I would love to do a chat on this topic. What do you think?

Is it too hot? Would people be brave enough to speak their mind?

thirsty

Interesting. I have visit some providers that will not see customers due to this.
GO for it.

That is a great idea. Some of my favorite providers are ladies of color. But I was very fortunate to be raised in a very open minded, non-judgmental atmosphere. YOU DUN IT AGAIN, MY FRIEND!
A REAL WINNER, that THIRTSY...

To me, it's a non-issue.

I personally know black providers who prefer white men, white providers who prefer black men, white providers who prefer white men, black providers who prefer black men, asian providers who... yada yada yada..., you get the picture.

It's their choice to see who they want, and seldom has anything to do with racism or ignorance - merely preference.  Simply because a provider makes a business decision to only see types of men they prefer or have an attraction doesn't make them a "bad" person, nor should they be judged harshly for it.

Some folks like salty chips, some like chocolate - and some prefer beer over wine and vice-versus. It's what makes the world go 'round.

However, I think I'm lucky 'cuz I seem to enjoy it ALL.  But I do have strong preferences...

atl_mgr

Oh, and Thirsty - unfortunately, I have obligations every Thursday night that prevent me from ever making the chat.  But feel free to cut/paste my post to get the discussion rolling if you choose.

You know, Thirsty, I read all that & I had mixed feelings about it.  But in the end I decided THAT provider has EVERY right to see whoEVER the hell she wants.  It works both ways & all ways. If I had read the reverse from a provider "of color" & she said "no anglos" - I would say it's HER choice. What if "non-whitedude" had his exclusive (or non-inclusive) guidelines for a provider?  Could they react the same as he did?  Nah! You can't go through this life being too sensitive. Some people prefer only TALL people.  Some don't want fat & bald (hmmm - very close to a personal description of me). If someone has a less than tolerant attitude for another race or ethnic background, then let that person pass you on by & get the hell outta your way. You're damn sure not gonna change their mind, so why argue about it. As long as that person is not HURTING you socially, financially, etc. then no foul - no harm.  For G-Ds sake, man, we're talking about providers & hobbyists here - not a seat on a bus or the right to vote.  As the Eagles so aptly put it - "GET OVER IT!"

Reon't think it's even close to boring...

Wow, it's thoughts like these that keep our society so screwed up. Hell, it doesn't impact his chance to get a little since he's white. So why get involved? Why show a little courage and stand up to someone who treats other people as if they're second class citizens when it's not in your interest and won't help you?

As far as the original post -- I feel sorry for her. She's missing out on so many great people and chances to experience and learn about people who are slightly different from herself. Too bad. She's a product of a close-minded family and she's afraid to risk changing.

A few years ago, when I lived in Nashville, this was a major problem. A friend of mine (a person of color) would go to places that I recommended to see girls that I recommended and would be told that she "no longer works here" through the door. We ran a few tests where he would not get in the door and I would come by within 5 mins and the girl miraculously would be there for me...imagine that!

I wondered how the Atlanta providers were on this subject but simply assumed that they were much more open-minded because of the levels of integration in this city.

Has anyone been refused at the door or treated like crap (which was the other reaction to my pal back in NSVL)?

My personal opinion is that refusing service to someone simply beause of the color of their skin is both unprofessional and unethical.  This isn't the 1940's and we're not neanderthals here, at least most of us aren't!  This is 2004 and segregation has been over for decades!!!  I refuse to allow appearances to dictate who I see or don't see.  Some Providers refuse to see Hobbyists who suffer from obesity, while others refuse to see Hobbyists who have certain skin disorders such as psoriasis.  

The list goes on and on as to why some Providers refuse to see some Hobbyists, however the fact of the matter is that some do refuse service based on appearances.  Regardless of my personal opinion, just as Hobbyists can refuse to make a donation in exchange for a certain Provider's time and companionship based on her appearance, a Provider can refuse to see them based on their appearance.  It's a matter of personal choice and preference.  Also, if a Provider feels uncomfortable with someone, the session probably will not be as good as it would've been if she felt at ease, so the Hobbyist would get better service elsewhere anyway.

A good friend of mine said it best when he stated that anytime something is kept in the dark, dark forces will take over.  If this Hobby was brought into the light and regulated, there would be legal recourse for a Provider not seeing someone based simply on the color of their skin... but it's not, so the best thing to do is to get over it and move on, IMHO!  

Just my $.02.. okay, okay $.25 worth!!  LOL!

Jaclyn
[email protected]

It's her body, she can see or not see whomever she chooses. I do the same in the women I see, I have no problem with a woman doing the same.

If I guy wants to force himself on someone that does not want to see him, HE is the one with the problem, not her.

Thirsty,

My opinion is that most likely, the session will degrade into people insulting one another.  If you look at the Poster (non-whitedude), he takes the provider's statement and makes conclusions about her environment, upbringing, parents, etc.

IMO, it is not a good topic for the friendly ATL chat room.

To answer your question, people will speak their minds, but they will not give due consideration to the statements of those who disagree with them.

I agree with you, Silk.  It's probably NOT a good idea to bring up this incredibly sticky subject in the Atlanta chat room... Good advice!  

Jaclyn

You don't have to like her decision.  She probably doesn't care if you like her decision.  For every provider who does not see a certain race for whatever reason .. There are ten more that will.

This issue has been brought up time and time again... so, if it was so ridiculous and there's no reason for debate, then why has it been brought up soooo many times?

I actually agree that's it's her body and therefore her choice.. My personal choice for my body is that it's unprofessional and unethical to deny service based on the color of someone's skin or how much they weigh.  However, if the reason behind it is logical and reasonable such as someone was beaten by a black guy or the fat guy stinks, then there's a different reason other than the color of his skin or his weight that she's denying service... It all comes down to it being her body, her choice and his money, his choice...

Jaclyn

How about looking at it from my point of view. I don't like BBW women so I don't go see them. By your argument, I should be forced to see a BBW and if I don't it is unpprofessional and unethical.

What I think is unethical, is for you to even suggest telling another woman who she can and cannot see. There is even no argument that can be made on the subject.

Actually, compelling points of view on both sides of the aisle! The loss is the provider's for missing a chance to meet some nice people.  HOWEVER in this specific case, she is not denying anyone more than a chance at a wonderful time (who knows even if it is wonderful).  Nor is she denying anyone the right to vote, the right to sit on a bus, decent housing, or a decent job.  Let's keep that in mind.

Freedom of choice is what's keeping "our society so screwed up"??

And whoever said I was white?

Treating people like second-hand citizens is one thing, and something I don't do and don't tolerate.  But that's a far cry from setting business practices based on personal preferences.

I've been turned down in the past by providers because of race AND age (different days, different providers).  And it's absolutely their right to do so.  It is NOT their right to make me feel like a second-class citizen, and neither one did so.

Folks, this is not a topic you can generalize -- if the provider is racist, then deal with the racism.  If the provider chooses to limit her business offerings, that is NOT necessarily the same thing.  Innocent until proven guilty.

Playing race cards where there's no game in progress IS boring.

I agree. I'm not sure I can see a great deal of positive vibes coming out of this debate. I will say that I do look at providers in a different light when I see the “Caucasians only” or “no Hispanics” lines. I can certainly appreciate preferences and prerogative but Damn. Race is a hell of lot different from being fat and bald. Don’t you guys make a Brother call the NAACP to get this hobby in check! LOL!!

To call this "freedom of choice" is a little disengenious, don't you think? After all, if you own a lunch counter do you really think you can choose to not serve black people? That's freedom of choice isn't it?

If every business could set their "business practices based on personal preferences" we'd be back in the land of our grandfathers.  Remember the Civil Rights Act?

You say you have "been turned down by providers because of race and age." And you say, "It is absolutely their right to do so." Which country do you live in? In the good old USA it is illegal to discriminate based on race or age!

Concerning racism you say that "If the provider chooses to limit her offerings that is not the same thing(as racism)." However, the issue is not about limiting her offerings it is about who she offers them to! Big difference! And concerning your "Innocent until proven guilty" that statement shows a tremendous amount of naivety. Who's going to press charges? Are you the insane one? Go ahead, then we'll see if she's innocent or guilty.

There is no reason to argue or get defensive on this issue.  This is simply a debate and sometimes, like it or not, opposite opinions clash, however there is a way to calmly discuss and maturely debate, instead of arguing a moot point and making derogatory, condescending comments to those who have a difference of opinion.  Having had some experience in debate, I can say that the key to it being successful is for both sides to listen with an open mind and carry with them the knowledge to back up their belief(s).  

I actually wasn't disagreeing with you, ATLG8R, in my last post.  I stated,

"I actually agree that's it's her body and therefore her choice.. My personal choice for my body is that it's unprofessional and unethical to deny service based on the color of someone's skin or how much they weigh.  However, if the reason behind it is logical and reasonable such as someone was beaten by a black guy or the fat guy stinks, then there's a different reason other than the color of his skin or his weight that she's denying service... It all comes down to it being her body, her choice and his money, his choice... "  

That was, in fact, agreeing with you!!!  To clarify my original post where I said

"My personal opinion is that refusing service to someone simply beause of the color of their skin is both unprofessional and unethical.  This isn't the 1940's and we're not neanderthals here, at least most of us aren't!  This is 2004 and segregation has been over for decades!!!  I refuse to allow appearances to dictate who I see or don't see.  Some Providers refuse to see Hobbyists who suffer from obesity, while others refuse to see Hobbyists who have certain skin disorders such as psoriasis."    

I meant that as my PERSONAL opinion, not the opinion I wish to project on anyone else!!!  Every Provider has her own comfort level and as such runs her business according to her own comfort levels.  There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with this... Matter of fact, it's the best way of doing things.  Every Provider has to find her niche as well as her own way of doing things, regardless of anyone else's opinions.  I was simply stating that for me and my body, I do not think it ethical to deny someone service based wholly on the color of their skin or solely on any other physical characteristic, and for that matter, for me, it is wrong... However, I CANNOT dictate what is right or wrong for another Provider.  

I hope that I have clarified my statements and I offer a public apology for seeming too judgemental in my opinions and not making myself clear the first time.  My point of view is meant for me ONLY and should NEVER be misconstrued as an attempt to place judgement on anyone or instruct anyone as to how to run their business.  

Jaclyn




-- Modified on 2/12/2004 3:16:02 AM

"I don't like BBW women, so I don't go see them".  Yet when you look at the reviews this person has written, there are some written for gals he classifies as BBW, so either the comment he made is a lie or his reviews are faked.

providers might elect not to see men of a certain race for reasons other than pure racism?

Consider this post from a black provider.

http://theeroticreview.com/msgBoard/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=77946&boardID=12&page=2

I would not argue that most of the women who impose restrictions based on race may have racist motives. However, as I wrote on one of my replies to a thread on the National board, many of us who make up the hobby community (both providers and clients) are not particularly skilled at relating to other people. If we were, many of us wouldn't be so active in this community. It's not an excuse for racism but an explanation. If we can't create a "perfect world" in the community outside the hobby, is it realistic to expect better behavior here. An analogy I made previously applies, for a person of color to be refused by a provider is not the same as refusal of service at a lunch counter in the 1950's. The services provided can be intimate. Moreso for some people than others. In the hobby is it reasonable to impose the rule, "Serve everybody or get out of the business?"

thirsty

Wow, I can't believe you compared legitimate businesses to that of a provider.

Plain and simple, a provider sells her body.  So, the normal rules of discrimination do not really apply here.  Saying it's illegal for a provider to discriminate while she is, in fact, engaging in an illegal activity is moot.  It doesn't make it 'more' illegal.  

Bottom line is it's her body, she can do whatever she wants with it.  Would you be angry if a provider refused greek because you were too big?  No, you would be proud.  However, at the root, it's still discrimination by definition.  

The reality is that comfort and safety of the woman come first.  No need to try to compare apples and oranges here.  If you don't like it, choose another one

Thanks, Thirsty. You opened my eyes on this topic. I now understand that, while most of the time it is done because of racism, there are other reasons also.

By the way, I do not agree with the people who continue to compare a restriction of service(i.e.; no greek --see below or no DFK)to a restriction on who you serve. I don't have any problems with a provider choosing which services she will provide. Just as I don't have a problem with the fact that Wal-Mart doesn't sell plywood. But Wal-Mart can't say "we won't sell to Muslims or blondes or Chinese or people over 65.

Yes, Freudian, I do find it humorous to be talking about a person who, while conducting an illegal business, discriminates and, therefore, performs another illegal act. You're probably right, it is moot. As I mentioned earlier, who's going to file charges of discrimination in this case? No one sane!

And your recommendation to "choose another one" is something I've done since I started hobbying last year. There are plenty of great providers out there -- especially in Atlanta -- so I can eliminate those that discriminate and move on to someone who, because she is more open to all people, is probably more open in the area of sexuality, too. My win!

this - put bluntly, what we are talking about is 'fucking'.  And NOBODY has the right to dictate to others who they must fuck, period.  My body, my decision.  Her body, her decision.  Not yours.  If you don't like it, tough.  Decisions regarding choice of sexual partners may be made for racial reasons, but that doesn't make them racist.  And if you don't understand the difference, please look it up in the dictionary.

Like you said, "It's a non-issue."

But, your last post sounded like it is an issue you are pretty worked up about.

I am also glad to know that you are the one making the rules in our lives. Like "..."NOBODY has the right to dictate to others who they must fuck, period." I like that "period". That means it must be right!