About 70 percent of black providers and 90 percent of providers of other races post this, and they have sound reasons too. Ive asked providers who post this why, most common answers given that black men are verbally and physically abusive, try to get their money back after a session, and bring multiple people who think they will pay one price for everybody. Black men even call providers that say no black men in their adds too just to see if they can come over anyway lol. Myself, I prefer adds that say no black men. Shows a smart provider who is unlikely to be a sting.
I think your stats are a bit off. Any provider I've seen doesn't have this on her website. I more see that on BP.
It's not just BP, there are providers whose web sites clearly state this. Most AA guys agree they'd rather see it on the site than be denied after they've already made contact.
That's an interesting point. If you want to see a girl with zero reviews, does the fact that her ad says no black me decrease the chance of it being a sting? I'm assuming your point is that the authorities would not use a "racist" qualification in their ad. I'm not sure I buy that argument, but it's an interesting observation.
I get what he means, and have heard this before...
A cop is not going to exclude black men from a sting op, considering they are usually the most targeted, so a gal putting that in her ad, (sort of) reassures guys that she is at least not LE. That does not mean she is not a rip off, psycho, or won't have a black pimp waiting for you outside, however lol.
I feel deeply troubled when I see "no black men" in an ad, or on a site. And, considering I'm always checking out other escorts' ads/sites, I actually see it quite often. Every client I've had has been different from the one before, and I would never generalize based on race, especially when I know what it's like to be generalized and completely disregarded because of the color of MY skin (every ISO ad that says "I'd prefer Latin, Asian, White or pretty much any race except black). If I were a client (and, obviously, not black) and saw a lady explicitly say "no black men," I still wouldn't see her, regardless of my race. That kind of discrimination just says a lot about a person...
I don't see ladies if they say "no black men" in their ads.
My sympathies Josephine. Not only have you had to deal with the stigmatism of being a minority all your life, axeman now claims that you are also a distinct minority within your own racial group, as you are one of the only 30% of African-American woman who will not exclude an African-American client simply because of his race. Of course axeman is relying on empirical data that can hardly be refuted when throwing these figures out there, isn't he? Nobody would ever publish inflammatory statistics like this haphazardly, would they?
I'm sure he took a scientific survey with an adequate and diverse sample size that perfectly adhered to the scientific method. I hear his findings will be published in The Hooker Scientific Journal next month. 
My thoughts exactly. Either that, or he is one of our elected representatives, so shoveling sh$t like that comes second nature!
Race doesnt matter to me, as long as they are respectable.
Perhaps they were not worth your time ,honey...
Excluding an entire race due to color is the very definition of racism. It's a loss for both the lady and the guy and for all that is decent in humankind. Racism is why the nazis lost Einstein.
Screen out clients based on verification not based on color.
Women can have a preference without being racist
It is there body and there right and choice who to share it with
If you do not like it you can always go play with yourself
We have the right to not sleep with or spend time with someone for any reason, yes, but if the reason is race, it's racism. That's the definition.
It is there body and there right and choice who to share it with
If you do not like it you can always go play with yourself
Josephine has given an apt response. I'd just like to point out that it should be "their" and not " there."
It is there body and there right and choice who to share it with
If you do not like it you can always go play with yourself
...most providers who don't see black men would institute such a policy. You honestly think that most providers wouldn't see a guy who looks like Taye Diggs but would see a guy who looks like Jim Belushi's older, fatter, shorter, balder brother because of attraction? Give me a break!
It seems more likely that most of these women who have that policy either a) have heard through one source or another that black men are bad clients or b) have had a bad personal experience or bad personal experiences with black men. I honestly think the former is more common. I can't tell anyone how she should run her business. Hell, if you want to make it a policy to only see men who are 45, divorced and named "Bob Smith" that's fine by me. But at the heart of a policy such as "no black men" is discriminatory on the basis of race, and I'm not entirely convinced it's always (or most of the time) based on anything legit.
Case in point: what color was the Green River killer?
Actually, it was anti-semitism and delusional fantasies of Aryan supremacy that fueled the Nazi pogroms and caused Einstein, as well other Jewish intelligentsia, to seek refuge elsewhere. Your hearts in the right place though.
Thank you for your kind words. I do beg to differ on Hitler. Hitler's declaration of his belief in a “master race” was an indication of the inherent racism of the Nazi movement
Differ all you want, but the last I looked, Nazism was a socio-political extension of the fascist/socialist movement that swept through post WWI Europe in response to the various communist entreaties spawned by the Russian Revolution of 1917, and the installation of a Marxist-Leninist oligarchy that eventually morphed into the absolute tyrannical dictatorship of Stalin and his progeny. Hitler simply created a myth of a greater Germanic Nation as a means of excusing his Austrian heritage and allowing him to claim kinship with his idols like Frederick the Great and Bismarck. It wasn't race that fueled his satanic obsessions, but nationalistic supremacy and political ideology.
but underlying all that is the belief of Aryan supremacy which is based on race. It is the notion of racial supremacy that fired up the Nazi's
If a provider says no black men, I (a white man) will not give her my business. Such blanket discrimination on the basis of race is just wrong, as well as illegal. No one should tolerate it. Ever.
A woman has a right to refuse sexual activity with anyone she wants, whether it be race, a height restriction, an age limit, whatever. There is no such thing as discrimination in being intimate with another person. This is not illegal by any stretch of the imagination and it's certainly not illegal considering this entire hobby itself is illegal. This is not Equal Employment Opportunity and there's no law anywhere on the books that says a woman can't choose her sex partners based on her personal preferences.
Having said this, it does make a provider look bad when she blatantly states no black men because AA men are typically the only race providers don't want to see. Even some AA providers won't see AA men and it has more to do with lack of respect than anything else. Guys are certainly free to eliminate providers who discriminate against black men but it's not illegal discrimination.
then "no black men" would be illegal. It would then amount denying a legal service based on race. Just like it will be illegal to deny service at restaurant based on race.
No judge can or will ever rule on what color dick a woman must allow inside her. Ain't never gonna happen, this isn't eating food or shopping. This is about an intimate act and every woman will always have the God-given right to refuse a dick inside her, lol.
and I could not find any test case for this where prostitution is legal. It will be interesting to see if there is any legal precedent that we could go by. If you find any let me know or post a thread. I will do the same.
A question? What is more intimate. The act of sex which is physical or talking to your psychiatrist. Both are very intimate acts. So can a psychiatrist refuse to offer treatment based on race.
But I defer to the sex act which is universally recognized as being the private domain of each of us. A shrink can get inside your head legally without your consent but nothing gets inside a woman's vagina legally without her consent. Courts have ruled that people must get psychiatric help and can lock them up in an institution if they're a danger to themselves or society. I guarantee you that no court nor judge will ever force a woman to have sex without her consent.
A psychiatrist can pick and choose his/her patients as they desire. I've never heard of a test case where a shrink was accused of being racially biased in refusing to treat a patient. I don't think any shrink in their right mind would make such a choice.
-- Modified on 2/3/2014 6:40:06 PM
If a psychiatrist like some providers explicitly says "no blacks" will he be sued? Yes of course. Is he racist? Yes of course.
We don't know yet how it will play out if escorting were legal. So we are all guessing here.
It's called The Civil Rights Act. That's the legal precedent, at least concerning discrimination in places of public accommodation. And you know how that law got passed constitutionally? The Interstate Commerce Clause. We could also talk about how prostitution was technically made illegal through that same clause because transporting a woman across state borders automatically involves interstate highway systems, and therefore becomes a federal issue, but that's another messy legal matter all together (for more on the White-Slave Traffic Act, also known as the Mann Act, see this charming Wikipedia entry here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann_Act).
Now. The Civil Rights Act pertains to any establishment (restaurant, movie theatre, hotel, gas station, truck stop, etc) that would be used by people traveling on interstate highways. So, if you owned one of these venues and people who traveled to your venues did so via an interstate highway, you could not have segregated spaces within your establishment. Of course there are always caveats; hotels had to have more than 6 rooms, for instance. The only way that the Civil Rights Act was constitutional was because of these very specific confines of the law. It applied directly to something that Congress has express power over, and that's interstate commerce (this is also the really quick and dirty version of how this law actually stood up to constitutional challenges) (see http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1964/1964_515 for brief explanation).
Federal and state Equal Opportunity and anti-discrimination laws are ONLY applicable if a facility (say a private university) receives federal or state funding. A private university has every right in the world to discriminate against whoever it so wishes; but if that university wants all that federal loan money and state allocated education funding, it better adhere to those equal opportunity and anti-discrimination laws.
Private businesses and private practices (like a psychiatrist) can refuse to see a patient for any reason whatsoever; a hospital cannot because they area public place of accommodation and tax-exempt, and in order to maintain that status, they have to adhere to those state and federal anti-discrimination laws. But private practices are not bound by the federal or state government to adhere to anti-discrimination laws unless they're receiving funding from those entities. A brothel would probably not be able to discriminate based on race due to the Civil Rights Act because it is a place of public accommodation, but that doesn't stop an independent escort from doing so. She does not affect the flow of interstate commerce and is not a place of public accommodation.
Now, in my opinion, those businesses that discriminate solely based on race are often outed really quickly; not only is it morally objectionable to be racist, but it's also really bad business. If someone won't see someone solely because they are black, I'm personally not okay with it. If you pass my screening, can afford to see me, and are polite, I don't care what your skin tone, ethnicity, or religious background is.
-- Modified on 2/5/2014 11:22:43 PM
Let's say the shoe was on the other foot
What flavor of Dick do you like ?
If you do not like them all your racist that is your logic
Everyone in the Human Race is entitled to there preferences and choices what ever they may be.
It's "you are racist" not "your racist" and it should be "their preferences" not "there preferences"
You are nuts if you truly believe this. This isn't the same as a NO BLACKS lunch counter. No law will ever say that a woman cant refuse to have sex, regardless of the reason.
Yup, and tough shit. When those same men always bitchng about this put their hooker heels on and start taking it in the ass, then they can worry about what others do. If I don't want to see fat men, old men, young men, smelly men, bald men, or black men, I don't have to. Also, I know so many black providers who won't see black men, and I also know a shit ton of white women with black boyfriends who also refuse to deal with them 'in the hobby.' That is far from being a racist, but being selective about who you see. If she's banging a black guy at home and having kids with him, she's not racist. This is BUSINESS as in risk vs. reward. Thank you.
Though I don't agree you should exclude an entire race based on the actions of a few, let's try a little simple logic here, shall we?
If you ran a night club and 9 out of 10 customers under the age of 25 were always the ones having the cops called for fighting, would it not be a smart idea to make the age limit 25 and up to save your business and your sanity vs. having to keep turning them away at the door? I will not see any group of people who have proven to be complete d*ckwads in the past, and that goes well beyond a guy's race.
The issue most are not taking into consideration here, is past actions of a certain group of clients. If 100 providers all claim their most troubling dates are with black guys or guys under 30, it's obvious more drama has come from that group... no, it's not fair, but that's life. This business is dangerous enough already without putting yourself at even more risk.
Fact 2... look up the stats on which race has the most cases of HIV and Hep C... nuff said, so that is another factor about why some refuse to see x race. Those are not opinions... they are facts that the CDC will back up.
Not everyone needs the money that bad to fk anyone, and they don't much give two shits about what others think. This is not a regulated business, so na na na boo boo. Also, what do some of you want exactly, because you keep changing your damn minds. Would you prefer having to flat out ask every provider if she sees x race vs. her making it upfront so your time is not wasted? How about "I drove all the way to a provider's incall, just to be turned away at the door for being black." So, what the fk do you want?
-- Modified on 2/3/2014 2:15:03 PM
Blunt and to the point I hear ya Sister !
This is sex and even though providers are getting paid for sex, they have every right to exclude whomever they want. It's her body and we'll never see a legal ruling on who someone can have sex with regardless of whether escorting is legalized.
Does putting it on a web site come off as racist? You bet it does. Is it discriminatory that I don't see BBW providers? Is it age discriminatory that I don't see providers over 45? I guess so but it's my choice to make and every person has the final say on who they have sex with. If a provider puts no AA men on her website, she's going to lose non-AA business as well and that's something she'll have to live with. It's her body, it's her perceived level of safety whether she's right or wrong or discriminatory. All providers discriminate to some extent, it may not have an official name such as race or age, but not wanting to see fat clients is also discriminatory although there's no law against discriminating against fat people. Maybe there should be, anyone up for a Supreme Court test case?
This subject has been brought up numerous times on this board and others. I've seen posts from AA providers stating that they will not see AA men so are those AA women racist too? Can you be racist against your own race? I suppose so but this is sex and sex is intimate regardless of whether it's a business transaction. I've seen posts from AA guys stating that they greatly prefer seeing a no-AA men policy on the providers web site rather than finding out later or even worse, when he shows up and she turns him away.
I agree that racism is alive and well in this hobby as well as the rest of the country. It's never affected me, I've seen a number of AA providers and two were absolute favorites. But I'm not seeing some 50 year old hag nor am I seeing a woman so big that there's zero attraction so yes, I do discriminate against fat and old women. On the subject of attraction, there are providers who prefer seeing more handsome men rather than the typical balding old strokes most of us are. It's not always the $$$$ determining who an escort sees - some girls prefer seeing clients they find handsome. OMG, there's something to scream about, how dare she not take my $$$$ because I'm old and balding? LOL, sounds ridiculous doesn't it?
This is sex, not a corporate job where EEO laws apply nor a bar or restaurant where discrimination laws apply. Make escorting legal and discrimination will still exist. No judge in this country will tell an escort she has to see an AA man or be guilty of discrimination.
If you advertise you offer services to the public, you cannot discriminate on the basis of race. Even if the business is illegal. I won't repeat the entire argument here, but the essence is that neutral laws apply to illegal businesses. You could not argue--my business is illegal, it is illegal gambling, bootleg liquor, selling illegal marijuana, or prostitution or sexual massage, so I don't have to pay taxes. Illegal income is taxable. Likewise an unlicensed bar could not legally refuse service to someone on the basis of race. Nor should escort services be able to. There is no exclusion in the federal, state, county, or municipal laws about race discrimination for illegal services. Even more so as to ADVERTISING a policy of race discrimination. That is even more unquestionably illegal. It may not be likely to elicit enforcement action, given that prosecutors have an entirely different agenda, but that doesn't change the facts
You find me one dumbass brave enough to call the cops and report us to the freaking EEOC because a provider refused to see him based on race, and one judge that will bother wasting time with such an idiot. I'll check back in five years for that evidence. That's about as dumb as saying a hooker can't rip you off or she used false advertising and you're gonna call the cops bwahhahaa. Um, ok... call the cops when that happens and watch both of your asses go to jail. Thanks for the laugh.
Once again, WE CAN DO WHAT WE WANT.
-- Modified on 2/3/2014 3:48:01 PM
Don't you have some provider to marry since she'll like you for you who you are? Delusional imbecile.
It is not your place to tell anyone what to do with there body AssClown !
Is that blunt enough for you.
That's a noble gesture maybe. If axeman is correct (and how could it be otherwise) you've just eliminated 70% of all African-American providers, and 90% of all non-African-American providers from consideration!
That maybe the case but the African American providers I've seen in the past have been very sweet.
So, if your daughter comes to you and says "Daddy, I don't ever want to sleep with black men" does the same go for her, or is it just those dirty whores you pay to fk?
-- Modified on 2/3/2014 4:46:01 PM
My daughter's first two boyfriends were black men. I am really sorry that she broke up with the second one, as I liked him lots, am still in touch with him, and gave him some money last fall to help keep him in college. The words "dirty whores" are yours, not mine. I would never talk that way about providers.
Look on Backpage and see how common this requirement is. I mean it, do it right now. The 80 to 90 percent who post this cant ALL be doing it because they are pimped out. I've asked many providers why they have this requirement, and the answers are black men are rough, immature, violent (one was beaten up by one wanting his money back), cheap, more likely to have diseases, and more likely to try to rob them.
There are providers who refuse to see AA guys, just like there are escort agencies that specify who they are willing to hire....leaving AA women out. For example: "Seeking Caucasian, Latin and Asian ladies only!!!" I don't discriminate, although I've encountered several problems with AA men, being an AA provider myself, but to each its own.
Racism is any action or attitude, conscious or unconscious, that subordinates an individual or group based on skin color or race. It can be enacted individually or institutionally
Good luck in suing for racial bias because a hooker wouldn't see you. For that matter, good luck in suing a civvie woman for not having sex with you because you're Asian, lol.
Here's a question: What happens in a Nevada brothel when a guy picks out the girl he wants to fuck and she says no because of his race? Does he have a case because it's a legal business? My assumption is no because you can't force a woman to have sex with anyone even if it's her job and the boss tells her to. I don't think that case can ever be won, a woman's body is a temple.
-- Modified on 2/3/2014 6:47:54 PM
Of course one can't sue. I was just saying it's racism to decide solely based on the color of one's skin.
Nope, nothing could be done even if it were legal UNLESS the provider was dumb enough to flat out tell someone "I am not seeing you because of your race." She can simply say "Sorry, I am booked" and she can be booked for the next five years every damn time he contacts her, or she can not respond at all. Do people really think employers don't refuse to hire certain people, and tell them the reason is race? AHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! Ok now, done laughing.
If it were legal and a provider said "no black men" in her ad like the OP mentioned, then she could get sued. But since we don't have any legal history we don't know if she will be convicted.
But a racist provider can hide the fact that she is racist by using all the things you mention and of course it's difficult to sue.
It's legal in Nevada brothels so that's where a test case could be tried. The scenario is a black guy asks to see a specific brothel girl and she refuses to see him. He could sue for civil rights violation but what judge would find in his favor? She refused to have SEX with him and she always has the right of refusal.
We don't know how the judge would rule if any one sues.
The questions the case would raise is:
Is racism wrong in an employment, restaurant or other business scenario, but OK with the business of prostitution?
What factors would justify an exception to the racism rule?
If it is intimacy, is it OK for a stripper or therapeutic massage provider to be racist?
I did address the question. It is just that some people here don't like my answer and prefer to call me names. The legality or illegality of providing makes no difference, as general laws apply to illegal businesses. The examples I cited included tax. If you were renting out an illegally converted basement apartment, renting it might be illegal, but a newspaper or craigslist etc. could not allow you to run an ad that said "whites only," "no women," "no rentals to the disabled," "no couples with children" (with the exception of senior set aside buildings meeting a set of several criteria as to the nature of the facility).
Let me start by saying I'm usually the one calling people out as being racist, but this is different. I know MANY civie white girls who are not racist at at all, but will never have sex with a black guy.
Sex is different, it's complex and a lot of psychological things are at play that go back to how someone was raised, what images they saw, where they grew up, all these things they have no control over. I'm not sure you can call that straight up racism when it comes to sexual preference based on race. If you just can't have sex with a black guy, it may not be because you hate black people, it could just be a total sexual thing. There are probably millions of white girls who have no racist tendencies at all, but just can't imagine having SEX with a black guy. It's just when it comes to SEX and not apparent in any other aspect of their lives. Now you can argue that it's a form of racism, or that's it rooted in some sort of stereotype about black men, but you can't make a blanket statement like that, since you have no way of untangling the psychological factors that make up someone's choice when it comes to sex. And "blanket statements" are exactly what you are arguing against.
And before some of you get swept up in your own self righteous bullshit calling everyone else a racist, remember that it's a slippery slope if you NOW want to start applying social norms and political correctness to sexual behavior, because if that's the case, everyone here is a fucking outcast and worthy of scorn.
-- Modified on 2/3/2014 7:42:48 PM
Your post makes no sense. How were those view points formed? As you stated, it's how you were raised, images they saw etc. Enough said. If you were raised by bigots with overt or covert racial attitudes, you more than likely will be the same. However, I know plenty of people raised by bigots who are just the opposite. This has nothing to do with PC but just ignorance.
to the point and succinct.
How is it any different from being pro or anti gay? I am pro gay rights, yet I would never have sex with a man nor would I want to even watch two gay men having sex, does that make me homophobic or anti-gay? Can you call me a homophob or "ignorant" because I choose not to have sex with a gay guy?
Just because someone doesn't want to have sex with someone of a certain race (for money), it doesn't mean it is automatically racism. It can just be preference. One of the girls that posts here said she would never see a guy over a certain age. Is that age discrimination? Is that ageism? According to you it is. A provider must accept all clients or risk being called ignorant by you if she doesn't apply the same rules of fair employment used by companies.
That's why I said, when it comes to sex, it's different, you have to use a different calculus. I would never not hire a gay person or have any issue with a gay person, but I would never have sex with a gay dude. Does that make me ignorant?
Like I said, sex is different.
Just because someone doesn't want to have sex with someone of a certain race (for money), it doesn't mean it is automatically racism. It can just be preference. One of the girls that posts here said she would never see a guy over a certain age. Is that age discrimination? Is that ageism? According to you it is. A provider must accept all clients or risk being called ignorant by you if she doesn't apply the same rules of fair employment used by companies.
That's why I said, when it comes to sex, it's different, you have to use a different calculus. I would never not hire a gay person or have any issue with a gay person, but I would never have sex with a gay dude. Does that make me ignorant?
Like I said, sex is different.
Your first post made no sense and this one is worst. You're talking about two separate issues. The issue is how did you develop your preference, that's all. Your first post concerning this issue is clear, enough said. You even tried to make this a PC issue in your previous post! Now you are comparing it to gay v. Straight. It is amazing how some people try and justify being a bigot or a covert racist. What's sad is they do not realize it or refuse to realize it. However, words have meaning and are very revealing. Let me say this. I am a southerner. One thing about southern racist and bigots, they are clear about it. In the north and Midwest , many racist and bigots are undercover, thus making them very dangerous IMHO.
-- Modified on 2/5/2014 3:07:17 PM
But, there are over 500 million black men in the world. All different colors, shapes, sizes, personalities, everything. To lump all of them together and decide you're not attracted to them all is to disregard them as individuals which denies them their humanity which is, yes, racist. Like, why is being called racist worse to everyone in this thread than the actual racism us black people who are chiming in are quite literally experiencing right this second?
Sex is different, it's complex and a lot of psychological things are at play that go back to how someone was raised, what images they saw, where they grew up, all these things they have no control over. I'm not sure you can call that straight up racism when it comes to sexual preference based on race. If you just can't have sex with a black guy, it may not be because you hate black people, it could just be a total sexual thing. There are probably millions of white girls who have no racist tendencies at all, but just can't imagine having SEX with a black guy. It's just when it comes to SEX and not apparent in any other aspect of their lives. Now you can argue that it's a form of racism, or that's it rooted in some sort of stereotype about black men, but you can't make a blanket statement like that, since you have no way of untangling the psychological factors that make up someone's choice when it comes to sex. And "blanket statements" are exactly what you are arguing against.
And before some of you get swept up in your own self righteous bullshit calling everyone else a racist, remember that it's a slippery slope if you NOW want to start applying social norms and political correctness to sexual behavior, because if that's the case, everyone here is a fucking outcast and worthy of scorn.
-- Modified on 2/3/2014 7:42:48 PM
I say this because I'm friends with and hang out with 90% white and asian women who are not in this business. And most of them have been assaulted and disrespected by white men. Some have told me privately ( while crying) that they were either date raped or cheated on by white men. And I feel so sorry for them. Yet these same women boyfriends or husbands are white. Even though they have had bad experiences with their own kind, they didn't stop dating them. You all make valid points here. And as for myself I would prefer to see "No Black Men" in the ad before I waste time and money.
I have to disagree - please note I have only read the first post.
I do not have policies that are designated to cut out ANY race, religion, creed, etc. I only have policies that are designated to stop me from seeing disrespectful and abusive people. And whether or not you see black men, and put it on your ad, that does not mean the girl is "less likely to be a sting". It just means she has certain preferences. And in fact, the police mimick in order to do their stings, so if they looked at all the ads and see that "no AA" comes up a lot- I would imagine they'd probably put it on their ad too.
I do not like racism, class ism, homophobia, sexism, etc. And TO ME not seeing people because of the color of their skin is that. Now don't get me wrong- every girl has the right to run their business the way that they see fit. But FOR ME race does not matter. As long as you are respectful throughout correspondence, you submit to my screening process, and you show up with that envelope, I will see you. I am an equal opportunity F*&^.