Since wonderful Candra's "heir apparent" screens, I have a few thoughts and questions!

This screening thing is like taking a placebo.  It makes you feel good, but does nothing to protect you.  How difficult is it for PD to arrange for all that is needed to set up a "capture?"

I cannot imagine, a normal man, with standing in the community, married, would be stupid enough to share his private information in a wild blue yonder, and opens himself up to all sort of unpleasant things.

Having said that, I think men who submit to screening are:

1] Single, not very handsome, who cannot get girls in San Diego, whereas it is full of beautiful single women

2] Married men who are intellectually challenged, desparate, or have nothing to lose by an exposure!

Then, the lady who screens, ends up with a limited set of customers, and certainly not rich married, affluent ones, which I assume would be the best customers.

Please don't flam me, I am just sharing a theory! I also appologize for offending any one, please prove me wrong!

You certainly didn't put much thought into that did you?

First of all we live in the age of information. Often enough I can find out more about you based on your e-mail and phone number than I even need to screen you. Secondly if one knows what one is doing or at the very least has decent google skills and a propensity for reading, learning and paying attention then one is able to very effectively eliminate the undesirables from the lot. (I reccomend gathering a database of various vocational organizations and information services as a discreet method of verifying employment.) There are databases for damn near everything, travel and flight information, corporation listings, licensing organizations and many states actually have free public records searches. Those who have permits for carrying a firearm also have a database as do lawyers, doctors, truck drivers, emt's, teachers, and the lists goes on and on. There are now databases that were once only available to insurance companies and law firms that are available to the public for a reasonable rate. Hell even the Spam Jockeys have no problem finding out that you desperately need a larger penis and a script for Viagra...

Verifying someone is not difficult and damn near everyone has a webpresence of some sort that can verify who they are and what the spend 40 plus hours a week doing.

While I am on a rant I won't be baited into revealing all the necessary components for a "good screen". If one is able to reason then one should be able to figure that out for ones self.

Now lets consider your assumption that escorts are second class citizens who would indeed cause you trouble as a married man...because of course we have nothing to lose in our own lives, and risking arrest and assault is just part of the job.

Ginger doesn't think so and thus far I have been the beneficiary of excellent clientele...including wealthy, married and good looking men who had no problem with my screening. In fact with the methods employed by the legion of doom, not being screened by a provider should be of some concern.


Screening also provides us with a means to stay safe and comfortable...that means a better experience for both.

I could go on but I am sure there are other ladies that would like to give you their two cents as well.

I seem to agree with Ginger on most points, even as a customer. Screening provides the provider a degree of security, in their mind I would presume, but in no way are they ever totally secure.

That said, we as customers only know so much and are largely as vulnerable or more.

For example--we don't know the provider's real name.
We don't have recourse other than posting a review about an experience if less than promised/presumed is delivered.
We don't get a money back guarantee as the act if criminal is not protected by normal consumer laws.

We don't know who they work for (i.e. ladies working as a syndicate vs. independent providers)

We don't know where they really live as many keep a "trick" pad

We don't know who their significant other is (married or other wise)

Since we don't know their real name we can't look them up in the databases that Ginger refers to and ascertain legal/criminal history, if they are involved in law suits, if they have protective orders out on former lovers, if they carry a gun, etc.

Given the recent Chicago incident where the provider was using a min-camera and video capturing her clients on film, logging the data one can only presume at some point the customers could be blackmailed.

I also remember a story turned into a tv episode of a bible beater sitting outside a massage parlor then contacting the owners of cars as a way to get the customers to stop visiting the neighborhood. Really, do you think smart people don't know what is going on inside an apartment or house where the door opens and closes six times a day and different men are always seen going in and out....? Do you think the hotel bellboys and security guards don't know who the ladies are in town based on how often they come and go without ever checking in.

Thus, not know who we are dealing with is as disconcerting to the customers as it is to a provider. I'm all for screening, but I really question sometimes (Not Ginger at all--as she has demonstrated her intelligence many times her for years) the overall "smarts" not just street smarts of the average provider, especially the young ones, who work for agencies or worse. They are the ones who are most dangerous to the hobby and create a climate of distrust.

All of the above said, if government wasn't so provicial, and legalized prostitution, all of this would go away.

1) Registration and licensing would mean we would know who is who.
2) Health checks and ratings would be posted, just like restaurants to
3) Customers with less to hide or none at all would not have to be as discreet as say a married person who always has to be discreet or lose the marriage, that would create a less suspicious industry, and thus more open screening proceedures.

paved with success in mind. You don’t go grocery shopping before researching what you need, you may even clip coupons and read the contents of a purchase before you put it in your cart. When going on vacation you don’t just walk out the door without researching where you going. I can go on and on with this, but I think you’re getting the message here that research helps.

Ginger did a great job of explaining all the different vehicles available in researching clients. You did an excellent job in coming to this site to do your research in finding a provider and basically all that is left is for you to become a member to insure your future success. Good luck and welcome.

Well, I take exception to your assumptions and theory.
I, like many, have submitted my information, gone through the screening process and I have never, ever had a problem. All have been very discrete and professional in their procedure.

And yes, I'm an intelligent, married, handsome, successful businessman with standing in the community. So I have much to lose. That said, I also enjoy playing and don't have the time nor the energy to pursue and cultivate an affair.    

 

Ginger made excellent points.

Curious, your logic that only a certain type of man would reveal information is extremely flawed.  I've done radical screening on every guy I think I may want to be with, and I've met nothing but the cream of the crop~~including executives, CEO's, CFO's, self made kabazillionaires, etc.  Never run into quasimodo.

Much can be gleaned from a few email exchanges.  Enough to separate the chaff from the wheat.  The undesireables have poor grammar, don't follow good etiquette, and stand out quite prominently.

The reverse is true for excellent quality, sexy, and fun dates.

That being said, the absolute best guys (and I only date a few a month) are easy to identify because they understand discretion is a two way street.

I happen to consider myself "high profile" in my personal life as well.  Why would I risk that with a possible non-entity that refuses to trust me?

And why would I want to date a guy that thinks I might do him harm.

The rule is research, have fun, and shred, shred, delete, delete.

xoxo
Elise

and what is acceptable to each according to their own comfort level.
I wouldn't dream of meeting with someone without knowing who I am dealing with. Would you, Curious1?!

I posted what I did about screening in order for people to understand that while others may know them, I do NOT, and we will need to get acquainted initially, just as I do with my own clients. This is pretty SOP, but said as a reminder.

Thanks, Ginger, for your (excellent) response.

I couldn't disagree with you more. Sure, there are databases avaliable, but the ones worth a damn cost $$money$$.  The rest of us just limp along like everyone else and use google or whatever free search engine is avaliable.  

I don't think Ginger's reply, or anyone elses on this thread, shed new insights or help on screening.  It was just nice opinion and rant with no substance.  No offense, Ginger.  

The problem here is that an atmosphere of paranoia and distrust has been created and no one is willing to share their screening techniques.  I don't see any change in the near future

I for one don't have the time or money to do the "best" screening.  Just do your homework on TER and go with your gut instincts.

I guess I should put in my "experienced" and aged point of view. For what its worth...I think the guy is right on. If LE wants to bust your ass, LE is gonna bust your ass. Just ask Jenni, even though she dropped her gaurd on the guy, I really think there was little she could do once that guy was in the door.

Now, my own experience is sort of odd to consider. On one hand I like knowing the lady first, either by one of you trusted guys, my own previous visits with her, or by one of the ladies recommending her. Those all gave me that warm fuzzy "Johnny's gettin laid today" feeling. But, on the other hand, the risk of the new provider, at least new to me, was certainly not a warm fuzzy feeling. It was a twisted gut, horny beyond hope that I was goona get laid feeling. Take for instance my first time with Suzy (you should recall her, awesome asian provider) I dont think she had even one review when I first saw her. I knew the pics were likely not her, but damn if I didnt want it bad. And luckily I got it, and got it, and got it again several more times. I know it was this way with Anna, too. I met her in chat and she had just been thinking of doing this line of work. I was not her first customer, but I was close. That scary walk through her appt complex in CV. Her stunning face, hot bod, wondering if I was gonna get busted, or at least get up-sold. Same story with Grace, and I was her first I believe.

Overall, you cannot protect yourself completely, unless its with a well known favorite. But if you guys are like I was, you just gotta risk it, for the risk sake itself. Just my humble opinion.

I learned the hard way.  Although I was already doing that, the only time I "slacked", I was compromised heavily.  If LE were not an issue, I would still use the same tools so as not to meet with someone who might harm me.  I have had people threaten me over the phone because I would not see them from a "referral" only.  I said this in a thread about a week ago, that the gentlemen who willingly give the information we need to be safe, are the very best guys to see.  Those guys understand the need and seem to care about my safety.  It is the nicest thing.  That leads into your "quality" client statement.  I have not had one bad experience once I learned how to screen efficiently.  As Ginger said, there are so many ways to know without taking any notes at all by simply "clicking" a few clicks.  Since that time, I have met nothing but the best!  And believe you me, they are the ones that have the best hygeine, often times very handsome, plenty of single guys.  You don't understand the true meaning of handsome, or attractive it seems.  Actually about half of the hobbyists are single by the way.  Anyone who tries to get around screening with me, never meets me.  

There are alot of girls who don't screen.  Sooner or later, they get hurt, stalked, harrassed and/or arrested.  It is only a matter of time.......I haven't been working as long as alot of the ladies reviewed here.  But I have seen in 2 yrs that without exception, women who were ripped off, victimized and arrested for alleged crime, always leads back to the poor screening process....every, single time........

I hope some of this and what others have to say will answer your question.  I understand the other side.  I have heard of girls calling guys who have contacted or met them before trying to solicit more business out of them.  Or women who have kept records around that fell in the wrong hands.  So there are risks on both sides.  

I would keep in mind if I were you however, that as Ginger said, the Legion of Doom won't give you a hard time about screening.  They'll welcome you right on over!  They will just collect your identity later, no problemo!

thank you !

kisses & licks to you...........
mara

"targets of opportunity", as my friends in the infantry say.  And that guys who cooperate with screening are the one's worth seeing...

I'm with you, cardguy.  Though I rarely see providers, I have never had a problem w/ screening. If I were a provider, I would be doing the same damn thing; any reasonable person would in this day and age.

Why would anyone ever disagree with Ginger?? She is the epitome of professionalism.

Jenni,

I was sorry to hear of your difficulty with LE,  and I certainly respect your right to do whatever screening that you feel is necessary for your comfort.  Unfortunately, screening isn't a 100% deterenent, as there has been at least one somewhat well known incident in LA where a provider, who screens very rigorously, was still subject to an attack by a client.

It seems that every time I start to soften my views on agreeing to more rigorous screening, I read a thread such as Master Zed's on the L.A. board, and think "there, but for the grace of God, go I."  Perhaps the original poster's views are not universally accepted, but I think there is some truth to his statement that some married men will not risk some screening processes.  I think it is a process that will screen out many undesireables, but also may screen out otherwise worthy prospects.  It doesn't make screening bad, its just the nature of the process.

In the end, we all decide what balance of risk and reward is appropriate for our particular situation.  I hope we all choose wisely.

--- my $.02 worth -----

Nevermind that she can warn her friends who to stay away from.  If she's dating legally there is NO reason not to do so.

Other than that, there are SEVERAL personal safety issues that should always be addressed by ladies dating a guy from the internet.  

Always Always let someone know who you're with and for how long.  They'll send in the gaurd if you don't report back on time, and it lessens the likelyhood that someone would look at her like a victim.

xoxo
Elise

There are definitely ladies that will tell you how to screen.

And there are TONS of free resources on the net... GET SAVVY if you're not.  Referencedesk.com is an excellent resource.  It only takes me about 20 minutes to screen if I'm given good information.

Again, if the guy won't trust you with his information, why trust him?

xoxo
Elise

There's no reason to date someone that solicits for sex, and if you do, you're opening yourself up to trouble.

There are PLENTY of girls that date legally, responsibly and morally, dating and bringing as well as accepting gifts.

They shred and delete information when it's no longer applicable.

If a girl says something illegal, that's a sure sign something is amiss.

Think think think, and stay safe.

xoxo
Elise

call the cops when she's been assaulted (more likely battered).  Many ladies ARE reluctant to do this because of their "working girl" status, however, and so it's not really that simple.  

Under those circumstances, they've GOT to call 911, IMHO.  Better yet, have a lawyer on retainer or a Pre-Paid Legal plan and get that lawyer to assist HER in navigating LE channels and reaching the prosecutor who will take the case to court.  

Maybe she can get transactional immunity, or even not be charged ("prosecutorial discretion").  The system's broke and needs fixin' if it don't work this way when we need it to, IMO.

Sorry for the rant, but the implication that providers get less justice system protection that others is so WRONG.  I'd argue agasinst that with my last breath.  We need one standard of justice for all.  (Catchy phrase, huh?)