Not on the Texas/Mexico border, I've got no problem with beaners, and as an employer I welcome the influx of cheap labor, me and the Koch brothers, lol
NO, I want a a wall on our western border to keep the fucking Californians out, Of course we need one to keep the fucking Yankees from moving south too, fucking liberals have shit in the own states and are swarming down here like locusts destroying everything in their path.
Texas is already Purple, Austin and DFW are already almost as liberal as San Francisco and LA, with Houston, San Antonio and Ft Worth right behind. Austin for example just passed a law very similar to laws in CA that make it LEGAL for people to camp out on the street, even if they happen to choose a spot right in front of someone's home or business. The Dims have made a LOT of predictions, most of which turn out to be total bullshit, this is one prediction that all of Texas needs to take VERY seriously, as does everyone else living in low tax, red states.
Given the deluge of anti-pay-for-play legislation that has been coming down the past two years, this is a breath of fresh air.
Maybe it will soften people's attitude a smidgen and allow the kind of environment where some meaningful discussion of the role of sex work in society.
Where is the collateral legislation to remove the stigma for a John who has a conviction on his record? By leaving the convictions on the Johns, aren't you condemning them to a life of spending their money on young, hot, hookers, without any chance to get out? I heard about a guy once who didn't want to do this anymore, but he had a conviction from a LE sting, so he was trapped into this life. The same sentiments that prompt legislation like this for the ladies should also apply to the men who are arrested. Why ruin their lives forever, too?
Good article, but I disagree with the notion that its "rare" for women to go into prostitution voluntarily. I have known many women, especially entrepreneurs, who always have hooking as a "Plan B" in their minds if whatever they are currently working on fails, but for them, its temporary while they recover from a failed enterprise. At least half will do it as SB's so as to ease their mind that they are not really sex workers. Hey, whatever it takes, right?
This is NOT a "good" article. Quite frankly the article itself sucks ass, for all the reasons you have mentioned. It tries to portray ALL sex workers as victims because "NO ONE would ever choose to be a ho", well once upon a time there were literally hundreds of "ho's" who would take serious issue with that self serving and ridiculous statement.
That said, I do agree with fish that this is a least a small step in the right direction, even if it's being done for all the wrong reasons. Of course as an employer I have to confess that if I found a prostitution charge on the record of a potential hire I would be MORE likely to hire that particular woman, not less likely. lol And being serious for just a moment, I would be more likely to hire a former hooker not just because I was interested in fucking her, but because hookers and ex hookers tend to be more open minded, less "prissy" and much more results oriented than other women. Quite frankly I think they make better employees than some self entitled priss who won't even suck her husband's dick. lol
that from my own experiences as a sex-customer, the work-ethic of sex workers (especially Kgirls I have known) dwarfs that of most other people of either sex, and I, too, would not hesitate to hire a former prostitute for an office job, but unlike you, I would not automatically expect her to work in the space under my desk. Lol The open-mindedness means if somebody gets pissed and swears in the office, she is not going to come running to management and report it as a "hostile work environment", which is something I had never heard of until a few years ago, much less knew it was a cause of action for a lawsuit.
corrected typos
-- Modified on 7/3/2019 2:57:07 AM
and his inability to read a plainly written sentence must be rubbing off on you. I clearly said that I would be interested in hiring an ex hooker NOT because I was interested in fucking her, but because all of the other reasons that you clearly agree with.
My definition of "open mindedness" is much the same as yours, it's NOT that I expect her to work "under my desk" it's the fact that she is less likely to get offended by a locker room mentality that can be expected by oil field guys than some prissy cunt who would be reporting me to the labor board if some roughneck told her she had a cute ass or if I happened to mention out loud that I think Pocahontas is a lying cunt while having a conversation in the office someday. Of course if you said that out loud living in LaLa land, most likely some cunt would report you, and said cunt would be just as likely to be male as female. It makes you wonder just who is actually creating a "hostile work environment" lol It's nice living in Texas, please tell all your Californian friends to stay on the west coast and to NOT move here.
The Dems are predicting that, by the 2024 election, Texas will be a Blue State because the exodus from California. Soon after, they will control the government, and then you and yours will get to share in the rampant homelessness with pissing and shitting on the sidewalk, taxes for healthcare for illegals, state income tax and, of course, sanctuary cities.
Not on the Texas/Mexico border, I've got no problem with beaners, and as an employer I welcome the influx of cheap labor, me and the Koch brothers, lol
NO, I want a a wall on our western border to keep the fucking Californians out, Of course we need one to keep the fucking Yankees from moving south too, fucking liberals have shit in the own states and are swarming down here like locusts destroying everything in their path.
Texas is already Purple, Austin and DFW are already almost as liberal as San Francisco and LA, with Houston, San Antonio and Ft Worth right behind. Austin for example just passed a law very similar to laws in CA that make it LEGAL for people to camp out on the street, even if they happen to choose a spot right in front of someone's home or business. The Dims have made a LOT of predictions, most of which turn out to be total bullshit, this is one prediction that all of Texas needs to take VERY seriously, as does everyone else living in low tax, red states.
And it shows with your every post. Your PTSD, that is, from being pummeled serially around the head and neck. Your sadly poor ability to read, write and comprehend English makes you a sad spectacle. I will agree you are "open minded." But it's the kind of open mindedness that exists when you have large holes on either side of your cranium. I hope all the fireworks haven't further upset you. Happy Fourth!
Come on Jake, KEEP UP!!!
And yes, I know you are more of a 1.75 kind of drunk, but please at least try to keep up with the rest of us here.
But thank you for your oh-so-typical dimwittedly literal response.
Keep up, Wu!
You are VERY sloppy with the English language yourself.
Now go drink your Ovaltine, and take your nap; we all know how cranky you get when you don't get your afternoon nap. lol
Say goodnight Jake.
And I am going to a Fourth Of July Weekend cookout at a friend's. While, YOU, no doubt, are sobbing softly into your lonely Tequila. And NO, my use of Happy Fourth doesn't even qualify as sloppy since it;s Fourth Of July weekend. ALL weekend.
KEEP UP, WU! rofl
PS: I suppose you've never wished anyone "Merry Christmas" on Dec. 26th, fool.
-- Modified on 7/5/2019 1:44:31 PM
Why would I wish someone Merry Christmas the day AFTER Christmas? Even you aren't THAT dumb, are you?
I might wish them "Happy Holidays" after Christmas, I might even wish them an early "Happy New Years", but why in the fuck would I wish someone Merry Christmas, AFTER Christmas was over? I hope that BBQ at "the home" is over early so you can get your lame ass to bed. I told you what happens when you miss your afternoon nap at your age.
I'll let Mr. Goodbar do the talking. Again. It is all your idiotic responses deserve.
Why would I wish someone Merry Christmas the day AFTER Christmas? Even you aren't THAT dumb, are you?
Every store and dealership is still promoting their 4th of July sale where I am. And they don't tell me I'm late for their Christmas Sale when I show on the 26th or even the 28th. They are so dumb to sell stuff at sale prices when it isn't even the actual holiday!
Most people can tell from context when a greeting is loose or generic or promotional and when it is an incorrect answer on a history test or when asked during an LE investigation:
"Where were you at 4 PM on Independence Day?"
"Gee, officer, I was busy ramming the ramparts. I've even got calluses to prove it."
"Any witnesses to back up your story?"
"The Space Force saw me from their flying saucers which won't be built for another 100 years."
"Ramming the ramparts." Is that something that requires another person to bend over?
You never heard the expression? You didn't listen to Trump's speech? He recounted how, in the early days of our nation, our military "rammed the ramparts." He also praised the Space Force again.
.
It's on Fox! http://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-says-malfunctioning-teleprompter-to-blame-for-airport-gaffe-in-july-4-speech
""Our Army manned the air, it rammed the ramparts, it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do, and at Fort McHenry, under the rocket’s red glare it had nothing but victory,” he said. “And when dawn came, their star-spangled banner waved defiant.""
"Ramming the ramparts." Is that something that requires another person to bend over?
Since he claims to be a veteran, perhaps he'll avail himself of these "4th of July Savings" on JULY 7TH!. But of course Home Depot is WRONG! rofl
4th of July Savings
Sun, Jul 7, 2019 8:41 am
The Home Depot ([email protected])
Last chance for HUGE appliance savings > View as a web page
The Home Depot
Specials & Offers
Appliances Bath Flooring Lighting & Fans Tools Outdoor Living
FREE 2-DAY DELIVERY
Display images to show real-time content
Display images to show real-time content
UP TO 40% OFF | INSTANTLY SAVE UP TO $600
HALF A BILLION DOLLARS TO VETERAN CAUSES BY 2025
10% MILITARY DISCOUNT | In Stores Only
TODAY'S SELECTIONS FOR YOU
HOME DECOR
Discover Trends or Start Your Own
RUGS
Tie the Room Together
BATH
Transform Your Space
STORAGE
Get Organized Inside & Out
Display images to show real-time content
Time To Get Hands On Special Financing Available
Rent What You Need Your Local Ad
Mobile App
Local Ad
Specials & Offers
Credit Center
Let's Connect: FB TW P YT Instagram
Privacy & Security Contact Us Store Finder
Except as noted, prices valid through 7/13/2019. Prices may vary by store.
To unsubscribe from future emails, click here.
Licenses available here.
NOTE: All offers may not be available in all areas. Prices are in U.S. dollars and are subject to change without notice.
2455 Paces Ferry Road, N.W., Atlanta, GA 30339-4024, USA.
©2019 Home Depot Product Authority, LLC. All rights reserved.
Unfortunately chicks are more likely to file workplace harassment suits to cash in, rather than any real feeling of offense, so I am not sure you can count on former sex workers to leave money on the table.
But with most women, they will either join in the fun and can become "one of the guys" or she will leave the conversation if it gets a little too randy for her. My policy is to treat everyone the same, regardless of gender, race, or anything else, but on the other hand, I don't have a problem telling someone they are not making enough effort to fit into the "team" and so they should make a bigger effort, or consider moving on.
I don't see how this moves the needle in the direction of either decriminalization or legalization. It essentially maintains the status quo by allowing a reset if a provider avoids a second conviction within 3 years of the first. It seems to me that providers who successfully evade LEO will simply continue on as always. Those who are less fortunate have at least a few options: 1) Continue providing and hope they can avoid future convictions; 2) Continue providing while not caring about additional convictions unless/until the legal consequences start to get serious; 3) Continue providing but relocate to another state for 3 years. At the end of the day nothing has really changed. Providers keep on providing, mongers keep on mongering, and the nanny-state continues apace. And, by not requiring proof of "trafficking" to have convictions expunged, it (IMHO) tacitly reinforces the mentality that all prostitution = trafficking. The entire article oozes that viewpoint with statements such as the average age of entry into sex work is 13 and that 80% of Hawaiian sex workers are trafficked. In fact, an argument can be made that this is a step in the wrong direction because it perpetuates the idea that all sex workers are trafficked and can't take care of themselves or make their own decisions.
even a tiny bit, that is a good thing.
Many gals eventually age out of the profession, and then will want to get a job without the stigma of a conviction.
The fact that the public will allow them to do this indicates that the perceptions that sex work is so terrible that a conviction should haunt a person for their whole life is being diminished.
What it does, similar to the so called "Nordic model" is make victims out of all prostitutes and the reason the conviction is expunged isn't because she hasn't actually committed any type of crime against society, but because she is deemed to have been an unwilling victim. I am with Jim, I don't see how this really moves the needle.
"age-out" of sex work, I wish more would do what other business owners do, and bring their daughters in to take over the business. If you're a straight customer, just be wary of any that call their business something like "Anastasia & Sons." Lol
By the time many of these women finally retire even their daughters are too old for me. How about "Anastasia and granddaughters" instead? lol
If you see an ad like that, send it to me. Lol
You can argue the merits / demerits of this law and slice and dice things you wish were different. But, contrary to GaG's point, this law does away with the need to prove "victimization" or trafficking which the discussion says is often impossible to prove anyway. Despite any legal or social flaws you might want to criticize, how do you vote: For or Against?
.
I am FOR this law for the same reasons that mrfisher is for it. I would add that a one-time handjob in the back of a car caught be a nosy street cop with a flashlight tapping on the window might create the same criminal record as an international touring pro with a private website and 5 years of clientele who gets nabbed in a 5-star hotel at the start of a 3-hour luxury session with an undercover cop in Honolulu. Let them both retire and leave those records behind.
.
And a question: Does anyone see Perfectstorm anywhere in that signing photo? Hiding behind a curtain, maybe?
even a tiny bit, that is a good thing.
Many gals eventually age out of the profession, and then will want to get a job without the stigma of a conviction.
The fact that the public will allow them to do this indicates that the perceptions that sex work is so terrible that a conviction should haunt a person for their whole life is being diminished.
While it's certainly the case that some women will probably benefit from this law, that doesn't mean it does anything constructive toward making sex work/workers more acceptable to society in the US. In fact, the rationale for doing away with the trafficking/victimization requirement is to simply assume that ALL prostitution is de facto trafficking and therefore requiring proof is unnecessary. And by enshrining and institutionalizing that concept, this law essentially declares all sex workers to be victims who need the nanny-state to protect them. So, in terms of whether this law moves the needle toward decriminalization/legalization/acceptance of sex work, it doesn't . . . not even a little bit.
Without the need to prove victimization under this new law, and with all the benefits that come with "claiming" victim status, this could easily skew the statistics that LE and others use to "PROVE" that virtually all prostitutes are unwilling victims of traffickers.
I was in lukewarm favor of this bill when I first read it as my kneejerk reaction was that if even a handful of women would be spared the "scarlet letter" for the rest of their lives, I am beginning to have a change of heart as I realize that it actually causes more problems than it solves. Anything that reinforces public perception that ALL prostitutes are unwilling victims is a step in the wrong direction as far as I am concerned.