So, fear of being "racist!!!" must trump all rational self interest for whites (and Asians, and Latinos) huh?
As long as blacks behave radically differently, on average, than other groups, yes, people will in fact pursue their self interest. You don't let the law thwart your desire to pay for sex, nor do you want even a woman's preferences to get in your way (dating service!), but you think everyone must sacrifice their self interest for others, for you, when it comes to race.
We saw the issues come to light immediately after his threads.
We have guys complaining about reviews getting them banned from Jennifer's Models. Granted, he was about full expression...but reviews get manipulated by providers and/or agencies. guys should feel comfortable writting reviews, period.
Plus, we saw digdirkler go on his racism justification tirade. Seriously, do we see agencies at the same price point being overly concerned about black men being clients? What's up with the Indys?
Also, we saw some independent providers treat the hobby like a dating website. Some of the k-girls (all be it agency) barely speak English, but they damn sure know how to pamper everyone and they are at a connection disadvantage. If a guy wants a dinner date, or a longer date then by all means put him to the test. But I do feel the 1hr guys are unnessarily on Love Connection at times.
.......just let it go. It's not a perfect world. It never will be. Find what works for you and move on.on.
the posts are equally difficult to follow.
And perhaps another: "all be it" instead of "albeit."
Grammatical ticks are far more telling than most people really know. (I'm in full agreement with you.)
What does a typo have to do with the discussion at hand? You are drawing baseless conclusion to avoid the issue.
A lunch counter is not the same as a woman's body. Let's not lose perspective here.
Personal preferences exist. Providers have rights - rights that don't evaporate just because we don't like or agree with that provider's choices.
Respect each other. Respect each other's choices. Respect each other's boundaries.
We are not entitled to change each other's choices because we don't agree with them or don't like them, no matter how distasteful we might find them personally
I have not comment J-models review retaliation strategy
But, are there really agencies charging the same as BP girls? 80, 100, 120, 150? If so, they are Asian agencies, and those do screen out AA's. Also, if the case did exist, wouldn't it make sense of an agency, which possibly has other security measures, to screen less heavily than an independent girl stuck all by herself in a room with a stranger? "Drivers" provide more than just taxi service I believe.
Also, I don't get this "dating" complaint. It seems the assertion, overlapping with the race screening complaint, is that any girl is supposed to act like a "public accommodation" under the law, and provide to whoever walks in the door with the right amount of cash. Really, just like McDonalds? Let a guy lie on her naked, with his schlong inside her body, with NO right to personal preference of any sort? Sure, its not good business for a girl if she's too picky, and if she accepts the $ and them provides bad service due to preferences a customer might complain. But if she doesn't want to see you because you use bad grammar or have a lower class accent, or smell, or are too old or young or fat or creepy or zitty or bald, or TOO BLACK, get over it and move on. Are you obligated to lie naked on top of and put your schlong into a woman of any size, age, race or whatever? Get a little perspective.
For what it's worth - I like your opinions you've shared the last couple days. I don't post much here but your spot on with your thoughts imo. Who the hell is anyone here to call someone out or say that the girl is racist because she doesn't want to be intimate with a black man. That's her personal preference. So what?
By that guy Life's standard and his alias or whoever started this thread than guy's here that don't have reviews for black women must be racist too right? Or the guy that won't pay 300 bucks to sleep with a bbw must have a bias against overweight people right? Or what about the guy that only pays redheads? He must have a thing against blonds and brunettes right?
Just because we're hookers doesn't mean we don't reserve the right to decline being intimate with someone for whatever reason we don't want to!
By that guy Life's standard and his alias or whoever started this thread than guy's here that don't have reviews for black women must be racist too right? Or the guy that won't pay 300 bucks to sleep with a bbw must have a bias against overweight people right? Or what about the guy that only pays redheads? He must have a thing against blonds and brunettes right?
Just because we're hookers doesn't mean we don't reserve the right to decline being intimate with someone for whatever reason we don't want to!
-- Modified on 3/16/2015 12:56:56 AM
gonna guess because there are 3-4 million whites and asians, and the DC suburban counties other than PG are top wealthiest in the country, so there are plenty of viable customers if a woman chooses to screen AA
By that guy Life's standard and his alias or whoever started this thread than guy's here that don't have reviews for black women must be racist too right? Or the guy that won't pay 300 bucks to sleep with a bbw must have a bias against overweight people right? Or what about the guy that only pays redheads? He must have a thing against blonds and brunettes right?
Just because we're hookers doesn't mean we don't reserve the right to decline being intimate with someone for whatever reason we don't want to!
So, fear of being "racist!!!" must trump all rational self interest for whites (and Asians, and Latinos) huh?
As long as blacks behave radically differently, on average, than other groups, yes, people will in fact pursue their self interest. You don't let the law thwart your desire to pay for sex, nor do you want even a woman's preferences to get in your way (dating service!), but you think everyone must sacrifice their self interest for others, for you, when it comes to race.
....his racists views!! Period!! Dig's expression of his amateur statistical analysis is nothing but a shell game for him to express his racist views.
I am a Black man and TOTALLY AGREE with a provider exercising and communicating her preferences and I ENCOURAGE it for whatever reasons, hidden or expressed.
The volume of ladies openly expressing their preferences is growing and I love it. If saves me time and effort!! And I commend them!! I'm glad they do it PC be damned!! I've stated repeatedly on this topic, as others, that this is not a lunch counter convesation and that the TER world is no place for affirmative action and for all to get over it. It does not offend me AT ALL as I don't want to be with anyone who does not want to be with me!!!
My personal hobby experience has been excellent!! For every 1 that notes "no Black Men" there are at least 8+ that have no issues with race.
THE SUMMARY POINT IS....DON'T MISTAKE DIG'S POST AND COMMENTS AS SOME COMMENTARY ON HIS CONCERN FOR THE LADIES SAFETY OR THE PROMOTION OF PERSONAL PREFERENCE!
have the standard 'We reserve the right to refuse service to...' sign. Why should providers not have the same right? I've been to classy restaurants that required gents to wear a jacket (most have a small supply of cheap navy blazers they will loan you so as not to lose your business). Most of us would agree that a provider has the right to refuse service to a drunk or someone obviously high on drugs, so why can't they have other standards?
But, are there really agencies charging the same as BP girls? 80, 100, 120, 150? If so, they are Asian agencies, and those do screen out AA's. Also, if the case did exist, wouldn't it make sense of an agency, which possibly has other security measures, to screen less heavily than an independent girl stuck all by herself in a room with a stranger? "Drivers" provide more than just taxi service I believe.
Also, I don't get this "dating" complaint. It seems the assertion, overlapping with the race screening complaint, is that any girl is supposed to act like a "public accommodation" under the law, and provide to whoever walks in the door with the right amount of cash. Really, just like McDonalds? Let a guy lie on her naked, with his schlong inside her body, with NO right to personal preference of any sort? Sure, its not good business for a girl if she's too picky, and if she accepts the $ and them provides bad service due to preferences a customer might complain. But if she doesn't want to see you because you use bad grammar or have a lower class accent, or smell, or are too old or young or fat or creepy or zitty or bald, or TOO BLACK, get over it and move on. Are you obligated to lie naked on top of and put your schlong into a woman of any size, age, race or whatever? Get a little perspective.
I have seen some higher end girls give weight limits on their websites. But point taken, AA screening is most common.
And its a valid point. Race is immutable characteristic, unlike age and weight and income, but like sex. And so the unfairness is greater.
OK, sex is immutable too, but we accept that men are treated as greater threats because men, on average, are 6-10 times as high risk than women (depending on the crime and the time measured). We don't get upset that men are a majority of prisoners, etc.
When I was young and dumb I used to get upset that sometimes women crossed the street at night to avoid a young man, because it was unfair to me, a nice harmless guy. I got upset when I was followed in stores. I got upset at being charged more for car insurance even if accident free.
But then I got over it, and realized that their suspicions were on average well founded, and asking women to accept risk of mugging or rape, or stores to accept more theft, or insurers to accept more accidents without charging more, was unreasonable.
If everyone had a chip implant that a smart phone app could read and give a comprehensive and perfect individual background check, then nobody would need or want to screen on race or any other broad characteristic. But until then, the question is which is the lesser of two evils, unfairness to those screened or given higher scrutiny or much higher risk of violent crime.
But, are there really agencies charging the same as BP girls? 80, 100, 120, 150? If so, they are Asian agencies, and those do screen out AA's.
I'm sure the reason why the agencies don't have race/age/eye color/whatever restrictions is because the ones setting the parameters aren't the ones participating in the actual appointments. When you're working for someone else, you don't really have that luxury.
Personally, I don't "get" the race restriction thing. It makes no sense to me. That said, I'm not about to tell anyone who they should or shouldn't be intimate with because it's not my place. Everyone has the right to say "thanks, but no thanks." Whining about it is a waste of time.
And I've dealt with my fair share of crybabies over that as well. Most reasonable dudes will just say "oh well, on to the next!" Only the ones with fragile egos will give even half of a fuck.
Glad to see you didn't get your lady boner caught in the zipper over my joke.
I gotta agree with you about one thing for sure, don't be a crybaby, just fucking move on already!
Don't cry about no AA.
Don't cry about no Whities.
Don't cry about being too old.
Don't cry about being too fat.
Don't cry about being too endowed.
Don't cry about not being endowed enough.
Fuck that list could go on forever, huh? Easily summed up as Just Move The Fuck On!