Risk Perceptions of Providers

In another recent thread I stated that I considered relying on memberships or references as unreliable screening. If I were a girl and unsure about the safety of a new guy I would have a girlfriend, or even a guy, somewhere else in the house. To me this is the only reliable way of assuring that I would not be harmed. If certain clients insist that the apartment, house, whatever, be totally empty of everyone except him and I, then I would let him go. I don't see a reason for that.

Furthermore, I would insist on this for encounters with non-clients, that is, boys that I just met and want to be intimate with. If I met a guy at SXSW or at a RAVE party, or wherever girls hook-up these days, I would want to know that at least for that first time together that we were not totally alone in whatever place we were doing it.

This raises what is to me an interesting issue. Why are so many providers very cautious about security with customers yet throw all caution to the wind when it comes to boys they bed down with in their private lives?

In my observation the security of seeing men as an escort is far better than for seeing men out of other motivations.

I've been involved with the hobby for a long time, and I've never personally known an escort that had a dangerous experience with a customer. I do however know many girls who have had dangerous experiences, and been badly harmed, in encounters with men in their private lives. I have never known an escort who even admitted to me that they believe they had caught an STD from an escort client, but some escorts I know admit to have had an STD in the past, and it was always obtained from a "boyfriend."

To me the reason is clear. When it comes to the things which motivate us [females or males] to seek out intimacy, we are highly motivated and overlook potential risks. But when the motive is money any potential risk is focused upon..perhaps even exaggerated.

I wonder if providers look at it that way also.

Very interesting topic, TAE.

I understand your point of view, because most young women who go bar hopping tend to be sexually promiscuous. If you're drinkin, you're fuckin. However, I don't think that point can be translated into the hobby world. Most providers are NOT sexually promiscuous and find it pointless and dangerous to lay a stranger for free, unprotected. Young women who have chosen the escort lifestyle have assessed their risks and tend to practicer safer sexual habits--in and out of the hobby. This means getting tested regularly, familiarizing themselves with STD's and their symptoms, and engaging in strictly safe sex. Not to mention, knowing a good deal about the stranger they're gonna be doing the hanky-panky with!

I think young women who are not providers aren't fully aware of the risks that come with unsafe sex, or one night stands. I say this because two of my good civilan girlfriends, both in their early 20's, have never been tested and yet have strange sex on a semi-regular basis. They have not properly assessed their risks (much to my chagrin) and ease their minds with utter BS, like, "Girl, he's sooo fine! And he told me he got tested when he was with his ex 6 mos ago and I'm the first person he's been with since her!" And even if they do plan on using condoms... It might not happen... Joe Sexy Ass, might turn out to be Joe Crazy Ass and rape and murder her.

Because civilian women are intimate with strangers for pure fun, logic and sensibility are sometimes thrown to the wind...Because escorts are intimate with strangers for their livlihoods (and fun *teehee*), logic and sensibility are never compromised. Now, I am speaking for myself, but I know there are many other providers who feel the same way.

I hope my post sheds some light on this issue.

I hope my post sheds some light on this issue. Originally Posted by KaraLynnKelley

+1

You are right in that escorts are not more promiscuous than anyone else, and perhaps less so. One girl I worked with, Mandy, had gone through four years of college before she had a boyfriend, and when she started working with me had only had one partner. Her first client with myself was therefore only her second.

But a girl doesn't need to be promiscuous to be at some risk, she just needs to be dating. Dangerous situations that escalate to real harm happen sometimes, even to the non-promiscuous.

The conclusion I've reached about the topic is that girls starting into escorting have real security worries about it when factually seeing clients is safer than ordinary dating.

For example, every girl seems to know about the one or two per decade girls that are homicide victims via clients, but they are unaware of the dozens of "girlfriends" that are offed by boyfriends during the same period.

I think that escorts usually exaggerate the risks of escorting.

well i think the risks of escorts for the most part is really LE. Yes, we had the guy who killed those girls up north and u had that incident last year in austin. if u think about how many P4P transactions occur in comparison to actual crimes, its pretty low. no one has solid numbers of course but i am willing to bet one is likely to be injured in a car wreck before or after a session than the actual session itself

You run an agency and you think escorts exaggerate the risks of escorting? Wow. Thank you for reminding me why I only trust myself to thoroughly screen and vet potential clients.

If I were a girl and unsure about the safety of a new guy I would have a girlfriend, or even a guy, somewhere else in the house. Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

If I were a provider I'd want a man-eating tiger with a bazooka at the foot of the bed trained to attack testicles if a guy so much as looked at me funny.

However, since I'm a hobbyist my paranoia and concern for my own safety and comfort level means that if there's another person in the apartment/house/room there's no fucking way I'm getting naked and turning my back on the door.

If I were a provider I'd want a man-eating tiger with a bazooka at the foot of the bed trained to attack testicles if a guy so much as looked at me funny.

However, since I'm a hobbyist my paranoia and concern for my own safety and comfort level means that if there's another person in the apartment/house/room there's no fucking way I'm getting naked and turning my back on the door. Originally Posted by down41

Honestly, the only times I ever even heard of someone else being "on the premises" be it in another room or hiding in the closet... Well, that story never ends well.

In no particular order, possible threats faced by anyone who participates in the hobby, be they male, female, hobbyist or provider:

Cash and Dash
Assault
Sting Operation
Robbery
Rape
Murder
Kidnapping

Hobby safely, hobby happily, or don't play!

Honestly, the only times I ever even heard of someone else being "on the premises" be it in another room or hiding in the closet... Well, that story never ends well.

In no particular order, possible threats faced by anyone who participates in the hobby, be they male, female, hobbyist or provider:

Cash and Dash
Assault
Sting Operation
Robbery
Rape
Murder
Kidnapping

Hobby safely, hobby happily, or don't play! Originally Posted by Austin Liv

being "outted", STDs, and blindness from staring at the screen till 3am looking at the new ads

I can only speak for myself, but if I even think someone else is in another room/ closet I'm out the door, and I'm not coming back. I can understand the provider looking out for her safety, but I'm also looking out for mine.

Thundarr, as far as I can tell the only person advocating having another person on the premises during an appointment is the "agency" (in quotations because I'm not quite sure I'd consider it an agency, per se) theaustinescorts.

This is apparently to minimize risks, which are greatly exaggerated by providers to begin with. Make sense?

Yeah, I didn't think so either.

Austin Liv, I get what you're saying, and I agree. I was just adding my .02 cents which is usually worth less than .01 cents.

Funny thing. I contacted an agency recently which had no screening practice whatsoever...apparently that is not how they do business...

There are tons of risks in any hobby situation. Some i refuse to take.

I was just adding my .02 cents which is usually worth less than .01 cents. Originally Posted by thundarr28

Damn economy...

I am another advocate of having another person in the apartment/hotel suite. I think that making your safety person another hot-pants provider is a fantastic idea. Someone else that is non-violent, sexy, and non-threatening. That way, someone is there to be a buffer for the really fucked-up stuff and it also makes the experience more professional.

I admit that I am a young, promiscuous woman that was a provider for awhile. I had a habit of fucking random guys from the internet or the bar, but I was always persistent enough to make the guy leave his information with my bff that was also my roommate. Crazy, but it has worked so far.

I was somewhat taken aback at the level of precaution when I first began to hobby, as it was a step further than what I was used to taking in my own life. BUT I loved the ability to be more anonymous from my end.

That is all.