Dearhunter could trap running water in a class 5 rapid in a raging river.
Fancy is wise and kindhearted.
Tbone77494 is horny and spot on.
MademoisElle is young, sexy and learning.
No harm and the replay is inconclusive. Play and stay safe all.
Props to Dearhunter and Fancy!
- BDD
- 07-09-2013, 07:43 AM
- Far-Out
- 07-09-2013, 10:35 AM
I'd hit it.... i mean, meet her 
- wildething
- 07-09-2013, 11:30 AM
- BDD
- 07-09-2013, 11:39 AM
- tbone77494
- 07-09-2013, 11:41 AM
WWJD? Hilarious.
- imabout2
- 07-09-2013, 12:12 PM
MademoisElle is young, sexy and learning✔
I need something cleaned at my home✔
I feel lightheaded and need a nurse✔
she is young and sexy✔
Loss of blood to brain after seeing her pictures😍✔
I need something cleaned at my home✔
I feel lightheaded and need a nurse✔
she is young and sexy✔
Loss of blood to brain after seeing her pictures😍✔
- dearhunter
- 07-09-2013, 03:43 PM
There will be a next time.......heh
- Sarunga
- 07-11-2013, 12:26 AM
Dearhunter could trap running water in a class 5 rapid in a raging river.You are well on your way to becoming a privileged member.
Fancy is wise and kindhearted.
Tbone77494 is horny and spot on.
MademoisElle is young, sexy and learning.
No harm and the replay is inconclusive. Play and stay safe all.
Props to Dearhunter and Fancy! Originally Posted by BDD
- Playwithalex
- 07-11-2013, 12:38 AM
http://titsandsass.com/how-texas-mad...le/#more-12642
Hate to hijack you post But I can't post and I wanna know if this scares the other providers as much as it scares me?
Hate to hijack you post But I can't post and I wanna know if this scares the other providers as much as it scares me?
- Playwithalex
- 07-11-2013, 12:44 AM
Except that it isn’t, because now a precedent has been set. The definition of “theft at nighttime” has been allowed to be defined so broadly that it now includes incomplete personal service, regardless of the legality of the service itself. You pay your hairdresser to come over and do a cut and color and she leaves with her payment without finishing your highlights? Feel free to shoot her down.
This precedent is exceptionally deadly for women, both in the sex industry and not. Sex workers who feel uncomfortable when arriving to see a client and choose to not have sex with him have the threat of legally sanctioned death hanging over their head. But this can expand past that. Imagine the woman who answers a vague house cleaning post, babysitting post, or secretary post (all jobs I’ve seen listed on Craigslist that have carried an insinuation that sex was expected) and the man hiring her decides that sex is a mandatory part of the position. Her options now are: 1) have sex she does not want to have, 2) not be paid for her time/work or 3) get shot.
These are not acceptable options. So what can we do about it? On a macro level, we can get involved in the legal and legislative systems. We can set up meetings with prosecutors to discuss with them the dangers and challenges that sex workers face and help them build the theories of their cases to include these facts when a sex worker is harmed. We can challenge the vagueness and breadth of laws like these because they not only harm sex workers but service workers generally, who disproportionately tend to be people of color, undocumented workers, and women: those who society is not jumping to protect.
On a smaller scale, we can speak up about our rights and urge our allies to do the same. We can squawk every time the word “whore” is used to slam someone, do some Sex Worker Education 101 when we hear the inevitable “what did she expect” in regard to cases like these, and set fire to the sex worker caste system. We can—and must—do everything we can to chip away at the stigma of what we do. Because if this case had been the hairdresser hypothetical a few paragraphs above, the absurdity of Gilbert’s defense would have shown through instead of being expanded to potentially harm us all.
1. It is interesting to note that in contract claims, you cannot sue for personal service. Contract law states that you can sue for the monetary value of the service, but the court cannot force a person to do perform a personal action. In civil court, Gilbert would have been able to sue to get his money back but not to force her have sex with him. Civil law finds it unconscionable to make someone do a “personal service”, but apparently it’s fine, in Texas, to kill over it.↩
This precedent is exceptionally deadly for women, both in the sex industry and not. Sex workers who feel uncomfortable when arriving to see a client and choose to not have sex with him have the threat of legally sanctioned death hanging over their head. But this can expand past that. Imagine the woman who answers a vague house cleaning post, babysitting post, or secretary post (all jobs I’ve seen listed on Craigslist that have carried an insinuation that sex was expected) and the man hiring her decides that sex is a mandatory part of the position. Her options now are: 1) have sex she does not want to have, 2) not be paid for her time/work or 3) get shot.
These are not acceptable options. So what can we do about it? On a macro level, we can get involved in the legal and legislative systems. We can set up meetings with prosecutors to discuss with them the dangers and challenges that sex workers face and help them build the theories of their cases to include these facts when a sex worker is harmed. We can challenge the vagueness and breadth of laws like these because they not only harm sex workers but service workers generally, who disproportionately tend to be people of color, undocumented workers, and women: those who society is not jumping to protect.
On a smaller scale, we can speak up about our rights and urge our allies to do the same. We can squawk every time the word “whore” is used to slam someone, do some Sex Worker Education 101 when we hear the inevitable “what did she expect” in regard to cases like these, and set fire to the sex worker caste system. We can—and must—do everything we can to chip away at the stigma of what we do. Because if this case had been the hairdresser hypothetical a few paragraphs above, the absurdity of Gilbert’s defense would have shown through instead of being expanded to potentially harm us all.
1. It is interesting to note that in contract claims, you cannot sue for personal service. Contract law states that you can sue for the monetary value of the service, but the court cannot force a person to do perform a personal action. In civil court, Gilbert would have been able to sue to get his money back but not to force her have sex with him. Civil law finds it unconscionable to make someone do a “personal service”, but apparently it’s fine, in Texas, to kill over it.↩
- pyramider
- 07-11-2013, 06:00 AM
- Dorian Gray
- 07-11-2013, 07:55 AM
- Guest082824
- 07-11-2013, 08:12 AM
Alex, you may start another thread if you want to continue the subject matter of your post 
- BigLouie
- 07-11-2013, 06:18 PM
- 08cris
- 07-11-2013, 07:32 PM
Well wise guy if you had not bumped a 2 month old thread I doubt if she post anything. Originally Posted by BigLouie
What 2 month thread did I bump dumbass?.....This thread is over a review that was written on the 7th, 4 days ago...Even though the OP is writing about a session that happened 2 months ago