Accusations

You're disgusting. Glad it's out in the open. Originally Posted by Annie Calhoun

Yeah we can all take a look in the mirror.

Just reading this thread is disturbing for so many reasons. The obvious, that there was either an abuse of a provider or the slander of a hobbyist. Both of which are wrong either way.

Then there is the issue of the Ladies Powder Room being abused and ladies violating the rules and calling the hobbyist and telling him what was being posted in a private sector (and yes, I know this happens all the time in both the men and ladies "private sections"). Has anything been done about the ladies who leaked this information? From what I have seen, the lady in question did not, nor has she to date, posted in the open forums, anything about this incident.

Then there is the P411 account cancellation. That is something soley on Gina to make that decision based on the information provided by BOTH sides of the story. I believe Gina to be a very honest lady in this business and she does what she feels to be the safest decision for the ladies. Her service is bulit on the idea that she is provinding a SAFE and HONEST (as can be in this business) service of screening and a level of protection for both the ladies and the gentlemen using her site.

Then we have people taking sides as to what is right and wrong here just because they know someone? How many times has a serial killer lived in a neighborhood and taught Sunday school? John Wayne Gacy comes to mind. His friends, family and neighbors all said that they KNEW him and he wasn't like that .... untill they started finding the bodies in his crawl space under his house. But everybody KNEW him right?

In this hobby, NO ONE really knows the other person just because you met them once or half a dozen times. We may THINK we do, but we don't.

Then we have the postings about how if we are a provider we should be able to take anything put on us. That our websites should tell EXACTLY what kind of services are offered or not offered on our MENU and we are HELD to that service no matter what? Do you really think I am going to go on my website and say I offer blah blah and blah? WTF? And just because I did Greek with 10 clients that same week before you and my reviews said I did Greek does NOT mean YOU are getting that same service. If you come in with a cock hung like a horse, looks like a beer can or if I am not in the mood that day (or because I did it with the client just before you), then you are NOT, in no way or fashion, getting Greek. My business, my body and my rules every time. I am being paid for my time not my services. This isn't a new concept that we providers have just come up with. That is how it has been for years.


This is a terrible situation. It DOES put a bad taste in everyones mouth. And a black mark on the hobby itself whichever side of the story turns out to be the truth.

Just reading this thread is disturbing for so many reasons. The obvious, that there was either an abuse of a provider or the slander of a hobbyist. Both of which are wrong either way.

Then there is the issue of the Ladies Powder Room being abused and ladies violating the rules and calling the hobbyist and telling him what was being posted in a private sector (and yes, I know this happens all the time in both the men and ladies "private sections"). Has anything been done about the ladies who leaked this information? From what I have seen, the lady in question did not, nor has she to date, posted in the open forums, anything about this incident.

Then there is the P411 account cancellation. That is something soley on Gina to make that decision based on the information provided by BOTH sides of the story. I believe Gina to be a very honest lady in this business and she does what she feels to be the safest decision for the ladies. Her service is bulit on the idea that she is provinding a SAFE and HONEST (as can be in this business) service of screening and a level of protection for both the ladies and the gentlemen using her site.

Then we have people taking sides as to what is right and wrong here just because they know someone? How many times has a serial killer lived in a neighborhood and taught Sunday school? John Wayne Gacy comes to mind. His friends, family and neighbors all said that they KNEW him and he wasn't like that .... untill they started finding the bodies in his crawl space under his house. But everybody KNEW him right?

In this hobby, NO ONE really knows the other person just because you met them once or half a dozen times. We may THINK we do, but we don't.

Then we have the postings about how if we are a provider we should be able to take anything put on us. That our websites should tell EXACTLY what kind of services are offered or not offered on our MENU and we are HELD to that service no matter what? Do you really think I am going to go on my website and say I offer blah blah and blah? WTF? And just because I did Greek with 10 clients that same week before you and my reviews said I did Greek does NOT mean YOU are getting that same service. If you come in with a cock hung like a horse, looks like a beer can or if I am not in the mood that day (or because I did it with the client just before you), then you are NOT, in no way or fashion, getting Greek. My business, my body and my rules every time. I am being paid for my time not my services. This isn't a new concept that we providers have just come up with. That is how it has been for years.


This is a terrible situation. It DOES put a bad taste in everyones mouth. And a black mark on the hobby itself whichever side of the story turns out to be the truth. Originally Posted by LilRed

Awesome post.

I whole heartedly agree with Annie. Besides, how could you go through with booking an appointment with a verified and reviewed girl and NOT know what was on the menu and what was not?



I'm sorry but this makes no bit of sense. Let me show you EXACTLY where it becomes rape (this is from a lawyer friend, fyi):

" Even if the overall session (or any engagement between two adult parties) was consentual, once you begin engaging in acts that are not consentual, your officially in the wrong. The sex may have been decided as "okay", but if a specific sexual act was expressed by your partner as not okay, you need to understand that by continuing that act against express wishes you are now knowingly engaging in non -consentual sex against the will of your partner."
Like it or not, that is the truth.

Its my understanding that the idea of this hobby is not "call the girl, pay her rate, do whatever the hell you want with her in the alloted time". There are entire websites (such as this), a whole dictionary of acronyms, reviews, and many other means so that you know what is and is not on the menu long before issues like this can even arise.

An exchange of cash does not mean an exchange of complete control, and a forfeit of humanity.

Overall, no one can truly pass judgement on either side. Last I checked, only two people were there, not all of Eccie. Originally Posted by DaniellaDViante

Let me get this straight. I hate rapists. Ok there.

Santa seemed to be saying that holding a provider down can be passed off as rape. To me that seems like an abuse of power if you ask me.I think he meant fucking the shit out of a provider and that's something that a lot of men want to see providers for. That's what I consider a good fucking. If that's not your thing, hey more power to you.
I'll give you an example from a session with a reviewed provider (whom has 100 or so yes reviews since you want to boast about having a lawyer friend). She made the first 2 advances for FK and I made the third after we laid down on the bed. I was on top and was putting some force down on her body. At one point my arms were on her shoulders holding her down while we were FK. I removed my lips and she smiled at me and said lets get undressed. Now according to Santa that can be passed off as a rape bc I held her down. This is news to me. Had she of put force on me while attempting to push me off and I resisted and put more force on her I can see where that is taking control. That's about the same as saying, "don't do that, or "no". Did you ever say no?
If I violate your menu, then yes I can see where it's rape. That was my point.
During sex at some point the man is going to be putting force on the woman, vice versa.

Well great jl11, nice we can all agree on that. Yes, its not that specific acts automatically = rape, its consent or non consent that determines rape and that's going to vary person to person.


I think this thread would be more useful if we could just start thinking of ways to prevent this sort of thing from happening in the future.

In BDSM lifestyles, safewords are used. I think that would be a great addition to any session. No need to openly discuss services, but just make sure that both parties 1) know what a safeword is and 2) understand that if a safeword is used by either party, it is a clear indication of "hey, I don't like that please stop".

As someone who is an active submissive in my private life, its a huge help and clears up the "guesswork" in trying to figure out how far is too far in rougher sex.

Just my .02, maybe it might help someone out there avoid these messes.

....there is the issue of the Ladies Powder Room being abused and ladies violating the rules and calling the hobbyist and telling him what was being posted in a private sector...... Originally Posted by LilRed

I'm kinda glad he found out in any case what was being said about him, especiallly if its something as serious as this situation. But in situations like these the provider who dropped dime gets kudos in my book. I have been in a situation or two where something was said about me backchannel that wasn't true. One of the local hens was tryna cockblock me from seeing a lady I was trying to see. It didn't work though. Once I talked to her and booked my session, the sisterhood is not always as strong as you think.

When the ladies reveal stuff its moreso with a grain of salt. They usually have no ulterior motive in it. She basically just want to be safe and keep it discreet and on the low low. Because from her perspective to be exposed as a whistleblower to client might yield more harsher results for her (no reference verification requests answered, banned and not having option to post ads, etc.)

When guys reveal stuff their usually is an alterior motive. Where he figures he wiill get perferrential treament in the future for whiteknighting now.

That our websites should tell EXACTLY what kind of services are offered or not offered on our MENU ........ Originally Posted by LilRed

I don't think we are forcing or coercing you to post it on
your website persay. But on the same token after we are screened don't get perturbed if we ask you to clarify what you offer because your info sites don't provide it. And don't be surprised if a few guy who aren't screened yet ask to clarify. If you want to avoid that post it, hang up on us immediately, or just say "its up to you to take the chance on what I feel in the mood to offer you after you pay my rate"........

Just don't get mad and say "refer to your reviews and research" for those answers, since you are situational ymmv with regards to your past services on all that he better clarify before he pays you right?

and we are HELD to that service no matter what? Originally Posted by LilRed

Nope your not held to anything. But if you don't do that particular service. (whatever it may be, GREEK and BIG COCK is always ymmv but others like positions and swallowing, kissing ...not so much) what those guys may be saying is, if for some reason we book a session with you an you don't feel like swallowing today, choose to give CBJ instead of BBBJ, kissing not allowed today or receiving DATY, getting fucked while on your knees, getting on top to have sex, or have a limited menu compared to your past reviewed experiences which lured us in to want to see you say so. Especially before we pay you, that way no one is dissappointed. Sheed you can even post your penis size restrictions on your website to avoid a miscue if needed.

And just because I did (..........)with 10 clients that same week before you and my reviews said I did (.........) does NOT mean YOU are getting that same service. If you come in......or if I am not in the mood that day......... Originally Posted by LilRed

Just don't work if your not 100 percent. Or definitely tell us if you may not be in the mood to provide your talent to a particular guy. (Again greek and big cock stuff is excluded, but any of that other stuff your not in the mood for would be a scam and a jip.

I am being paid for my time not my services. Originally Posted by LilRed

Yes we are booking time. But let's be real. We may ask for an occasional dinner date, overnight, trip, etc........but you are definitely (and probably mostly percentage wise) being paid because you do put out those said services. I would imagine the bulk or a large majority of you client base get their dick sucked or fucked when they call you right. We know the ole disclaimer line about paying for my time.......but if you only feel like talking or fantacizing mentally about sex but not providing it that time is pretty pointless especially if I'm horny and want and need sex now.

I think he meant fucking the shit out of a provider and that's something that a lot of men want to see providers for. That's what I consider a good fucking. If that's not your thing, hey more power to you. Originally Posted by jl11

I agree with you in this sense. Hard to find ladies that cater to that sometimes though. Always awesome when you find one with the drive, ambition, and stamina to cater to it; especially when you don't expect it

I do not believe that this information was accidently leaked or done so because it was thought someone's safety was an issue. Whoever leaked the info from the ladies room did it intentionally to let the gentleman know what was being said about him.

So working 100% means that you should feel like doing everything you have done in the past because it was in a review or someone said you did it before? Just because you saw in a review that a lady did something with another client does not mean she is going to do it with every guy who asks. I was not talking about a woman wanting to work at all and you know that. My reference was to specific services. No matter how many times she has done said service, she still does not have to do it again with someone else if she does not feel like it. No one should be made to do anything in a sexual manner that they do not want to do at that moment. Period.

I do not believe that this information was accidently leaked or done so because it was thought someone's safety was an issue. Whoever leaked the info from the ladies room did it intentionally to let the gentleman know what was being said about him.

So working 100% means that you should feel like doing everything you have done in the past because it was in a review or someone said you did it before? Just because you saw in a review that a lady did something with another client does not mean she is going to do it with every guy who asks. I was not talking about a woman wanting to work at all and you know that. My reference was to specific services. No matter how many times she has done said service, she still does not have to do it again with someone else if she does not feel like it. No one should be made to do anything in a sexual manner that they do not want to do at that moment. Period. Originally Posted by LilRed

Totally in agreement... 100%

BUT.... who are we to say, that is even the issue, here?

No Matter What , right now... we have a "He Said/She Said" situation... only THEY know the REAL Truth!

What came first....
- the lousy, mis-represented appearance/service?
- the negative review?
- the "violation accusation"?

Unfortunately.... given the cunundrum we face... many/most will be inclined to defer to the longer standing, better established, more often confirmed, well earned reputation. May not seem fair to "all".... but I'd be willing to bet it does, to "most".

What has happened in this thread is not a "He said/She said" situation. His comments were repulsive and disturbing, and at this point, that also goes for anyone willing to defend him.

...and actually, you are not "totally in agreement...100%" with LilRed's comment. That's like saying, "Oh yeah, I totally agree with you 100% that the sky is always blue. Except, you know, it's actually red most of the time."

Totally in agreement... 100%

BUT.... who are we to say, that is even the issue, here?

No Matter What , right now... we have a "He Said/She Said" situation... only THEY know the REAL Truth!

What came first....
- the lousy, mis-represented appearance/service?
- the negative review?
- the "violation accusation"?

Unfortunately.... given the cunundrum we face... many/most will be inclined to defer to the longer standing, better established, more often confirmed, well earned reputation. May not seem fair to "all".... but I'd be willing to bet it does, to "most". Originally Posted by MrGiz

What has happened in this thread is not a "He said/She said" situation. His comments were repulsive and disturbing, and at this point, that also goes for anyone willing to defend him.

...and actually, you are not "totally in agreement...100%" with LilRed's comment. That's like saying, "Oh yeah, I totally agree with you 100% that the sky is always blue. Except, you know, it's actually red most of the time." Originally Posted by Annie Calhoun

I'm not sure whose whose comments you're referring to. Is it the OP or those of Giz that you quote? I don't see anything "repulsive and disturbing" about either!

However it is EXTREMELY disturbing that a bad review seems to have earned the OP a ban from P411. I've had nothing but good come from P411 and Gina, but when a trusted Dawg is banned based on a providers word I'm questioning my continued support. We may never know the truth - but reading the review and responses from providers and dawgs alike supporting the integrity of the OP it's not hard to think the new provider is full of shit!

What came first....
- the lousy, mis-represented appearance/service?
- the negative review?
- the "violation accusation"? Originally Posted by MrGiz

I went and took a look and it was the post in the ladies room that was made 3 minutes before the review was posted. Then this thread was started 28 hours later.

I'm not sure whose whose comments you're referring to. Is it the OP or those of Giz that you quote? I don't see anything "repulsive and disturbing" about either! Originally Posted by Louigi

I guess you didn't see the comment where the OP asserted that if a woman does not want to be "held down" (which implies she's TRYING TO GET AWAY) and penetrated, then she should not be a provider. Or the comment where he implied that any man that DOESN'T need to physically restrain a woman in order to get laid must be a homosexual.

Yeah I think if a provider can't take a good fucking then maybe she's in the wrong business. I don't know what happened so I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but if you're a provider and feel that you're being raped by being held down, then say, "can you please not do that". If he continues, I don't see where it's rape as long as it was consentual sex. I've done this before, but not to the point of it causing her pain or bruising or anything. If a woman tells me she's into being punched or harmed, I couldn't do it.

If the man violates the no greek policy, rape.
If the man violates the protection policy, rape.
Deepthroat against her consent, rape.

Maybe you providers should start letting everyone know in your menus if you don't like being held down and fucked. Maybe you can call it preferring Nancy boys. Sorry, I just thought a lot of women love bringing out the animal in a man when they agree to consentual sex.
Possibly this provider is dom friendly and wants to take the man, it seems possible huh... Originally Posted by jl11

she is referring to this post.

Giz's post was about the original topic of this thread.

Annie go back and look the op never said that.

I guess you didn't see the comment where the OP asserted that if a woman does not want to be "held down" (which implies she's TRYING TO GET AWAY) and penetrated, then she should not be a provider. Or the comment where he implied that any man that DOESN'T need to physically restrain a woman in order to get laid must be a homosexual. Originally Posted by Annie Calhoun

Slow down...

The OP is the first poster of the thread. So, he is not the guy you are referring to.

Bodilly has it right...

Everyone needs to read carefully and then post...

Smooch!

Lea

And... I am sure not going to get in the middle of this discussion except to say Staff is looking at the whole situation...