saminseattle

I wasn’t aware of the prior name or discussions, but for what it’s worth, I saw him a few weeks ago and certainly enjoyed our time together.

On a visit to San Francisco a couple of years ago, I had a couple of very enjoyable massages from Dino. It looks like he is still advertising. https://rentmasseur.com/Dinoseur

I met Mr. Gaite on one of his visits here and had a great time. We get a lot of talented visitors coming these days as well as more local folks advertising than in the past. I suspect this is all related to demographic and economic factors. There’s a lot of new money with Amazon being headquartered here and related tech. field growth, and the population has grown faster here than any other big city in the country over the last decade. https://tdn.com/news/state-and-regional/seattle-officially-fastest-growing-big-city-of-the-decade/article_0e78af34-189e-52b0-9ff2-285c10796965.html

Yes, state laws do define sex with considerable specificity in various contexts. For example, in the State of New York, where I believe you live, prostitution is a crime, but what does this mean exactly? Well, “A person is guilty of prostitution when such person engages or agrees or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee.” (This is Section 230 of the NYS Penal Code which you can find with a simple google search.) But what exactly is “sexual conduct?” Well, New York says it is “sexual intercourse, oral sexual conduct, anal sexual conduct, aggravated sexual contact, or sexual contact.” Section 130(10). Each of these terms is further defined. For example, “sexual intercourse has its ordinary meaning and occurs upon any penetration, however slight,” “oral sexual conduct means conduct between persons consisting of contact between the mouth and the penis, the mouth and the anus, or the mouth and the vulva or vagina,” “anal sexual conduct” mean conduct between persons consisting of contact between the penis and anus.” So, a “blow job” definitely qualifies as “sexual conduct,” and it’s a crime to pay for one. But what about a “hand job” or “fingering” someone’s ass? Well, that’s where the definition of “sexual contact” comes in, which is extremely broad: “Sexual contact means any touching of the sexual or other intimate parts of a person for the purpose of gratifying sexual desire of either party. It includes the touching of the actor by the victim, as well as the touching of the victim by the actor, whether directly or through clothing, as well as the emission of ejaculate by the actor upon any part of the victim, clothed or unclothed.” So, a “hand job” definitely counts and people should keep in mind that if this is included as part of a massage, the parties are engaged in a form of prostitution. Fingering someone’s ass would almost certainly also count as sexual contact. But if your doctor is doing a “digital exam” to check for possible internal hemorrhoids or something, that is presumably not being done to gratify sexual desires so it won’t count (though I note that given some recent controversies about doctor conduct, it might depend on the specific situation…there is also a specific exception in New York to what might otherwise be a sex offense if it is conducted “for a valid medical or mental health care purpose.”). Touching the perineum is a closer question, but I think most people would consider this area an “intimate part” of their person, so if the touching there is done for pleasure, I think it would count as “sexual contact” and it would probably be a crime to pay someone to touch you there, even if they did nothing else. At the same time, this kind of touching would not qualify as “sex” in the sense of “sexual intercourse” because there is no penetration (even a slight one). And some offenses require more than just sexual contact (1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree rape for example, all require sexual intercourse, in NYS at least). The whole topic does raise interesting issues, like whether “muscle worship” is prostitution etc. One thing I always thought was strange about the original RB complaint was their focus on things like sneaker sniffing, which does not seem to fit any of these definitions of sex. So, while it might be perceived as “weird,” it is hardly illegal.

I have met him on a few occasions over the last several years and have always enjoyed spending time with him, though I should note that I have never experienced his massage. Incidentally, I don’t think he’s from New Orleans, but Mexico City. If you search for Armann, you will find a number of threads that reference him, with almost all positive comments. Per @TruHart1 he recently published a memoir. https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/a-self-published-book-by-escort-armann-behind-the-mask.138280/

He used to live in Chicago and travel quite a lot. Also went by “collegestudguy.” There are several threads using that moniker, for example: https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/info-on-dylan-collegestudguy.104276/#post-959502

This is not the first time this issue has come up. I am reminded particularly of a thread by Devon Hunter from a few years ago: https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/a-way-to-warn-other-escorts-of-a-repeat-time-waster.102347/. I align myself with the comment of @WhamIAm (post 33), although I do not find it completely satisfying, as I also sympathize with Devon’s response about a “cycle of powerlessness.” (post 34). Demanding that providers simply absorb the loss and move on with no realistic accountability for appalling client misbehavior leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. Still, I cannot think of an alternative approach that does not risk creating even greater damage, for all sides. As I have said before, if there were a code of professional ethics in this business, I think the first rule would absolute discretion for the client (with the only exception being cases of violence). https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/price-point-and-alternative-advetising-lowering-rates.120359/page-2#post-1206041 (post 28). I even extended this to the Italian priest case not long ago, even though I think my view was in the minority on that thread. https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/italian-escort-tells-all.134378/. People have also clearly not forgotten about the Austin Wolf controversy, so once the line has been crossed, it can have a lasting impact. https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/out-of-bounds-by-an-escort.106907/, https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/public-shaming-of-the-john-part-deux-austin-wolf.100252/. Along those lines, there was also this: https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/scammer-alert-beware.104455/ (which I cross-reference because of some insightful comments, not because I’m trying to resurrect old disputes on threads that had to be shut down). Having said all that, we all make mistakes, and we would all be hurting if there were no second chances. While some people may cross someone off their list for such transgressions, others would simply proceed more cautiously. Last year, I chose to meet up with someone I was quite enamored with, despite knowing that he had used his twitter account to publicly shame someone who had offended him somehow. We had a great time together, and I am glad I overlooked his faux pas.

I don't know any such thing. Perhaps you should speak for yourself instead of presuming to speak for others?

The example I was thinking of was not a typical sting operation, but was more of an undercover operation which culminated in shutting-down an escort review site and the arrest and prosecution of dozens of people, including the website operator (who later killed himself). Two of the prosecutions are apparently still ongoing, more than two years later. https://sexworkclients.org/news-updates/give-to-the-review-board-defense/ Anyway, I went back and read the article again, and you’re right that it was not the police that originally requested the photo ID’s; nevertheless, through their investigation they ended up with “hundreds of pieces of identification” of clients including “employee badges from Microsoft, Amazon and Boeing, as well as LinkedIn accounts, business letterheads, passports and even family photos.” According to the article, their reaction was “Wow! They’re sending their personal information to a criminal enterprise.” https://projects.seattletimes.com/2017/eastside-prostitution-bust/ I suspect that reading this kind of a story in the newspaper might make clients more reluctant to provide their full/real names, even for legitimate screening purposes…once the information is out there, who knows where it may end up. While it's not necessarily typical, I think this is an interesting case to be aware of, and I've been trying to follow it since the story first broke in January 2016. https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/crackdown-continues.110695/ While it’s quite lengthy, here is another take on what happened, different from that of the Seattle Times. https://reason.com/archives/2016/09/09/the-truth-about-us-sex-trafficking

From what I have read, this is very common on the straight side of the industry, but very rare on the gay side. This may have to do with the average physical power imbalance between men and women resulting in greater security concerns. Certainly, there are some crazy people out there and knowing someone’s identity could provide a sense of accountability for misbehavior. On the other hand, providing this information comes with its own set of risks. During coverage of a major local “sting” operation, I recall the authorities expressing shock that people would freely give out their drivers’ license, employee ID badge, etc. Of course, after such an operation, people are far less likely to be so forthcoming in the future. In this way, the government authorities inadvertently discourage a safety/screening method and make life more dangerous for those they are supposedly trying to protect.

I wonder if these services get counted in the “basket of goods” used to calculate inflation? Apparently, they determine this from consumer survey data on expenditures, so I hope people are accurately reporting all this, so we can get some accurate statistics instead of just anecdotes. https://www.bls.gov/cpi/questions-and-answers.htm#Question_2

In the past, I have often insisted on using condoms for oral sex to reduce the risk of contracting an STI. Sometimes I forgo this now, accepting some increased risk in exchange for a more enjoyable experience. But I do regularly get screened for gonorrhea and chlamydia with an oral swab without regard to symptoms, as these STIs can be asymptomatic. In terms of reducing the risks associated with oral sex, people should also consider getting vaccinated for HPV. There are many strains of this virus, some of which are associated with oropharyngeal cancers. If you are over 26, you generally have to pay for the vaccination series yourself, but it may well be worth it to you. https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/std-how-do-you-protect-yourself.125511/page-2 (post 35), https://www.companyofmen.org/threads/oral-using-a-condom.116256/page-2#post-1130744 (posts 35 and 36). Even though you may have been exposed to one strain, the vaccine may protect you against another.

Thank you for the birthday wishes! I am genuinely touched, and I don’t mean that in a pun kind-of-way. And while I’ve been busy recently and not posting as much as I used to, I intend to stick with you guys for the long term and keep contributing when I can.

While I don't claim to have any particular expertise, my impression has always been that the actual words passed into law by Congress matter much more than what individual members of Congress say they are intending to do by passing said law. So I don’t think the fact that Senators highlight sex trafficking victims during the floor debate and don’t say much about gay people means very much. The words in the law clearly apply to everyone, including gay people, and they also clearly apply to non-sex-trafficking situations, and that’s what matters. I suppose Schumer’s comments might come into play if someone were to advance a very broad theory of what “promote” means, such as trying to argue that nonprofits that have webpages and provide STD testing are indirectly “promoting” prostitution. The word "promote" might be considered ambiguous, and Schumer's statement might help in interpreting the meaning of the term in that kind of situation. But I don’t see anything here that would make RM any less liable than it otherwise might be.

I’m sorry to see you leaving and wish you the best in the move and with your new treatment. Incidentally, I was just checking out the ads in Dallas and saw lots of folks visiting there from here (plus I believe that AndrewK is also in the midst of moving there), so if you get a hankering for a “taste” of the PNW, you’ll have lots of options