Prejudice and SmallTownJohn1

[Rick Munroe]

>We're not sex slaves.

 

Speak for yourself!

[+ deej]

>>We're not sex slaves.

 

You know, Rod, we've disagreed before but this is one of those times I just want to give you a high five and a hug. This is exactly the point. Five simple words that totally sum up the issue.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

IMHO

 

>>>We're not sex slaves.

>

>You know, Rod, we've disagreed before but this is one of

>those times I just want to give you a high five and a hug.

>This is exactly the point. Five simple words that totally

>sum up the issue.

 

I have learned three things lately.

 

1. I am not the only person with a dictionary.

 

2. What IMHO stands for.

 

3. There are times to comment and there are times to not. I believe some good points have been made herein

on both sides of the issue and could certainly add my own, but ultimately I find the most salient point I could make,

has been made.

 

I am in complete agreement with the thrust of Mr. Hagen's final comment.

 

 

If you can not be with the one you love, love the one who will not just take your money but will also show you a good time.

[Guest jeffOH]

RE: IMHO

 

> has been made.

 

HAVE;-)

 

I appreciate the fact that John is upfront about his limitations. Not all escorts who have such limitations are that forthcoming.

 

Minorities make up a tiny fraction of all my clients. I've had clients of every race, size and age(16-80). The only times I've experienced performance problems have been when I didn't like a client's attitude. I can deal with the not-so-attractive or the overweight, but not a condescending attitude.

 

I realized years ago that it's not about me and what turns me on when I'm with a client, it's about the client's pleasure. I get really into it with my clients, but I'm not excited in the same way they may be.I'm more focused on what they getting off on and sharing the experience with them. Not all escorts approach escorting in this manner. Some are more concerned with themselves and unfortunately this may limit their ability to perform with a wide range of client types.This doesn't necessarily mean they're prejudiced. They just know with whom they can and can't perform.

 

JEFF

jeff4men@hotmail.com

[Guest DCeBOY]

RE: IMHO

 

f was right.

[Rod Hagen]

RE: IMHO

 

>didn't like a client's attitude. I can deal with the

>not-so-attractive or the overweight, but not a condescending

>attitude.

 

 

Which means that you have your limitations too, right? I mean if you were open to sex with anyone who's willing and paying, their attitude shouldn't matter. Therefore you too are concerned with yourself along with making the client happy. Nothing wrong with that, just wanted to make sure that he, who is also with sin, did not cast the first stone. We all discriminate, to some degree. You too, apparently. My point still stands :-)

 

I am so great, I am so great. Everybody loves me, I AM SO GREAT (bart simpson quote)

[Guest JackLA]

>This is an interesting issue. In the wake of the Civil

>Rights Era most states have "public accommodations" statutes.

>The question is, is an escort in the nature of a "public

>accomodation"? If the escort owned a barber shop, a

>taxicab, a restaurant or a chiropractic clinic these laws

>would not allow him to refuse service to black men no matter

>how much he might prefer not to deal with them. Should an

>escort adhere to the same standards?

 

Ridiculous. How can anybody with a straight face seriously argue that having sex with someone falls into the same "generic service category" as giving a haircut, providing service in a restaurant, or giving someone a ride in a taxi cab. Although most of us would be opposed to blatant public descrimination, there has to be a time where common sense starts and this way over the top politically correct crap ends.

 

Sex is a VERY personal thing whether for an escort or anyone else. I think John is totally right to set parameters in which he knows he can perform so that not only will he be comfortable, but his customers will be satisfied. I've never had sex with a black man (and probably never will) but I am certainly not a racist. Does the fact that when it comes to sex I am partial to smooth blond Billy Brandt

types mean that I guilty of descriminating against brunettes? I don't think so. To try and say that escorting is a "service industry" that should be governed by the same rules that apply to public transportation and restaurants (among other things) is moronic and just plain stupid.

[Guest regulation]

I am amused to see how different this thread is from a previous thread on this subject, in which an Asian client complained that he was rejected by an escort because of his race and members of this site fell all over themselves condemning the escort's behavior.

 

Thanks to Rod and one or two others for pointing out the glaringly obvious -- prostitution is an illegal transaction and is not governed by the laws that prohibit racial discrimination by other service providers.

 

But should it be? Phage's post hits the nail on the head as usual. We have all been treated to endless diatribes on the subject of legalizing prostitution. The many posters who have furiously advocated legalization should now step up and explain whether legal prostitution will be subject to the public accommodation laws. Well, Bilbo?

 

I can't deny that those who tell us prostitutes are different in that they provide a uniquely personal service have a point.

 

But those who bring up the "professionalism" issue also have a point. The essence of prostitution is that the service provider is willing to have sex with people he does not find attractive. If he is willing to have sex only with those he does find attractive, what exactly is he being paid for? A prostitute departs from the logic of his business to the extent that he rejects customers for such reasons. The narrower the group of clients he will accept, the greater the departure.

 

I must also point out that the arguments of those who support discrimination are disturbingly similar to arguments made by supporters of racial segregation in the past. The opponents of integrating the U.S. military, for example, argued that it would not be reasonable to demand that white soldiers who find blacks personally repugnant should have to serve in the same units with them, meaning not only work but also eat and sleep and shower with them. More recently, the exact same arguments have been used by opponents of allowing gay men in the military. Rod, it sounds as though you think those opponents are right.

 

One thing can't be denied. Someone whose position is that he finds all black men unattractive whether they look like Marion Barry or like Taye Diggs simply because they are black is practicing racial discrimination of an extremely blatant and pure variety.

[+ Lucky]

RE: IMHO

 

Call me prejudiced, but I don't think I could have sex with Bart Simpson.

[Rod Hagen]

>Thanks to Rod and one or two others for pointing out the

>glaringly obvious -- prostitution is an illegal transaction

>and is not governed by the laws that prohibit racial

>discrimination by other service providers.

>

>But should it be?

 

That's neither here nor there. As it stands it isn't regulated. If what you are asking is should we expect escorts to make allowances even though they aren't forced to by law (just as I suggested that even though it is illegal, and therefore largely unregulated, to hire street kids, I thought perhaps people should behave better than that) my answer is no. If what you are asking is that, were escorting legalized do we expect, or do we hope, that escorts will be forced to sleep with whomever has money? Again, my answer is No, I don't think they should be forced to, and in a western country that would probably never happen. It smells too much like rape, even with the financial compensation, and smacks of white slavery brothels in Bonsia.

 

Personally, I'd die without ever having sex again if I had to be told whom I must have sex with; money or no money.

 

>But those who bring up the "professionalism" issue also have

>a point.

 

Professionalism and Forced Sex are two different things.

 

>If he is willing to have sex only with those he

>does find attractive, what exactly is he being paid for?

 

Providing sex and company to paying clients whom the escort is willing to accept into his home, and his rectum.

 

>A

>prostitute departs from the logic of his business to the

>extent that he rejects customers for such reasons.

 

Not true. He behaves professionally to every CUSTOMER. He's just not willing to allow everyone to be a customer. It is discrimination. But it's not unprofessional. But if this turns into a debate about is it unprofessional to discriminate, then let's just say "yes it is", and avoid the banter. Either way, it's the Escort's perogative.

 

>One thing can't be denied. Someone whose position is that

>he finds all black men unattractive whether they look like

>Marion Barry or like Taye Diggs simply because they are

>black is practicing racial discrimination of an extremely

>blatant and pure variety.

 

Totally. And until he's thrown into some mating pen in Burma, he can continue to do so.

[Guest DCeBOY]

>Does the fact that when it comes to

>sex I am partial to smooth blond Billy Brandt

>types mean that I guilty of descriminating against

>brunettes? I don't think so.

 

LOL.. you do know billy isn't naturally blond, don't you?

[Guest chubsksesc]

Hagen-

 

I do appreciate your concerns in regard to my health and your right to assume that everyone wants to tell me the same thing based on my stats alone. However the truth is I workout 3x a week. M-F I eat a sugar free cereal with fat free milk for breakfast and skinless grilled chicken (Thanks George Foreman), rice and steamed veggie for dinner. On the weekends, I eat regular meals. Nothing out of the ordinary.

 

My heart, cholesterol, blood pressure and all other indicators are right on the mark. And they always have been. Basically, I am fit and healthy my friend.

 

But thanks for the concern.

[Guest jeffOH]

RE: IMHO

 

>Which means that you have your limitations too, right? I

>mean if you were open to sex with anyone who's willing and

>paying, their attitude shouldn't matter. Therefore you too

>are concerned with yourself along with making the client

>happy. Nothing wrong with that, just wanted to make sure

>that he, who is also with sin, did not cast the first stone.

> We all discriminate, to some degree. You too, apparently.

>My point still stands :-)

 

That was why I mentioned it. That's my limitation. CLEAN and attitude-free works me!;-)I didn't say I was open to sex with anyone who's willing and paying. If someone can't show me proper respect, I choose not to see them.

 

JEFF

jeff4men@hotmail.com

[Guest jeffOH]

RE: IMHO

 

Sorry Franco, I was looking at the first "points" in your sentence.

But hey, I gave someone the opportunity to correct me and say that you were right in your use of "has". I wasn't following my own advice regarding posting. Post BEFORE hitting the bong!;-)

 

JEFF

jeff4men@hotmail.com

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

that is pure stupidity. We are discussing SEXUAL PREFERENCES, everyone has them. In most case the ones discussed are this case in point or the famed ageism. It all boils down to the simple yet for some reason hard to comprehend for some that everyone has a right to have a type, whether it be female, male, white, black, hispanic, asain, tall, short, big dicks, small dicks, for gods sake look on the net of how many groups and clubs their are for all the various interest in the gay population. If we claim everyone is prejudice just because they do not have a sexual interest in something then the whole damn lot of us are going to hell too.

 

Interesting point though and maybe something to ponder is when one is turned away from a potential fling and there is no racist card to play, do we just accept the fact that we are big boys and have learned to accept rejection and move on? Or do we start yelling and screeming like 8 year olds yelling for mommy to fix it?

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

>Many escorts discriminate and not just based on ethnic background. Reading their web sites and profiles you will find a buffet of exclusions. Some others factors that I've seen are age, smokers, HIV Poz clients, crippled clients, and overweight. There are also escorts who ask for pictures of clients to see if they meet the escort's physical requirements.

What's funny to me is many escorts claim what they do is a legit business. That they're in the service industry. Well, if you want to give them the benefit of doubt for a moment what happened to the fundamental federal laws regarding discrimination?<

 

I have been declined from several clients due to the fact I have a 7" dick, they said mine was too small. That is discrimination. Also have been told I was too "AMERICAN" looking, that is discrimination. Was told I was too old, Ageism. And god knows how many bastard children have declined to hire me because of my hiv + status.

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

but stupid me, I keep forgetting that all these rules apply to us, not you

[Guest Norm De Plume]

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I for one appreciate when an escort is up front with their likes and dislikes, it simplfies the relationship and I can move on rapidly if it creates a problem with me.

 

I completely disagree with your assurtion that somehow he doesn't have the right to publish his prejudice.

 

I for one do not tend to date blacks, and before you get up on your soapbox, I should point out, that the color of their skin has absolutely nothing to do it.

 

The type of descrimination that your trying to impose IMHO is not useful nor should it be accepted.

[Guest Musclebearshare]

mmk & sdmuscl4hire,

 

Please re-read the definition of "prejudice." John is forming an adverse judgement about something beforehand without knowledge of the facts. His profile is an advertisement for his services, and he's saying up-front that he will not make his services available to anyone who is black, no matter ...what he looks like, ...how much he's willing to pay, ...how intelligent or charming he is, etc. That is, as the definition of "prejudice" states, a preconceived preference. Because his prejudice is based on race, his attitude in this regard also fits the definition of "racist" - prejudice based on race.

 

I agree, mmk, that we all have people we aren't sexually attracted to. I, for example, am not sexually attracted to women, not in the least. That makes me sexist, with regard to my sexual preferences. I automatically exclude more than one-half the planet's population from consideration as a sexual partner, not based upon meeting any particular woman and deciding, no, I'm not attracted to her, but based on my own preconceived preference. So yes, sdmuscl, we most certainly do have to right to have a "type," and even the right to have a type that we aren't attracted to. And I see no reason why an escort should have any less right in this regard, unless or until prostitution is legalized.

 

None of this means John or I are "bad people." We all discriminate all the time, necessarily so. I just think we ought to recognize that we do so, and determine the extent to which we as individuals and as a society are willing to practice and tolerate discrimination. Some people here are bothered by John's prejudice; other's admire him for being up-front about it. But I don't see the point of trying to pretend it's something other than what it is.

 

To your question, sdmuscl, I would hope that we can accept rejection. Perhaps those who haven't had to deal with it very much have a harder time with it. But screaming and yelling isn't likely to do much good, nor frankly is blaming it on race or age or any other particular factor. It just part of life, at least for the vast majority of us. When you're talking about matters other than a potential fling, of course, rejection based on race, sex, age, orientation, etc., becomes a more serious issue, and a "no blacks" sign is something to scream about, IMO.

 

I think the reason people are getting a bit worked up over this example of racism is that escorting falls somewhere in the no-man's land between a potential fling and a business transaction. Clients (or potential clients) tend to presume that any escort should be available to them for the asking price, while many escorts make it quite clear that they are discriminating. I once approached one such escort (who actually didn't make his discrimination entirely clear) and was rejected, which initially pissed me off, but more because of the way he handled it (very poorly) than because of the rejection itself. I'm glad, though, that I didn't go see this guy and have a lousy time. In John's shoes, I might reconsider the way in which I let people know that all comers might not be welcome. The only thing that bothers me about it is that it lacks tact.

[Rod Hagen]

>My heart, cholesterol, blood pressure and all other

>indicators are right on the mark. And they always have been.

>Basically, I am fit and healthy my friend.

 

Very cool. I wonder if you saw the NYTimes piece yesterday about the "larger" woman, in great shape, who was fired as a Jazzercise instructor, and then won against them in court? Point being it is entirely possible to be "big" and in shape. Glad to hear you're one of them. Congrats.

[Guest chubsksesc]

Thank you Big Daddy ;-)

[Guest sdmuscl4hire]

I have to agree on the approach issue, it does need a bit more finesse

[Uncle Bill]

Early on in my escort seeking days, I contacted a really hot-looking guy whose ad had caught my eye for a spur-of-the-moment fling. When I phoned him, he indicated that he could meet, then quickly asked if I was black ("umm, you're not black, are you?") -- as he was "not into black guys". While I'm not black, that question turned me off quite a bit, but my lust kept me going. However, I decided that if he excluded blacks as clients, he might exclude other types of guys, so I told him more about myself (which I always do anyway -- and had just not gotten to that in the conversation yet). Well, sure enough, he didn't go for overweight clients either -- a category I fall into (I'm not huge, but I do carry a lot of extra weight), and the meeting was off.

 

Yes, I was hurt by the rejection of me personally and generally offended by what I considered his racial prejudice, but I appreciated getting that information since it helped me avoid what no doubt would have been a very unsatisfactory meeting. However, I would have rather read in the escort's ad that he had these "limitations" so that the awkward phone call could have been avoided. Regardless of the escort's motivation (be it compatibility, vanity, true racial prejudice, etc.), I know that I won't be able to change who the escort is as a person or what he thinks. In the context of escorting, I try not to make any specific judgements about a person (although I will judge the experience itself) -- I just want to go on my way without any trouble (even though I would most likely take a different approach in other areas of life).

 

Long-winded way of saying that I appreciate escorts being up front in their advertising about who they will/will not see -- as well as what they will/will not do (although the latter gets a little dicier from a legal standpoint), regardless of their personal motivations. That might make me shallow, but this is a very unique activity that is filled with contradictions (as many previous posters have noted).

[mmk]

I do agree that it could have been put a little more tactfully that he is not into black men. But the other issue would be that he says nothing and when he meets up with potential clients, if any of them are black, that he turns them down. That action, I think, could cause even more of an uproar. I could see a negative review being published where the reviewer does say that he met with this escort and the escort said "No, I cannot go through with this" How would that go over?

 

I still think that John is missing out on quite a bit of pleasure but limiting himself to only white clients. Some of my all most pleasurable experiences have been with black men and if I could relive those moments I would in a heartbeat.

[Guest JON1265]

I have had sex with black men (and will continue to do so) - some very hot ones at that. I dated a black guy once and he was a sweetheart.

 

But I would never hire a black escort. What does that make me?

 

How many of you would, or have?