Prejudice and SmallTownJohn1

[mmk]

I have never hired a black escort but if I found one that had what I was looking for in an escort, then I would most definately hire him. (There are alot of white escorts out there that I would never consider hiring at all) For me, the escort could be black, white, asian, latino, etc. If they have what I want in an escort, they would get hired.

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

To Has or Has Not

 

I was only agreeing with one point of Mr. Hagen but in addition to the spell checking software I just invested in, I will certainly make sure to get a grammer text check involved.

 

But thanks for thinking of me, handsome, and by the way, I am still holding open that bubble butt sex slave/proof reader position just for you if the gym does not work out.

 

:9

[Guest regulation]

>That's neither here nor there. As it stands it isn't

>regulated.

 

No? But there are some legal brothels in Nevada. What do you want to bet that Nevada also has a public accommodation law?

 

 

>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,

 

 

But that is not what I'm asking. No law states that a barber or chiropractor must accept absolutely anyone as a client. But the law does state that he may not reject a client for certain specific reasons, such as race. See the difference?

 

>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.

 

Okay.

 

>>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.

 

 

It's his prerogative so long as prostitution remains illegal and unregulated. But if those who argue in favor of legalization get their wish, it won't remain the escort's prerogative, because with legalization comes regulation (no pun intended :-) ). You can't seriously believe that if prostitution is legalized there won't be legislators in some states who will demand that racial discrimination by prostitutes be prohibited. And who's going to argue with them? Who's going to get up in public and insist that anyone should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of race?

 

I think one reason the advocates of legalization haven't stepped up to the challenge in this thread is that they have no answer to this problem.

[Guest 7Zach]

As others point out, if professionalism means being a sex worker and judged by the same standards required of legal businesses, then John is busted.

But that's the rub: there is no regulation and no "open accomodations" law to apply (pun intended). And for me, I've had great times with those that do this as a sideline, so I guess they're part-time sex workers?

Never have met him, not my type exactly, but judging from his posts, he's articulate, down-to-earth, and I am glad he posts. And if escorts were required to sleep with anybody and everybody, I think a lot of them would quit, as opposed to accepting all comers...there i did it again.

[Guest jeffOH]

RE: To Has or Has Not

 

>But thanks for thinking of me, handsome, and by the way, I

>am still holding open that bubble butt sex slave/proof

>reader position just for you if the gym does not work out.

 

Thanks, it's always nice to have something to fall back on :* }>

 

JEFF

jeff4men@hotmail.com

[Guest Musclebearshare]

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

>me?

 

It makes you a guy who would never hire a black escort. Don't you feel that ought to be your perogative? If you were, say, a doctor, do you feel it ought to be your perogative to say "I would never have a black patient"?

 

>How many of you would, or have?

 

Have not, but would.

 

Michael

[+ Charlie]

I have slept with every race and nationality--I once did it with a Greenland Eskimo--but most of the escorts I have hired have been white, mainly because good ones are easier to find. Unfortunately, really handsome, intelligent, educated black and Latino men have more attractive employment opportunities, so minority escorts tend not to be from the social class that attracts me (there, I've said it: I'm basically a classist!). Nevertheless, I have hired black and Latino escorts when the right one was available, and really enjoyed them.

[Guest blkescortznc]

Well being that we are a black male escort service located in raleigh nc , not too far from tennessee , I thought I would add my two cents... This is Tee and I am one of the escorts...I really do not think he is being racist or prejudiced, he is just being upfront about his preferences. I being a black male escort , normally do not take black male clients. I have had several bad experiences with black clients, so I actually mainly have a white clientele. My preference is based from actual escort experiences with clients. In all honesty , does that make me racist towards my own race , because I base my preference of clients on experience? I am curious to hear anyone's thoughts on this

 

Thanks

Tee (Raleigh NC)

[buckguy]

After reading all the posts and think about how we've gone after escorts who don't like overweight guys, older guys, etc., I'm struck by the willingness to suddenly accept "preferences".

 

I'm also struck that there are parallels to the world where I once worked, which was in series of helping professions related to mental health. I worked as apsychiatric tech in several hospitals while going to school, then worked in a school for dissturbed kids, a community hotline, and then in a series of community mental health cneters and hospitals as a clinician and clinician in training.

 

In all these places, we basically took all comers regardless of age, race, complication factors, etc. When I had crisi intervention duties, I never knew who'd walk in the door. Ditto, coming back to the hospital after a few days off. yes, there were people I liked better than others, got on with better than others. And I had my prefernces---I disliked working with opiate users and wasn't thrilled with the retarded. On the other hand, I really enjoyed working with psychotic people, a group others didn't always enjoy. But even within these preferences, i found druggies I could work with and psychotics who were impossible (mostly because of the personality that still lurked behind the psychosis. I also found that was better to deal with the people I was less iclined toward because I learned something about myself in the process and gained skill in my work.

 

If you're gonna work with the public (as escort or anything else), you're not going to have much choice over your clientele esp. in the beginning. And if you're not willing to stretch yourself beyond your limitations, you better hope your lucky enough to only attract who you want, because narrowness will show to lots of people you don't think are looking.

[Rod Hagen]

>I'm also struck that there are parallels to the world where

>I once worked, which was in series of helping professions

>related to mental health. I worked as apsychiatric tech in

>several hospitals while going to school, then worked in a

>school for dissturbed kids, a community hotline, and then in

>a series of community mental health cneters and hospitals as

>a clinician and clinician in training.

 

And I wouldn't be a bit surprised if a not-so-insignificant number of those patients had a history of prostitution. Now imagine if on top of having not been psychologically UP to handling prostitution, they were also told by the government that they had to allow all persons with cash and interest to penetrate their anus, they would not be allowed to discriminate based on race, color, sex, creed, ability, appearance. It just sounds too much like white slavery to me. Am I wrong?

 

Is it not obvious that a barber, or a case worker at a mental health hospital, has less to lose, psychologically, by NOT discriminating, than a prostitute does?

[Guest elwood]

The term "white slavery" is interesting.Is this a separate entity from other types of slavery?

Or is slavery only that which applies to blacks and we have to use a different term for others? Slavery is slavery.And you are correct Rod that escorts ,are not sexual slaves.Johns statements are an expression of what he will do, and for clients, honesty is definitely the best policy and there is nothing wrong with him stating that on his website. What his true reasons are..we cannot know...whether it is sexual attraction or racial prejudice. And when hiring an escort,if that is an issue...well at least John has put it out front for the client to decide..

[buckguy]

>

>And I wouldn't be a bit surprised if a not-so-insignificant

>number of those patients had a history of prostitution.

>Now imagine if on top of having not been psychologically UP

>to handling prostitution, they were also told by the

>government that they had to allow all persons with cash and

>interest to penetrate their anus, they would not be allowed

>to discriminate based on race, color, sex, creed, ability,

>appearance. It just sounds too much like white slavery to

>me. Am I wrong?

>

>Is it not obvious that a barber, or a case worker at a

>mental health hospital, has less to lose, psychologically,

>by NOT discriminating, than a prostitute does?

 

I take it you don't appreciate that other people might deal with intimate aspects of people's lives and live with not discriminating.

[Guest DCeBOY]

so let's see... i have a continuing discussion about law school & that gets locked.

this thread just keeps going & going.

hmmm...

[Guest Musclebearshare]

>And I wouldn't be a bit surprised if a not-so-insignificant

>number of those patients had a history of prostitution.

>Now imagine if on top of having not been psychologically UP

>to handling prostitution, they were also told by the

>government that they had to allow all persons with cash and

>interest to penetrate their anus, they would not be allowed

>to discriminate based on race, color, sex, creed, ability,

>appearance. It just sounds too much like white slavery to

>me. Am I wrong?

>

>Is it not obvious that a barber, or a case worker at a

>mental health hospital, has less to lose, psychologically,

>by NOT discriminating, than a prostitute does?

 

Yes, I think you're wrong, or at the very least, I think you're overstating your case to such an extent that it partially invalidates your arguement. First, if prostitution was legalized and subject to equal-access regulations, I can't imagine this would mean every m4m escort would be forced into sexual versatility. What makes you think escorts would have to submit to being penetrated by all comers? I think we'd have the same variety of services being offered that we do now - top-only escorts, versatile bottoms, muscle-worship only, S&M, etc.

 

Second, not being able to discriminate based on race doesn't mean not being able to discriminate. A barber, a case-worker (presuming his employer is reasonable), a lawyer, doctor, etc., can refuse a particular client/patient based on any number of factors. Why wouldn't an escort be able to do this? There would be nothing wrong with an escort posting publicly that he insists his clients be clean. There would be nothing wrong with an escort discussing a client's expectations and personal appearance with that client and deciding he isn't the right person for the job. There would be something wrong with an escort saying "no blacks," "no clients over 50," etc. That's not slavery, not remotely. In the same way that an escort can make it clear that his own preferences are for men, he can also make it clear what types of men he performs best with and what kinds of activities he excels at. (Actually, while I don't know quite how legalized prostitution might be implemented, the sexual discrimination angle could be skirted if escorts were licensed separately for each sex, so that if a woman tried to hire you, you could say, "I'm sorry, my California state license only permits me to have male clients.") That's not so different from what happens now. Most people wouldn't bother trying to hire someone for whom they seemed an unsuitable client. No one who hires out his services - plumbers, carpenters, personal shoppers, interior designers, licensed masseurs - is forced to take all comers, and none of them is allowed to discriminate based on race. Why would escorts, if the job was legalized, be any different? If that is too psychologically damaging for any would-be licensed escort, he should consider another line of work.

 

Michael

[Rod Hagen]

> Why would escorts, if the job

>was legalized, be any different?

 

There are plenty of people out there who

1. either enjoy making the escort uncomfortable; they get off on it.

2. aren't concerned with the escort's comfort or discomfort, only their own pleasure.

 

If prostitution was legalised, and the escort was forced by law to accept all types, to not discriminate, then even if he makes it clear who he is and isn't comfortable with, he would still be required, by law, to accept numbers 1. and 2. as paying sexual partners(top, bottom S&M, whatever his specialty). Having no legal recourse if things don't turn violent, he'll internalize his disgust, anger and revulsion even more than he may of when it was legal.

 

> If that is too

>psychologically damaging for any would-be licensed escort,

>he should consider another line of work.

 

absolutely

[Guest pshaw]

Tee -

 

I think the issue of out-and-out rejecting an entire race of people is what makes me uncomfortable. I certainly agree that everyone, escorts and clients, are entitled to their preferences. My preference runs toward asians and latinos - they are what floats my boat. But there are certainly black and white men who also attract my attention and if I lived in the Raleigh area Blackescortznc would be on my list. ;-)

 

Obviously, escorts are not obligated to provide service to anyone who seeks them. Your hesitance to take on black clients is based on prior bad experiences, and you do not say that you will NEVER take on a black client. (I guess it would be interesting to know exactly what are the problems that are more likely to be posed by a black client than a white client.) It is not clear on what John's decision is based, and I suppose it really is none of our business. I think John tried to make his limitation non-offensive and non-personal - it is not the racial equivalent of "no fats or fems." Yet it is fairly likely that a black potential client would be bothered by it - "I would have no trouble servicing a white guy not matter what age or size, but I wouldn't even consider a 30-year-old buff black guy."

 

I'm sure that there are several escorts are hesitant about taking on or absolutely reject black clients. I give John credit for being more open about it than others, but at the same time it is troubling to be be confronted in such a bald-face fashion with the obvious fact that many still judge others strictly by their race. I certainly don't ask an escort if he is an equal-opportunity escort, and I have not rejected an escort on those very rare occasions when I have been asked "Er, are you white?" But I did wind up quickly terminating an encounter with an escort (well-reviewed on this site, actually) who absolutely turned me off with his racist blathering about immigrants and black people.

 

The short of it is, no, Tee, I don't think you are a racist. Your approach is more along the lines of the mini-mart owner in a high-crime area who doesn't accept checks after being burned too often and installs plexiglass over the counter after a few robberies. You have had bad experiences and have adjusted your policy accordingly. It may not always be fair, but it does have a certain rationale behind it.

 

 

>Well being that we are a black male escort service located

>in raleigh nc , not too far from tennessee , I thought I

>would add my two cents... This is Tee and I am one of the

>escorts...I really do not think he is being racist or

>prejudiced, he is just being upfront about his preferences.

>I being a black male escort , normally do not take black

>male clients. I have had several bad experiences with black

>clients, so I actually mainly have a white clientele. My

>preference is based from actual escort experiences with

>clients. In all honesty , does that make me racist towards

>my own race , because I base my preference of clients on

>experience? I am curious to hear anyone's thoughts on this

>

>Thanks

>Tee (Raleigh NC)

[Guest blkescortznc]

Thanks Pshaw, I just wanted to make sure I was not offending anyone, and you are correct , I didnt say I would not have black clients , as i do have several that have been regular clients for a while. Its just from some bad experieces with black clients, there is some hesitation on my part with new clients that are black... But once again , I base my decision and preference on experience....

 

Thanks

Tee

http://blkboizinc.2y.net

[Guest Musclebearshare]

>> Why would escorts, if the job

>>was legalized, be any different?

>

>There are plenty of people out there who

>1. either enjoy making the escort uncomfortable; they get

>off on it.

>2. aren't concerned with the escort's comfort or discomfort,

>only their own pleasure.

>

>If prostitution was legalised, and the escort was forced by

>law to accept all types, to not discriminate, then even if

>he makes it clear who he is and isn't comfortable with, he

>would still be required, by law, to accept numbers 1. and 2.

>as paying sexual partners(top, bottom S&M, whatever his

>specialty).

 

Well, I still think that most likely wouldn't be the case. I don't see why an escort would be required by law to accept these types any more that a plumber is required by law to accept any business he gets called about. The bottom line, I think, would be that an escort would have almost as much freedom to discriminate as he does now, with a few notable exceptions. And even then, it would be somewhat difficult to prove that an escort discriminates based upon, say, race, unless the escort violates the law by stating it upfront. You'd have to show a pattern of discrimination - one disgruntled client wouldn't do the trick, though he could certainly create legal hassles for the escort that he can't create now.

 

But who knows, unless or until it happens? You could be right. I have no idea whether, IMO, legalization would, overall, be good for escorts and clients or be a disaster.

 

Michael

[DaninWA]

Rod,

 

I find myself agreeing with Musclebear on this one. Nowhere, that I know of, is there a law that requires a business to serve abusive customers. I doubt that would change if prostitution were legalized.

 

I just got back from San Francisco where I saw signs in many windows stating that the establishment reserves the right to refuse service to anyone. This should be the same with legalized prostitution.

 

Notice that I said should. Anything can happen when dealing with a volatile issue like this. We won't know for certain until and unless prostitution is legalized.

 

Dan

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>You can't seriously believe that if

>prostitution is legalized there won't be legislators in some

>states who will demand that racial discrimination by

>prostitutes be prohibited.

 

Actually, I'm having a hard time picturing that happening. And the legislators I can picture making that demand are the kinds of legislators whose bills never make it out of committee.

 

>And who's going to argue with

>them? Who's going to get up in public and insist that

>anyone should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of

>race?

 

Oh, I'd say the overwhelming majority of the American population. It wasn't so long ago that there were laws outlawing marriage between the races, and while things are changing, most people still choose their sex partners overwhelmingly from within their own race and would react viscerally to the notion that someone should be forced by the government to accept a sex partner they don't want to be with. What's more, the movements pertaining to sexuality that have made the most impact in more recent years are those that have emphasized the right of individuals to make their own choices about what they do with their bodies. If prostitution were legalized (I think decriminalization is a more likely option, which I understand to be a different thing), it would be partially on these grounds (and, to a greater degree, out of concern about the conditions faced by street prostitutes, particularly women).

>

>I think one reason the advocates of legalization haven't

>stepped up to the challenge in this thread is that they have

>no answer to this problem.

 

I just don't see a huge problem here. Let's say prostitution gets legalized, and the anti-discrimination-by-sex-workers movement somehow catches fire, and yes, sex workers are ordered not to discriminate. Then what? I think somebody else in this thread mentioned the need to prove a pattern of discrimination. Do we really, REALLY think government agencies are going to devote substantial resources to investigate patterns of discrimination in the pursuit of cases brought by clients who felt they were being discriminated against? Maybe some private attorneys will see a gold mine in this area of litigation, but I don't think sex workers have a lot to worry about.

 

By the way, sorry if someone has brought this up but John's statement was that he was not into black guys, not a statement that they would be denied service. So that could be 'evidence' of discrimination but I doubt it would be sufficient by itself. And I suspect for the most part that having the statement on his site would have the same practical effects on his clientele as it does now, regardless of legalization.

 

(All that said, by the way, I make it known on my own website that all comers are welcome regardless of race, size, and age. I'm lucky to be an equal opportunity ho. }> )

[Guest DevonSFescort]

While it could reasonably be argued that a personal decision not to sleep with people of a certain race (or, in this context to take them as a client to or to hire them as escorts) is irrational, isn't irrationality pretty integral to sexuality? I'm trying to remember the last time I had rational sex. Most people's sexuality is a cocktail of their irrational fantasies, fears, neurosis, and spiritual instincts. Sex, like art and religion, is an arena in which we play out these issues, hopefully safely. I think we should cut each other plenty of slack about our various sexual hangups, except to the extent that they infringe upon the right of any adult (including service seekers and service providers) to make their own sexual choices.

[Guest DCeBOY]

anything new?

 

i'm curious, does anyone have anything that hasn't already been said to say on this subject?

[Guest regulation]

>Actually, I'm having a hard time picturing that happening.

>And the legislators I can picture making that demand are the

>kinds of legislators whose bills never make it out of

>committee.

 

Really? Which legislators are you talking about?

 

> >And who's going to argue with

>>them? Who's going to get up in public and insist that

>>anyone should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of

>>race?

>

>Oh, I'd say the overwhelming majority of the American

>population.

 

 

Can you give us the name of any state legislator who has recently argued AGAINST any provision of a bill that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of race?

 

 

> Then what? I think somebody else in this thread mentioned

>the need to prove a pattern of discrimination.

 

 

Can you actually point to a provision of a public accommodation statute -- like the one in your state, for example -- that contains such a requirement? Or are you just making this up?

 

>Do we

>really, REALLY think government agencies are going to devote

>substantial resources to investigate patterns of

>discrimination in the pursuit of cases brought by clients

>who felt they were being discriminated against?

 

 

Let's ask Bilbo, who used to be a licensed massage therapist in Texas. B, if you had put out an ad stating that you didn't accept black clients, how long would it have been before someone complained to the state licensing authority?

 

 

Maybe some

>private attorneys will see a gold mine in this area of

>litigation, but I don't think sex workers have a lot to

>worry about.

 

 

Here's a hint: The public accommodation statute in your state provides for a private right of action for anyone whose rights have been violated, and in addition to damages a successful plaintiff is entitlted to recover attorney's fees.

 

 

>By the way, sorry if someone has brought this up but John's

>statement was that he was not into black guys, not a

>statement that they would be denied service.

 

Can you give us a list of reasons why an escort would put such a statement in his ad if he IS willing to accept black clients?

 

We could put that list right next to the list of reasons why an escort would invent a different working name for ads on bareback sites if he does NOT want to conceal his bareback activities from his other clients.

 

 

>So that could

>be 'evidence' of discrimination but I doubt it would be

>sufficient by itself.

 

And your doubt in this regard is based on what? Is there something in the statutes we're discussing that supports it? Or are you just making it up?

[Guest Musclebearshare]

>> Then what? I think somebody else in this thread mentioned

>>the need to prove a pattern of discrimination.

>

>Can you actually point to a provision of a public

>accommodation statute -- like the one in your state, for

>example -- that contains such a requirement? Or are you

>just making this up?

 

There are only two ways I can think of to prove that someone is in violation of a public accomodation statute - either he says so up-front or explicitly, or the complaintant can demonstrate that that person exhibits a pattern of discrimination. One woman complaining that an employer wouldn't hire her because she is a woman won't have a leg to stand on if that employer has a solid record of hiring women, unless she was told explicitly that she wasn't hired because of her sex. The discrimination case against Coca-Cola, for example, rested on a demonstrable pattern of discrimination against black employees that stretched over years. With regard specifically to how an escort could be found to violate these statutes, can you please explain how else this might come to pass?

 

Michael

[Guest elwood]

RE: anything new?

 

Well put DCeBoy...........or as parliamentary procedure would have it..........let's call the question