I got off the tube at Leicester Square and walked through Chinatown to Soho. When I got to the walk up in Frith Street that I was looking for the door was open. Even though it was just before midday. Usually I have something to eat in Soho before I see a girl but I thought I'm here now so I might as well go up.
I could see the name of the girl I was looking for. Alina, who I have heard good things about but not seen before. I knocked on the door and after a few seconds a voice came down the stairs saying she's not there yet. It was Alina's maid who was in the other flat. I asked when I should come back and she said half an hour.
That's OK I thought, I can go and have something to eat and a coffee. I walked along Frith Street past Bar Italia. I always have a look at the people sitting outside to see if there is anyone I recognize. JoAnne Good and her dog Matilda go there and apparently a well-known American actor (whose name I forget) likes to go there. I saw the musician Suggs enjoying a cup of coffee.
I went to a nearby Pret A Manger further up Frith Street and had a latte and something to eat. I read a newspaper and felt more relaxed. Walking back I saw Suggs again just getting up. I passed him on the pavement.
Back at the walk up the maid was in the doorway on her mobile. She was trying to phone Alina to see where she was. Then Alina came up the stairs, saying she was sorry she was late. We went into the bedroom and she took the money from me, £20, and went out. I took off my clothes and lay on the bed. I don't think I had been in this room before. It was small and had mirrors on the ceiling and by the bed.
Alina took her time coming back into the room, but I was happy, looking at myself in the mirrors. She came back in, wearing what looked like her bra and panties, and busied herself with paper towels and stuff. I noticed her big breasts as well as her pretty face. Then she went out again.
This reminded me of something similar that had happened in Green's Court a couple of years ago. I was on the stairway about midday and a beautiful Italian-looking woman came up the stairs and went into the flat, talking to the maid about transport delays. I wish that I had seen her. I would have like to have helped her take her clothes off, open up her legs and given her oral sex. I don't usually give oral sex, I think about what the previous punters have done to her that day. I know the prostitutes wash their genitals, but even so.
Alina came back into the room again. I asked her if I could give her oral sex but she said no. Alina is young and pretty, with a nice figure and big breasts. I can see why people like her. Maybe I'm getting used to being with beautiful women. Like most of the young ones I couldn't really communicate with her.
She put a condom on and gave me an energetic suck. I got erect and I looked in the mirrors at her head bobbing up and down. But soon my ten minutes were up.
I had already decided that I wanted to see two or three women that day. I don't usually do this. Maybe it would have been better if I had spent £60 for half an hour with one woman than £20 for ten minutes with 3 different women. But when you have the choice of so many beautiful women, sometimes you feel like a fox in a chicken coop or a nursery.
I wanted to see a real woman so I went to see Mimi in Green's Court. Mimi is Polish. She is tall and not too slender, how I like them. She has a pretty face and shoulder length curly blonde hair. I got Mimi to lie on the bed with her legs apart. I knelt between her legs and played with my willy while looking at her pussy. It didn't take long before I was erect and she put a condom on.
I don't always fuck the women I see in Soho, but there is something about Mimi. She's very sultry. Because she is tall my head was next to hers and her lovely hair. Without me asking her to, she started encouraging me, saying things like "Fuck my pussy, darling. Come on, fuck it". It was really lovely, but I can't come like that. When I got tired and started to lose my erection I stopped.
Sometimes it's difficult to believe that a man can have sex with a woman who looks like a movie star for only £20.
A few hours later I decided to go and see Sandy. Sandy was in a good mood, friendly and chatty. The last time I saw Sandy I thought she was really beautiful. I compared her to Eva Longoria. I was surprised this time that she did not seem quite so beautiful. I think there are some women who are sometimes really beautiful and other times not quite so beautiful. She was still lovely though.
She asked me what I would like and I said I would like a hand job. She said she would only charge me £20 for that. Usually £25 is the minimum for the women at 4 Old Compton Street. I asked her what she had been doing that day. She told me she had pissed on a man, had beaten another one. I can't remember all the details but she said something like "And then I put on a uniform and I was a schoolgirl". She likes all that kinky stuff. I was pleased that I'm not the only pervert that sees her.
I had forgotten that Sandy allows fingering. She let me put a finger in her pussy. She said she does Wednesdays and Fridays but that's going to change. She said something about a beauticians course she was doing or wanted to do and she wants to work around that. She seems to have her life sorted out. I shall see Sandy again.
Showing posts with label prostitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prostitution. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
angels
In March last year I wrote a blog post 'encounters with women with problems'. I wrote about a young woman who I saw in the street near where I live. She looked as if she was about to collapse and I went over to see if she was OK. I have seen her three times in the street since then but I haven't had the opportunity to speak to her.
I have also recently seen the other woman I talked about in the post. The one in Soho. She looked and sounded different from the other times I have seen her. I bought her something to eat. She recognized me but didn't seem pleased to see me and didn't want to talk much. She seemed more 'normal' than before, maybe they've changed her medication or something.
I talked to another young woman I saw in the street. The first time I saw Tracy was in the centre of Croydon. She was stopping people and asking them for money. I asked her why and she said that she needed money for somewhere to sleep that night. I mentioned that she didn't look very happy. I gave her a couple of quid and told her that the next time she saw me she could ask me again.
Weeks later I saw her outside the supermarket near where I live asking people for money. I didn't speak to her then. She came up to me in the street one day and I had a conversation with her. She said she was staying in a bed and breakfast hotel in that street. I asked her if she knew Trina and she said "Yes, I know Trina". Trina is a local drug addict that I have talked about in a previous post.
Tracy was quite scruffy-looking but she didn't look like and addict. She wasn't skinny. She is reasonably attractive. I haven't seen Tracy for a few weeks so I guess she must have moved on. If I had seen her again I would have asked her if she wanted anthing to eat and taken her to a local cafe.
You might think that I would have wanted to take Tracy back to my flat and have sex with her. I would only have done that if I thought it wouldn't have harmed her. I would have encouraged her not to go down the same route as Trina. I would have tried to help her see that she has an alternative to that.
If I thought that having sex with her would have made her think less of herself then I would not have done it. However, to a lot of these women having sex is no big deal. If a woman is on benefits and has nothing to do all day, then spending an hour having sex one afternoon with a nice man and getting £20 or £30 for it and a cup of tea after is something quite attractive. Or I could have photographed her.
Trina sent me a text message recently. It said "Do you remember me?". I didn't reply to her because I don't want to see her again. I don't even know if it was her, it could have been one of her male addict associates hoping to rob me.
Whenever I go somewhere that I may meet a prostitute I am hoping that I might meet an 'angel'. This is my word for a particular type of girl, someone rare. I have only met a few angels in the years I have been going to see prostitutes. I can't fully explain what makes a girl an angel. An angel is pretty, feminine and graceful.
I met one on Tooting Bec Common a couple of years ago. Her name was Louise. I was sitting on a bench and she came up to me on her bike. I had already been with a woman so I didn't want to take Louise into the bushes. I should have done, and got her phone number too.
She rode off saying she couldn't believe there were no punters around. When I walked off I saw her again. She asked me if I could give her a couple of pounds. I gave her all my loose change and then I gave her a big hug. She seemed to like that. She had said she was a regular on the common but I have not seen her since.
A few years ago I was in Liverpool and I passed a beautiful girl standing on a corner of Hope Street near the Anglican cathedral. There used to be loads of prostitutes near there. I went into the cathedral gardens and sat on a bench. She walked past me with a man and gave me a big smile. I decided to follow them from a distance. They went into a shrubby part of the gardens. At first I thought I'd lost them but then I saw them embracing against a tree. She saw me and I hastily went off, thinking the man might get angry and confront me. Never saw her again.
When I went to my dentist there used to be an angel there, a dental assistant. One day I saw my dentist and I thought she used the acronym 'DP' when talking to her assistant. I was interested because DP means something very rude in pornographic videos. Just before I left the dentist I asked this girl who was behind the desk "Do you know what 'DP' means?". The look on her face, of suprise and amusement, told me she knew what it meant. I said that I thought the dentist had said 'DP' and I didn't know what it meant. Apparently there is no dental term DP.
I don't think she's there now. If I see her behind the desk again I will say to the other assistant "Do you know what DP means?". When she says no, I'll say "She knows what it means" and then leave.
I have also recently seen the other woman I talked about in the post. The one in Soho. She looked and sounded different from the other times I have seen her. I bought her something to eat. She recognized me but didn't seem pleased to see me and didn't want to talk much. She seemed more 'normal' than before, maybe they've changed her medication or something.
I talked to another young woman I saw in the street. The first time I saw Tracy was in the centre of Croydon. She was stopping people and asking them for money. I asked her why and she said that she needed money for somewhere to sleep that night. I mentioned that she didn't look very happy. I gave her a couple of quid and told her that the next time she saw me she could ask me again.
Weeks later I saw her outside the supermarket near where I live asking people for money. I didn't speak to her then. She came up to me in the street one day and I had a conversation with her. She said she was staying in a bed and breakfast hotel in that street. I asked her if she knew Trina and she said "Yes, I know Trina". Trina is a local drug addict that I have talked about in a previous post.
Tracy was quite scruffy-looking but she didn't look like and addict. She wasn't skinny. She is reasonably attractive. I haven't seen Tracy for a few weeks so I guess she must have moved on. If I had seen her again I would have asked her if she wanted anthing to eat and taken her to a local cafe.
You might think that I would have wanted to take Tracy back to my flat and have sex with her. I would only have done that if I thought it wouldn't have harmed her. I would have encouraged her not to go down the same route as Trina. I would have tried to help her see that she has an alternative to that.
If I thought that having sex with her would have made her think less of herself then I would not have done it. However, to a lot of these women having sex is no big deal. If a woman is on benefits and has nothing to do all day, then spending an hour having sex one afternoon with a nice man and getting £20 or £30 for it and a cup of tea after is something quite attractive. Or I could have photographed her.
Trina sent me a text message recently. It said "Do you remember me?". I didn't reply to her because I don't want to see her again. I don't even know if it was her, it could have been one of her male addict associates hoping to rob me.
Whenever I go somewhere that I may meet a prostitute I am hoping that I might meet an 'angel'. This is my word for a particular type of girl, someone rare. I have only met a few angels in the years I have been going to see prostitutes. I can't fully explain what makes a girl an angel. An angel is pretty, feminine and graceful.
I met one on Tooting Bec Common a couple of years ago. Her name was Louise. I was sitting on a bench and she came up to me on her bike. I had already been with a woman so I didn't want to take Louise into the bushes. I should have done, and got her phone number too.
She rode off saying she couldn't believe there were no punters around. When I walked off I saw her again. She asked me if I could give her a couple of pounds. I gave her all my loose change and then I gave her a big hug. She seemed to like that. She had said she was a regular on the common but I have not seen her since.
A few years ago I was in Liverpool and I passed a beautiful girl standing on a corner of Hope Street near the Anglican cathedral. There used to be loads of prostitutes near there. I went into the cathedral gardens and sat on a bench. She walked past me with a man and gave me a big smile. I decided to follow them from a distance. They went into a shrubby part of the gardens. At first I thought I'd lost them but then I saw them embracing against a tree. She saw me and I hastily went off, thinking the man might get angry and confront me. Never saw her again.
When I went to my dentist there used to be an angel there, a dental assistant. One day I saw my dentist and I thought she used the acronym 'DP' when talking to her assistant. I was interested because DP means something very rude in pornographic videos. Just before I left the dentist I asked this girl who was behind the desk "Do you know what 'DP' means?". The look on her face, of suprise and amusement, told me she knew what it meant. I said that I thought the dentist had said 'DP' and I didn't know what it meant. Apparently there is no dental term DP.
I don't think she's there now. If I see her behind the desk again I will say to the other assistant "Do you know what DP means?". When she says no, I'll say "She knows what it means" and then leave.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
prostitution debate on Woman's Hour this morning
There was a discussion of prostitution and new legislation on Woman's Hour this morning, on BBC Radio 4. If you want to hear it, it can be downloaded as a podcast at the BBC website.
Changes in the law will affect prostitution and the licensing of lap dancing clubs in England and Wales. Cari Mitchell from the English Collective of Prostitutes and Anna Van Heeswijk from Object debate the impact of the legislation.
Cari Mitchell stated that police have been given additional powers to arrest and criminalise women who work on the streets.
She also stated that the impact of the legislation is that women going to have to work longer hours and take more risks in order to earn the money that they need. In Scotland where similar legislation has already been introduced there have been nearly double the number of reported attacks on sex workers.
Anna Van Heeswijk was asked about the idea that this type of legislation will force prostitution underground and will make life more difficult and dangerous for the women involved. As you know if you have read this blog I have said more than once that I oppose recent legislation for exactly this reason. Anna Van Heeswijk gave her answer and I have quoted it below because it is crucial to the debate. I have given a point-by-point reply to what she has said below the quote.
I think the idea that prostitution will be pushed underground is a genuine concern of a lot of people. But if you think about it actually doesn’t work in that way. If punters can find women then so can those who are wanting to provide exit services and support services for those women. If we look at countries such as Sweden and Norway where they have completely criminalised the purchase of sex and completely decriminalised those who are sold for sexual purposes, the women have no fear of coming forward because they are not going to be criminalised in fact they are going to be supported and actually the number of women in prostitution has decreased with more women being helped to exit. And importantly the European police have said that now Sweden is no longer an attractive destination for traffickers. The number of men paying for sex has decreased and it just creates a whole shift in cultural attitudes so that is no longer seen as acceptable.
This is my response to what she said:
1. If punters can find women then so can those who are wanting to provide exit services and support services for those women.
The new legislation will make it more difficult for punters to find women and more difficult for people wanting to provide exit services and support services for them.
2. If we look at countries such as Sweden and Norway ... the women have no fear of coming forward because they are not going to be criminalised ...
As Cari Mitchell stated that police have been given additional powers to arrest and criminalise women who work on the streets. This means that women will be even more fearful of reporting to the police crimes committed against them, including violence. The legislation will not affect the readiness of women to come forward for exit and support services.
Some more women will accept services (if they can find them) because they will have had their choice to earn money through prostitution in relative safety taken away from them. Life will be made so difficult that some women will have to give up prostitution. Others will continue. The ones who continue will be the poorest and the most drug addicted, the most vulnerable ones.
3. ... the number of women in prostitution has decreased with more women being helped to exit ...
If you legislate against something and force it underground then there will be fewer people involved in it. However, the ones who are still involved are harmed. That's the point. No one is saying that the number of women involved in prostitution will stay the same.
The reason why more women are leaving prostitution is not because they are helped to exit. It's because they are being forced to do something that they don't want to do.
You may say that if half of all lap dancers or prostitutes give it up then that is something. However, these women will live in poverty and will no longer be able to pay a mortgage, rent or bills. Not such a good result for them. Why can't they decide for themselves what is best for them?
4. Sweden is no longer an attractive destination for traffickers.
The numbers of women who have been trafficked has been grossly overestimated. It is in the interests of people who want to ban all prostitution to overestimate it, and to talk about pimps and children, as Anna Van Heeswijk did. I object to coercion in prostitution but most prostitutes are not coerced. Anna Van Heeswijk used the phrase "those who are sold for sexual purposes" to imply that all prostitutes are coerced. It is people like her who are doing the coercing.
5. The number of men paying for sex has decreased and it just creates a whole shift in cultural attitudes so that is no longer seen as acceptable.
It is true that the number of men paying for sex has decreased in places like Sweden. I don't think that paying for sex is a bad thing. I believe in the liberal principle that people should decide for themselves what they believe is good or bad, if it does not harm others. It is not acceptable for lobby groups or the state to tell us what to do or to try to control our behaviour. They have no right to 'shift cultural attitudes' and tell us what is 'acceptable'. Especially when we know that they are dishonest. They pretend that they only want to help the vulnerable but they have a hidden agenda. They use false statistics and false arguments. And they know they are doing it.
It is very important for women to have the choice to make money out of what can loosely be describes as 'the sex industry' without having sex. Lap dancing clubs and some massage establishments offer women this choice. By closing lap dancing clubs some women will live in poverty while others will become prostitutes. This doesn't help women, and it seems strange that some feminists want to do things that harm women.
Middle-class feminists don't want to understand how poor and vulnerable women live, and I don't believe they actually care. It is puritanism dressed up as ideology. A nonsensical and dishonest ideology at that, opposed to the liberal values our society is based on. They are more motivated by the idea of restricting men than enabling women.
Changes in the law will affect prostitution and the licensing of lap dancing clubs in England and Wales. Cari Mitchell from the English Collective of Prostitutes and Anna Van Heeswijk from Object debate the impact of the legislation.
Cari Mitchell stated that police have been given additional powers to arrest and criminalise women who work on the streets.
She also stated that the impact of the legislation is that women going to have to work longer hours and take more risks in order to earn the money that they need. In Scotland where similar legislation has already been introduced there have been nearly double the number of reported attacks on sex workers.
Anna Van Heeswijk was asked about the idea that this type of legislation will force prostitution underground and will make life more difficult and dangerous for the women involved. As you know if you have read this blog I have said more than once that I oppose recent legislation for exactly this reason. Anna Van Heeswijk gave her answer and I have quoted it below because it is crucial to the debate. I have given a point-by-point reply to what she has said below the quote.
I think the idea that prostitution will be pushed underground is a genuine concern of a lot of people. But if you think about it actually doesn’t work in that way. If punters can find women then so can those who are wanting to provide exit services and support services for those women. If we look at countries such as Sweden and Norway where they have completely criminalised the purchase of sex and completely decriminalised those who are sold for sexual purposes, the women have no fear of coming forward because they are not going to be criminalised in fact they are going to be supported and actually the number of women in prostitution has decreased with more women being helped to exit. And importantly the European police have said that now Sweden is no longer an attractive destination for traffickers. The number of men paying for sex has decreased and it just creates a whole shift in cultural attitudes so that is no longer seen as acceptable.
This is my response to what she said:
1. If punters can find women then so can those who are wanting to provide exit services and support services for those women.
The new legislation will make it more difficult for punters to find women and more difficult for people wanting to provide exit services and support services for them.
2. If we look at countries such as Sweden and Norway ... the women have no fear of coming forward because they are not going to be criminalised ...
As Cari Mitchell stated that police have been given additional powers to arrest and criminalise women who work on the streets. This means that women will be even more fearful of reporting to the police crimes committed against them, including violence. The legislation will not affect the readiness of women to come forward for exit and support services.
Some more women will accept services (if they can find them) because they will have had their choice to earn money through prostitution in relative safety taken away from them. Life will be made so difficult that some women will have to give up prostitution. Others will continue. The ones who continue will be the poorest and the most drug addicted, the most vulnerable ones.
3. ... the number of women in prostitution has decreased with more women being helped to exit ...
If you legislate against something and force it underground then there will be fewer people involved in it. However, the ones who are still involved are harmed. That's the point. No one is saying that the number of women involved in prostitution will stay the same.
The reason why more women are leaving prostitution is not because they are helped to exit. It's because they are being forced to do something that they don't want to do.
You may say that if half of all lap dancers or prostitutes give it up then that is something. However, these women will live in poverty and will no longer be able to pay a mortgage, rent or bills. Not such a good result for them. Why can't they decide for themselves what is best for them?
4. Sweden is no longer an attractive destination for traffickers.
The numbers of women who have been trafficked has been grossly overestimated. It is in the interests of people who want to ban all prostitution to overestimate it, and to talk about pimps and children, as Anna Van Heeswijk did. I object to coercion in prostitution but most prostitutes are not coerced. Anna Van Heeswijk used the phrase "those who are sold for sexual purposes" to imply that all prostitutes are coerced. It is people like her who are doing the coercing.
5. The number of men paying for sex has decreased and it just creates a whole shift in cultural attitudes so that is no longer seen as acceptable.
It is true that the number of men paying for sex has decreased in places like Sweden. I don't think that paying for sex is a bad thing. I believe in the liberal principle that people should decide for themselves what they believe is good or bad, if it does not harm others. It is not acceptable for lobby groups or the state to tell us what to do or to try to control our behaviour. They have no right to 'shift cultural attitudes' and tell us what is 'acceptable'. Especially when we know that they are dishonest. They pretend that they only want to help the vulnerable but they have a hidden agenda. They use false statistics and false arguments. And they know they are doing it.
It is very important for women to have the choice to make money out of what can loosely be describes as 'the sex industry' without having sex. Lap dancing clubs and some massage establishments offer women this choice. By closing lap dancing clubs some women will live in poverty while others will become prostitutes. This doesn't help women, and it seems strange that some feminists want to do things that harm women.
Middle-class feminists don't want to understand how poor and vulnerable women live, and I don't believe they actually care. It is puritanism dressed up as ideology. A nonsensical and dishonest ideology at that, opposed to the liberal values our society is based on. They are more motivated by the idea of restricting men than enabling women.
Friday, January 22, 2010
another day out in Soho
On Tuesday I went to Soho again. I had been thinking of going to see a particular girl, one that I had not seen before. Reading the PunterNet field reports and the Soho walk ups thread on the PunterNet forum I thought Alice sounded interesting. Her details ticked a couple of boxes for me. She is Italian and young looking.
I have always liked exotic-looking women and recently I have tried young-looking women. I have been going to Lisle Street looking for the very young-looking woman that they mentioned on Vice Squad, the recent TV programme on Five.
I eventually found that this girl is no longer there. I sat in the room they showed on the programme and talked to the maid about her. This was while I was waiting to see Nicole, a young Eastern European girl. The previous week I had seen Neli, a young Sicilian girl. Neli was nice, tall and slender with black hair. Nicole was OK too.
Also in Lisle Street but in different flats I have recently seen two blonde Russian women, Sasha and Natalie. They were both beautiful but I don't really go for blondes.
Alice was the last girl on my 'wish list' of girls I have read about and wanted to see. She works at 2 Green's Court on Tuesdays and I know she also works at 4 Old Compton Street. I have been to the second-floor flat at 2 Green's Court where I have seen Ritzy and Andra but I had not been to the first-floor flat. The second-floor flat is lovely but the first-floor one is not. The room was small and windowless and could have done with painting.
Alice was short and not very exotic-looking. She also didn't seem very happy or communicative. She was young-looking and had a pretty face. I didn't do much with her. She played with my willy for a while and we chatted. Then I got her to lie down with her legs apart so I could look at her pussy. I held her pussy open and said "Una bellissima figa" which means "A most beautiful pussy" in Italian. She was giggling and laughing at my attempt to speak Italian. Then we had a cuddle until my time was up.
I went onto the Internet and had a look at the PunterNet site. I wanted to see 'field reports' for Soho. It is a good way of finding out about the different women available at Soho walk ups. One of the reports was not about a walk up, it was about one of the Chinese establishments that you see in Soho offering acupuncture, massage and Chinese herbs. I had often walked by this place and Chinese girls had come out and asked me if I wanted a massage. I always assumed that it was just a massage so I always declined, but this report was saying that they're doing hand jobs.
This was something new to me and I just had to check it out. I went to the place and when in the doorway I was asked if I wanted a massage I asked how much. They said £50 for an hour. I asked how much it would be for half an hour and they said £25. I looked in my wallet and I told them I only had £20. They said I could have a 20 minute massage for that.
I went into the shop past the massage chairs to the counter behind which were jars of herbs. One of the girls took my money from me and put it in the till. She then got on her mobile and spoke in Chinese to someone. She told me to go down the stairs to room number 3.
It was a tiny room with a massage table. The table had a paper sheet over it so it all looked quite hygenic. A Chinese woman told me to take of my clothes and lie down and she would be back in a while. I did so, but I kept my boxer shorts on because I wasn't sure if this PunterNet report was a wind up. This was a clean and pleasant environment unlike the walk ups I was so familiar with. I imagined the woman walking back into the room, seeing me naked and shouting "What are you doing! What are you doing!". Also I didn't want anyone in the corridor outside to get a glimpse of me.
She came back into the room. I pulled of my boxer shorts and lay down on the couch. She put some Chinese music and turned the lights down low. I turned over onto my tummy as instructed and the massage began.
It was very pleasant but I didn't want this to go on for too long. I only had 20 minutes and I wanted to get to the hand relief bit. I turned over and she asked me if I only wanted to have my front done. She continued to massage and then asked me "Do you want..." and then moved her hand in a wanking motion.
I said yes and she said I would have to pay extra. I said I didn't have any more money, which was true. I said it was my first time and I hadn't realised that I would need to pay more money. She said I could pay by card but I told her that I didn't have one, which wasn't true.
When I asked her how much it would cost to have relief massage she said that I would need to spend at least £30. I assumed at the time that this would be on top of the money I had already paid for the massage. Now I'm not sure. Maybe if I'd paid the £50 and had an hour the hand relief would have been included.
So she continued to massage me. When I touched my willy she told me that wasn't allowed. She had put a sheet over my tummy but my genitals were uncovered. I relaxed and tried to have a sexual fantasy so that I would get an erection. I wanted her to see it. She wasn't that pretty and she was fully clothed and had ordinary clothes on so I didn't feel sexual.
When the massage was over she left the room. I suppose I could have had a wank there in the room before I left but I wasn't feeling aroused. I took my time to put on my clothes and left. They all said goodbye to me as I left.
Ever since I was a teenager I have been aware that there are places where men can go to get a proper massage. At some of these places when the man has had his massage he can say to the woman "Do you do extras?". She can say no, or she can say "Yes, I do relief massage". I had never been to one of these places. I wasn't sure if they still existed or if they had ever existed quite like that.
Of course I was aware of so-called massage parlours. I went to one near where I live called 'Enjoy Massage'. When the woman came into the room she started sucking my cock without a condom even though I hadn't asked for it. I thought they were all knocking shops. There is something exiting about going to a nice place and being with a nice woman and getting hand relief.
I have learned that hand relief is the best way for me to get an orgasm. I have been to see an oriental lady in Greek Street twice who has given a hand job and both times it was a great success. I paid £40 to spend 20 minutes with her, which is enough time for me to get to an orgasm. Ivy hasn't been there for a couple of months.
So you might think that these Chinese places could be just the thing for me. However, I don't know enough about these places yet. There is a section on the PunterNet forum about hand relief so I have been researching it. If I could choose the girl and I knew I wasn't going to have to pay too much I would try it again.
I imagined that they would have a euphemism for hand relief. I imagined they might call it something like 'Lotus Blossom'. Many years ago I went to see a French lady a couple of times who did massage with what she called a 'Fleur-de-Lys'. I imagined negotiating with a Chinese girl and asking her if the price includes a 'Lotus Blossom'.
I have now learned that they do have a euphemism for it. The call it a 'Happy Ending' which I think is sweet.
You may say that these women are exploited. I can imagine that these women may have come to this country thinking that they would be doing a respectable massage and not giving Happy Endings. However, they don't have to have sex with clients, they don't have to take their clothes off or even wear sexy clothes. They don't get groped by men. Many of them never give Happy Endings. The environment they work in is clean and pleasant. I think some of them would like giving Happy Endings, watching all that spunk squirting out of the end of a stiff cock.
Also, I think they are catering for tourists and don't try to give a good service where customers would come back again and again. I think it's the customers who are exploited.
I have always liked exotic-looking women and recently I have tried young-looking women. I have been going to Lisle Street looking for the very young-looking woman that they mentioned on Vice Squad, the recent TV programme on Five.
I eventually found that this girl is no longer there. I sat in the room they showed on the programme and talked to the maid about her. This was while I was waiting to see Nicole, a young Eastern European girl. The previous week I had seen Neli, a young Sicilian girl. Neli was nice, tall and slender with black hair. Nicole was OK too.
Also in Lisle Street but in different flats I have recently seen two blonde Russian women, Sasha and Natalie. They were both beautiful but I don't really go for blondes.
Alice was the last girl on my 'wish list' of girls I have read about and wanted to see. She works at 2 Green's Court on Tuesdays and I know she also works at 4 Old Compton Street. I have been to the second-floor flat at 2 Green's Court where I have seen Ritzy and Andra but I had not been to the first-floor flat. The second-floor flat is lovely but the first-floor one is not. The room was small and windowless and could have done with painting.
Alice was short and not very exotic-looking. She also didn't seem very happy or communicative. She was young-looking and had a pretty face. I didn't do much with her. She played with my willy for a while and we chatted. Then I got her to lie down with her legs apart so I could look at her pussy. I held her pussy open and said "Una bellissima figa" which means "A most beautiful pussy" in Italian. She was giggling and laughing at my attempt to speak Italian. Then we had a cuddle until my time was up.
I went onto the Internet and had a look at the PunterNet site. I wanted to see 'field reports' for Soho. It is a good way of finding out about the different women available at Soho walk ups. One of the reports was not about a walk up, it was about one of the Chinese establishments that you see in Soho offering acupuncture, massage and Chinese herbs. I had often walked by this place and Chinese girls had come out and asked me if I wanted a massage. I always assumed that it was just a massage so I always declined, but this report was saying that they're doing hand jobs.
This was something new to me and I just had to check it out. I went to the place and when in the doorway I was asked if I wanted a massage I asked how much. They said £50 for an hour. I asked how much it would be for half an hour and they said £25. I looked in my wallet and I told them I only had £20. They said I could have a 20 minute massage for that.
I went into the shop past the massage chairs to the counter behind which were jars of herbs. One of the girls took my money from me and put it in the till. She then got on her mobile and spoke in Chinese to someone. She told me to go down the stairs to room number 3.
It was a tiny room with a massage table. The table had a paper sheet over it so it all looked quite hygenic. A Chinese woman told me to take of my clothes and lie down and she would be back in a while. I did so, but I kept my boxer shorts on because I wasn't sure if this PunterNet report was a wind up. This was a clean and pleasant environment unlike the walk ups I was so familiar with. I imagined the woman walking back into the room, seeing me naked and shouting "What are you doing! What are you doing!". Also I didn't want anyone in the corridor outside to get a glimpse of me.
She came back into the room. I pulled of my boxer shorts and lay down on the couch. She put some Chinese music and turned the lights down low. I turned over onto my tummy as instructed and the massage began.
It was very pleasant but I didn't want this to go on for too long. I only had 20 minutes and I wanted to get to the hand relief bit. I turned over and she asked me if I only wanted to have my front done. She continued to massage and then asked me "Do you want..." and then moved her hand in a wanking motion.
I said yes and she said I would have to pay extra. I said I didn't have any more money, which was true. I said it was my first time and I hadn't realised that I would need to pay more money. She said I could pay by card but I told her that I didn't have one, which wasn't true.
When I asked her how much it would cost to have relief massage she said that I would need to spend at least £30. I assumed at the time that this would be on top of the money I had already paid for the massage. Now I'm not sure. Maybe if I'd paid the £50 and had an hour the hand relief would have been included.
So she continued to massage me. When I touched my willy she told me that wasn't allowed. She had put a sheet over my tummy but my genitals were uncovered. I relaxed and tried to have a sexual fantasy so that I would get an erection. I wanted her to see it. She wasn't that pretty and she was fully clothed and had ordinary clothes on so I didn't feel sexual.
When the massage was over she left the room. I suppose I could have had a wank there in the room before I left but I wasn't feeling aroused. I took my time to put on my clothes and left. They all said goodbye to me as I left.
Ever since I was a teenager I have been aware that there are places where men can go to get a proper massage. At some of these places when the man has had his massage he can say to the woman "Do you do extras?". She can say no, or she can say "Yes, I do relief massage". I had never been to one of these places. I wasn't sure if they still existed or if they had ever existed quite like that.
Of course I was aware of so-called massage parlours. I went to one near where I live called 'Enjoy Massage'. When the woman came into the room she started sucking my cock without a condom even though I hadn't asked for it. I thought they were all knocking shops. There is something exiting about going to a nice place and being with a nice woman and getting hand relief.
I have learned that hand relief is the best way for me to get an orgasm. I have been to see an oriental lady in Greek Street twice who has given a hand job and both times it was a great success. I paid £40 to spend 20 minutes with her, which is enough time for me to get to an orgasm. Ivy hasn't been there for a couple of months.
So you might think that these Chinese places could be just the thing for me. However, I don't know enough about these places yet. There is a section on the PunterNet forum about hand relief so I have been researching it. If I could choose the girl and I knew I wasn't going to have to pay too much I would try it again.
I imagined that they would have a euphemism for hand relief. I imagined they might call it something like 'Lotus Blossom'. Many years ago I went to see a French lady a couple of times who did massage with what she called a 'Fleur-de-Lys'. I imagined negotiating with a Chinese girl and asking her if the price includes a 'Lotus Blossom'.
I have now learned that they do have a euphemism for it. The call it a 'Happy Ending' which I think is sweet.
You may say that these women are exploited. I can imagine that these women may have come to this country thinking that they would be doing a respectable massage and not giving Happy Endings. However, they don't have to have sex with clients, they don't have to take their clothes off or even wear sexy clothes. They don't get groped by men. Many of them never give Happy Endings. The environment they work in is clean and pleasant. I think some of them would like giving Happy Endings, watching all that spunk squirting out of the end of a stiff cock.
Also, I think they are catering for tourists and don't try to give a good service where customers would come back again and again. I think it's the customers who are exploited.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
final episode of Vice Squad last night
Five must have lost interest in this series because the last two episodes have been delayed and the final one (number 6 of 6) was shown at 4 am today. It's not so surprising because it had become quite repetitive. I think that they were hoping that it would attract the same sort of viewers who like to see footage of real car chases and drug busts by police. Despite the dramatic music it fails to thrill.
I went onto the Five site today but unlike usual they did not have any details of this particular episode. I am only interested because I want to see what the attitude of the authorities towards prostitution is now. It is quite disturbing to see what happens when the left-wing fundamentalist feminism of women like Harriet Harman in the Labour government meets the right-wing puritanism of men in the police force.
These two final episodes confirm what we know already. Harriet Harman and people like her would like to ban prostitution. They know from surveys that most British people don't want prostitution to be banned. So they pretend that most women involved with prostitution are forced into it. They pretend that they want to rescue victims. Then they try to stop prostitution by any means necessary. I'm sure they think that the ends justify the means.
I like to think that most people in this country are sensible enough to realise that if you try to ban prostitution you merely force it underground. This makes it more likely that women will be killed or injured. I have no objection to 'unannounced brothel visits'. If brothels were legalised then this would be easier and the few numbers of real victims could be helped.
This episode started with the issue of prostitute advert cards in phone boxes. It was said that these are connected to organised crime and trafficked women. I have no idea if this is true but I doubt it. They showed a man being arrested for putting these cards in phone boxes. He was grabbed by a police man, his arm was held high up behind his back and then he was made to kneel. He was hand-cuffed before being taken away. This seemed totally unnecessary to me. It seems that it was done to inflict fear and pain so as to deter these people. Remember, 'the ends justify the means'.
The next part of the episode was about brothels. It started with footage of men in Oxford Street who were selling an Eastern European woman for a few thousand pounds. I'm sure that this does happen. They went into different brothels/saunas near Stratford in east London.
They were talking about women forced to work in brothels, servicing 30 to 35 men a day. Now I think that in brothels there are never that many customers. Even before the recession I doubt if any woman in a brothel can attract that many customers.
A police officer told a story of a woman who was made pregnant by a client, was forced to have an abortion in the morning and then was forced to continue working within 3 hours. If this really happened then it is disgusting, but I doubt it.
In one place they went to they arrested an oriental woman. It was difficult to tell how old she was. They arrested her for suspicion of controlling prostitution and suspicion of money laundering. Apparently anyone who makes money from something illegal and uses some of that money to continue in their illegal activities is a money launderer. I wonder if our MPs discussed the possibility of the law being used this way before they voted for it. Or did they think it would only be used for gangsters. Now it is used for anyone the police want to stop, and if they want to stop prostitution then 'the ends justify the means'.
They took the woman to the police station and formally charged her with 'conspiracy to control prostitution for gain' and 'controlling prostitution for gain'. They didn't find any trafficked women. They talked a lot about 'immigration issues'.
The next part of this episode was about 'nuisance kerb crawling'. They have done this in several of the previous episodes, always in East London near Stratford (Romford Road/Dyson Road). Not Whitechapel as I had previously thought.
In the previous episode they said that ordinary local mothers with toddlers in pushchairs had been propositioned by kerb crawlers. I don't believe this has happened. I remember that a few years ago there was a report on Tooting Bec Common that said fathers with toddlers in pushchairs had been propositioned by street girls. In all the years I have been going to Tooting Bec Common I have never seen this, and I don't believe it ever happens.
What I think can happen is that in these areas a local woman on her way home could be stopped by police and searched on suspicion that she is a prostitute. I would imagine that would be quite upsetting, to say the least. In the last episode they showed women being stopped by police and searched. The police were quite rude and condescending to the women, treating them like dirt.
That episode said that women were given a caution and if they had several then they were arrested. One woman was arrested and became distressed because she had to get home to her daughter.
At the end of last night's episode they said that because of their 'zero tolerance' policy "the lack of customers could mean that street prostitutes move on, making the area a safer place to live".
So they are saying the zero tolerance policy COULD mean that things change for local residents, but then it might not. If the street prostitutes 'move on' they presumably will move on to somewhere else and nothing will change overall. Then that particular area will become a 'safer place to live'. Really? They had not said that residents are less safe because of kerb crawlers. Safe for whom? Not safer for the prostitutes themselves (some of whom will be local residents), in fact it will be much more dangerous for them. So much for 'rescuing the victim'.
I'm glad this shabby little series has ended. I'm not surprised that Five lost interest in it and hid it away. It started as propaganda for moral crusaders and the American style zero tolerance policies of sly dishonest politicians like Harriet Harman and Jacqui Smith. That has backfired on them. Most viewers can see it for what it is. It leaves a nasty taste in my mouth and a lot of people will agree with me.
I went onto the Five site today but unlike usual they did not have any details of this particular episode. I am only interested because I want to see what the attitude of the authorities towards prostitution is now. It is quite disturbing to see what happens when the left-wing fundamentalist feminism of women like Harriet Harman in the Labour government meets the right-wing puritanism of men in the police force.
These two final episodes confirm what we know already. Harriet Harman and people like her would like to ban prostitution. They know from surveys that most British people don't want prostitution to be banned. So they pretend that most women involved with prostitution are forced into it. They pretend that they want to rescue victims. Then they try to stop prostitution by any means necessary. I'm sure they think that the ends justify the means.
I like to think that most people in this country are sensible enough to realise that if you try to ban prostitution you merely force it underground. This makes it more likely that women will be killed or injured. I have no objection to 'unannounced brothel visits'. If brothels were legalised then this would be easier and the few numbers of real victims could be helped.
This episode started with the issue of prostitute advert cards in phone boxes. It was said that these are connected to organised crime and trafficked women. I have no idea if this is true but I doubt it. They showed a man being arrested for putting these cards in phone boxes. He was grabbed by a police man, his arm was held high up behind his back and then he was made to kneel. He was hand-cuffed before being taken away. This seemed totally unnecessary to me. It seems that it was done to inflict fear and pain so as to deter these people. Remember, 'the ends justify the means'.
The next part of the episode was about brothels. It started with footage of men in Oxford Street who were selling an Eastern European woman for a few thousand pounds. I'm sure that this does happen. They went into different brothels/saunas near Stratford in east London.
They were talking about women forced to work in brothels, servicing 30 to 35 men a day. Now I think that in brothels there are never that many customers. Even before the recession I doubt if any woman in a brothel can attract that many customers.
A police officer told a story of a woman who was made pregnant by a client, was forced to have an abortion in the morning and then was forced to continue working within 3 hours. If this really happened then it is disgusting, but I doubt it.
In one place they went to they arrested an oriental woman. It was difficult to tell how old she was. They arrested her for suspicion of controlling prostitution and suspicion of money laundering. Apparently anyone who makes money from something illegal and uses some of that money to continue in their illegal activities is a money launderer. I wonder if our MPs discussed the possibility of the law being used this way before they voted for it. Or did they think it would only be used for gangsters. Now it is used for anyone the police want to stop, and if they want to stop prostitution then 'the ends justify the means'.
They took the woman to the police station and formally charged her with 'conspiracy to control prostitution for gain' and 'controlling prostitution for gain'. They didn't find any trafficked women. They talked a lot about 'immigration issues'.
The next part of this episode was about 'nuisance kerb crawling'. They have done this in several of the previous episodes, always in East London near Stratford (Romford Road/Dyson Road). Not Whitechapel as I had previously thought.
In the previous episode they said that ordinary local mothers with toddlers in pushchairs had been propositioned by kerb crawlers. I don't believe this has happened. I remember that a few years ago there was a report on Tooting Bec Common that said fathers with toddlers in pushchairs had been propositioned by street girls. In all the years I have been going to Tooting Bec Common I have never seen this, and I don't believe it ever happens.
What I think can happen is that in these areas a local woman on her way home could be stopped by police and searched on suspicion that she is a prostitute. I would imagine that would be quite upsetting, to say the least. In the last episode they showed women being stopped by police and searched. The police were quite rude and condescending to the women, treating them like dirt.
That episode said that women were given a caution and if they had several then they were arrested. One woman was arrested and became distressed because she had to get home to her daughter.
At the end of last night's episode they said that because of their 'zero tolerance' policy "the lack of customers could mean that street prostitutes move on, making the area a safer place to live".
So they are saying the zero tolerance policy COULD mean that things change for local residents, but then it might not. If the street prostitutes 'move on' they presumably will move on to somewhere else and nothing will change overall. Then that particular area will become a 'safer place to live'. Really? They had not said that residents are less safe because of kerb crawlers. Safe for whom? Not safer for the prostitutes themselves (some of whom will be local residents), in fact it will be much more dangerous for them. So much for 'rescuing the victim'.
I'm glad this shabby little series has ended. I'm not surprised that Five lost interest in it and hid it away. It started as propaganda for moral crusaders and the American style zero tolerance policies of sly dishonest politicians like Harriet Harman and Jacqui Smith. That has backfired on them. Most viewers can see it for what it is. It leaves a nasty taste in my mouth and a lot of people will agree with me.
Monday, July 27, 2009
bleak future for street girls
I like to read the PunterNet forum and sometimes I contribute. There has been a thread recently called 'Street girls'. I was going to make a contribution but I didn't get round to it and now it has been closed. There were a lot of snide remarks and it dealt with issues that have been dealt with before by myself and others in previous threads, so it wasn't a high priority for me. It was interesting how much hatred some people have for men who have sex with street girls. I think there were contributors who were not involved in prostitution but were either extreme feminists or religious.
Extreme feminists and religious people have a lot in common, although they would not like to admit it. They both take an ideological approach, see everything in black-and-white terms, and don't want to learn anything because they think they know it all already. Ideological approaches always end up harming the people that they say they want to help. They are all hypocrites because if they really wanted to help they would first try to understand what the problems are.
Now it has been decided that there will be no more discussions on the PunterNet forum of the subject of the street scene. I predict that this will make the PunterNet site less credible in the eyes of the general public. Many people will have thought “They discuss prostitution but at least they are willing to show the dark side as well as its more acceptable side”. Now they are not willing to discuss the dark side. They want to make out that it is like Secret Diary of a Call Girl. Hiding the truth will not make anything better.
There were many points raised in this thread that I would like to address. I am no longer able to contribute to the thread because it has been closed. I am no longer able to start a new thread because the subject of the street scene has been banned. So I have to do it here. There were 2 points that I thought were the most important. I will address them both in this posting and then if I can be bothered I can address other points in later postings.
Someone made the point that street girls have enormous problems and that people like me are adding to them. It is not me who is adding to their problems, it is people who want to ban things and drive them further underground.
I have mentioned Amanda Austin, the local resident who campaigned for prostitutes to be removed from Tooting Bec Common. Now it seems that she has achieved her aims. I have only seen 2 prostitutes there this year. This is probably more due to the activities of Harriet Harman and Jacqui Smith than Amanda Austin.
According to Amanda Austin the Common was awash with used condoms and drugs paraphernalia. This was a lie. Tooting Bec Common is a big park and the prostitutes restricted their activities to one small area of the park. The only used condoms that could be seen were in particular areas of the undergrowth. The only drugs paraphernalia I have ever seen in several years of going there was an improvised crack pipe. It was there for many weeks, which just shows that what rubbish could be seen was an accumulation of many weeks-worth.
I often wonder if Amanda Austin and her fellow campaigners ever thing about what has happened to these women, as I do. Perhaps they think that they have all given up drugs. I don't think they care, there seemed to be a lot of hostility to the women from residents, although of course they are always willing to shed crocodile tears if it helps them get their way.
When I first started going to the Common about 9 years ago, there were many women there of different types. I would say 3 different types. There were women who occasionally went to the Common when they had rent to pay or a bill, or because of delays in getting benefits. There were other women who drank or took some drugs but were not addicts, or who would not have considered themselves addicts but recreational users. The third group were the hardened drug addicts who came to the Common because it was a safer and easier option for them than getting into cars at 2 or 3 in the morning in New Park Road or Brixton Hill.
What has happened to these women is different in each case.
The first group will be having even more problems because of the economic downturn (caused by Harriet Harman and her chums) and they will be getting evicted or sitting in the dark or not having gas to cook their children food (Ms Harman is getting 'evicted' soon).
The second group will be shoplifting and committing other crimes. Perhaps the men in their lives will have to do more burglaries. Or maybe selling cocaine to kiddies (there has recently been a big rise in cocaine use among young people). So if Amanda Austin gets burgled and her teenage daughter gets a cocaine addiction like Daniella Westbrook it should not come as a big surprise.
And then the third group will be getting into cars at 2 or 3 in the morning in New Park Road or Brixton Hill and maybe sometimes never be seen again. They are likely to face injury. So I wonder if Harriet and Amanda and their fellow campaigners are proud of themselves about what they have achieved.
Another possibility is the more attractive and more organised women in groups 1 and 2 decide to become full-time prostitutes. Which I'm sure is not what Harriet Harman and Jacqui Smith originally intended.
The woman who made the posting that I am replying to finished by writing 'maybe it's time to go away and rethink your moral standards...?'. Ethics is a branch of philosophy that has occupied the minds of some of the most intelligent people for centuries. They have not come to any conclusions but they always stick to certain rules.
People should base their morality on thinking instead of emotion. They should be informed about issues and be willing to share information and discuss facts and opinions, without being sarcastic or insulting. They should not try to shut people up, either by intimidating them or trying to stop their contribution to the debate.
They should try to understand the consequences of their opinions and actions. If they can see that the consequences of their actions or opinions have increased human suffering then they should not continue to claim that they are altruistic. They should realize that they are not altruistic, or that they are not altruistic enough to be willing to spend a little time listening to others who know more than they do and to think about things a bit. If they are unwilling to see the consequences of their actions, as I think is the case with Amanda Austin, then they are immoral people.
How is it that so many women can be happy to bring so much misery to other women?
The other post that I want to reply to today was made by a man whose contribution was well intentioned but misguided. He said that in a job he had he encountered a street girl who told him that 'she felt that she was worthless and would never amount to anything more in life so took drugs to numb the pain she felt'. This is the sort of thing that drug addicts say to make people feel sorry for them.
The fact is that if you take a drug like cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin or crystal meth you will like it and want more. You are likely to become addicted. It has nothing to do with self-confidence or feelings of worthlessness or whether you spent your teenage years in a children's home or were abused as a child.
People think that addiction will not happen to them. They think “Well, I never lived in a children's home and I don't have feelings of worthlessness, so I'm not going to end up as a street girl”. This is a fatal (often literally fatal) error of thinking. If you think that street girls are only a certain type of unfortunate individual then you are missing an important truth.
Last year on the Common I met a woman in her thirties (I guess) called Alison. She was from Dublin. I asked her if she took crack and she said she did. I asked her if she took smack and she said she did, but only smoked it, not injected it. She said that she used to run a restaurant in Ireland. I told her that I had never taken drugs. She said don't, if you take it and you like it it can change your life. This is the sort of thing I have seen again and again in the years that I have been going to the Common. I have never seen a 'teen runaway'.
The author of this post also said that he would have liked to help this woman but she would not consider rehab. There is a reason for that. The reason for that is that the life of a crack addict is a life of much pleasure as well as pain. You may not want to believe that but people who know about drug addicts know that they are getting too much out of it to give it all up. That might sound like a crass thing to say but it is an important truth to understand. They want to party all the time.
In any case psychological opinion is changing about drug addiction. I had a CBT therapist who had worked with drug addicts. She did not see them as victims. I told her about my involvement with street girls, and that some people see me as an abuser. She could not understand this. She did not see me as an abuser, and none of the street girls have seen me as an abuser, so why should I pay any attention to dickheads?
Of course there are abusers on the street scene. Just like in any kind of prostitution or in any sphere of life. There are men who like to have women under their control and to harm them. But I have always listened to street girls and tried to help them. Just because I fuck them (occasionally) doesn't mean that I can't care about what happens to them. You might say that I am pretending that I am benefiting them and am deluded, but it is not me who is pretending to have their best interests at heart and is deluded.
There will be more abuse of street girls now. Read this from this site http://www.scot-pep.org.uk/
Since the kerb-crawling legislation came in, nobody’s drug dependency or rent arrears or benefit delays have magically cleared up overnight. Women are still working on the streets, but with many of their regular clients avoiding the scene for fear of legal repercussions, they are seeing a greater proportion of unpleasant and violent clients, with a rise in requests for sex without a condom and services at insultingly low prices. Some are resigned to being out all night, since business is slow, they still need to make money, and in some cases they haven’t a hope of meeting their curfews in homeless accommodation. Clients want them to leave their traditional areas and meet them elsewhere, so that the clients won’t be targeted by police; as a consequence sex workers are working in greater isolation with a significant threat to their personal safety.
Extreme feminists and religious people have a lot in common, although they would not like to admit it. They both take an ideological approach, see everything in black-and-white terms, and don't want to learn anything because they think they know it all already. Ideological approaches always end up harming the people that they say they want to help. They are all hypocrites because if they really wanted to help they would first try to understand what the problems are.
Now it has been decided that there will be no more discussions on the PunterNet forum of the subject of the street scene. I predict that this will make the PunterNet site less credible in the eyes of the general public. Many people will have thought “They discuss prostitution but at least they are willing to show the dark side as well as its more acceptable side”. Now they are not willing to discuss the dark side. They want to make out that it is like Secret Diary of a Call Girl. Hiding the truth will not make anything better.
There were many points raised in this thread that I would like to address. I am no longer able to contribute to the thread because it has been closed. I am no longer able to start a new thread because the subject of the street scene has been banned. So I have to do it here. There were 2 points that I thought were the most important. I will address them both in this posting and then if I can be bothered I can address other points in later postings.
Someone made the point that street girls have enormous problems and that people like me are adding to them. It is not me who is adding to their problems, it is people who want to ban things and drive them further underground.
I have mentioned Amanda Austin, the local resident who campaigned for prostitutes to be removed from Tooting Bec Common. Now it seems that she has achieved her aims. I have only seen 2 prostitutes there this year. This is probably more due to the activities of Harriet Harman and Jacqui Smith than Amanda Austin.
According to Amanda Austin the Common was awash with used condoms and drugs paraphernalia. This was a lie. Tooting Bec Common is a big park and the prostitutes restricted their activities to one small area of the park. The only used condoms that could be seen were in particular areas of the undergrowth. The only drugs paraphernalia I have ever seen in several years of going there was an improvised crack pipe. It was there for many weeks, which just shows that what rubbish could be seen was an accumulation of many weeks-worth.
I often wonder if Amanda Austin and her fellow campaigners ever thing about what has happened to these women, as I do. Perhaps they think that they have all given up drugs. I don't think they care, there seemed to be a lot of hostility to the women from residents, although of course they are always willing to shed crocodile tears if it helps them get their way.
When I first started going to the Common about 9 years ago, there were many women there of different types. I would say 3 different types. There were women who occasionally went to the Common when they had rent to pay or a bill, or because of delays in getting benefits. There were other women who drank or took some drugs but were not addicts, or who would not have considered themselves addicts but recreational users. The third group were the hardened drug addicts who came to the Common because it was a safer and easier option for them than getting into cars at 2 or 3 in the morning in New Park Road or Brixton Hill.
What has happened to these women is different in each case.
The first group will be having even more problems because of the economic downturn (caused by Harriet Harman and her chums) and they will be getting evicted or sitting in the dark or not having gas to cook their children food (Ms Harman is getting 'evicted' soon).
The second group will be shoplifting and committing other crimes. Perhaps the men in their lives will have to do more burglaries. Or maybe selling cocaine to kiddies (there has recently been a big rise in cocaine use among young people). So if Amanda Austin gets burgled and her teenage daughter gets a cocaine addiction like Daniella Westbrook it should not come as a big surprise.
And then the third group will be getting into cars at 2 or 3 in the morning in New Park Road or Brixton Hill and maybe sometimes never be seen again. They are likely to face injury. So I wonder if Harriet and Amanda and their fellow campaigners are proud of themselves about what they have achieved.
Another possibility is the more attractive and more organised women in groups 1 and 2 decide to become full-time prostitutes. Which I'm sure is not what Harriet Harman and Jacqui Smith originally intended.
The woman who made the posting that I am replying to finished by writing 'maybe it's time to go away and rethink your moral standards...?'. Ethics is a branch of philosophy that has occupied the minds of some of the most intelligent people for centuries. They have not come to any conclusions but they always stick to certain rules.
People should base their morality on thinking instead of emotion. They should be informed about issues and be willing to share information and discuss facts and opinions, without being sarcastic or insulting. They should not try to shut people up, either by intimidating them or trying to stop their contribution to the debate.
They should try to understand the consequences of their opinions and actions. If they can see that the consequences of their actions or opinions have increased human suffering then they should not continue to claim that they are altruistic. They should realize that they are not altruistic, or that they are not altruistic enough to be willing to spend a little time listening to others who know more than they do and to think about things a bit. If they are unwilling to see the consequences of their actions, as I think is the case with Amanda Austin, then they are immoral people.
How is it that so many women can be happy to bring so much misery to other women?
The other post that I want to reply to today was made by a man whose contribution was well intentioned but misguided. He said that in a job he had he encountered a street girl who told him that 'she felt that she was worthless and would never amount to anything more in life so took drugs to numb the pain she felt'. This is the sort of thing that drug addicts say to make people feel sorry for them.
The fact is that if you take a drug like cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin or crystal meth you will like it and want more. You are likely to become addicted. It has nothing to do with self-confidence or feelings of worthlessness or whether you spent your teenage years in a children's home or were abused as a child.
People think that addiction will not happen to them. They think “Well, I never lived in a children's home and I don't have feelings of worthlessness, so I'm not going to end up as a street girl”. This is a fatal (often literally fatal) error of thinking. If you think that street girls are only a certain type of unfortunate individual then you are missing an important truth.
Last year on the Common I met a woman in her thirties (I guess) called Alison. She was from Dublin. I asked her if she took crack and she said she did. I asked her if she took smack and she said she did, but only smoked it, not injected it. She said that she used to run a restaurant in Ireland. I told her that I had never taken drugs. She said don't, if you take it and you like it it can change your life. This is the sort of thing I have seen again and again in the years that I have been going to the Common. I have never seen a 'teen runaway'.
The author of this post also said that he would have liked to help this woman but she would not consider rehab. There is a reason for that. The reason for that is that the life of a crack addict is a life of much pleasure as well as pain. You may not want to believe that but people who know about drug addicts know that they are getting too much out of it to give it all up. That might sound like a crass thing to say but it is an important truth to understand. They want to party all the time.
In any case psychological opinion is changing about drug addiction. I had a CBT therapist who had worked with drug addicts. She did not see them as victims. I told her about my involvement with street girls, and that some people see me as an abuser. She could not understand this. She did not see me as an abuser, and none of the street girls have seen me as an abuser, so why should I pay any attention to dickheads?
Of course there are abusers on the street scene. Just like in any kind of prostitution or in any sphere of life. There are men who like to have women under their control and to harm them. But I have always listened to street girls and tried to help them. Just because I fuck them (occasionally) doesn't mean that I can't care about what happens to them. You might say that I am pretending that I am benefiting them and am deluded, but it is not me who is pretending to have their best interests at heart and is deluded.
There will be more abuse of street girls now. Read this from this site http://www.scot-pep.org.uk/
Since the kerb-crawling legislation came in, nobody’s drug dependency or rent arrears or benefit delays have magically cleared up overnight. Women are still working on the streets, but with many of their regular clients avoiding the scene for fear of legal repercussions, they are seeing a greater proportion of unpleasant and violent clients, with a rise in requests for sex without a condom and services at insultingly low prices. Some are resigned to being out all night, since business is slow, they still need to make money, and in some cases they haven’t a hope of meeting their curfews in homeless accommodation. Clients want them to leave their traditional areas and meet them elsewhere, so that the clients won’t be targeted by police; as a consequence sex workers are working in greater isolation with a significant threat to their personal safety.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)