Interesting Interview On Tom Dunne Show

[LaBelleThatcher]

I can understand your argument that if you criminalise any aspect you are taking away the last channel of income for most sex workers, that is a very uncomfortable position to be in as a client. You see, what you are basically saying, if I can paraphrase, is that as clients we are guilty of exploitation. Despite the fact that most clients, myself included would run a mile at the thought of exploitation. If recession economics forces a woman to work in the sex industry then we as clients are exploiting that weakness.

Despite the discomfort of that position, it is our duty as clients to ensure that the avenue of earning is not closed or even made more difficult by criminalisation.

I know Doodlebug...and here you have the crux of the matter...and yet also a paradox...because if clients are guilty of exploitation then it is not exploitation in the usual sense of a free, imposition of choice to exploit at all...and besides there is always the percival factor...whereby biological imperatives lay men open to exploitation for gain by women in ways that will never be "gender equal" however many fanatical feminists are allowed to chew through the straps.

The male sex drive is more compelling and invasive than the female sex drive...that's how we preserve our species...it is also, left unsatisfied, probably a bl**dy nuisance...

If a woman wants, even needs, a sense, or illusion, of physical intimacy, chances are some male sex drive on overload will provide that at the snap of her fingers...if a man wants, or needs, the exact same it will not be so easy.

THAT is not "gender equal" is it?

...and you cannot make it gender equal, though I have noticed in amongst the other varieties of insanity being preached by extreme aspects (of the already extreme) rescue industry a tendency to try and suggest that women have the same sex drive as men and will be much more fulfilled if they leave go their inhibitions and sh*g like bunnies for free...tiny problem...women do not feel that way anywhere near as often as men (to say the least), so, even with the best will in the world, you still have this HUGE sex drive deficit going on...and unless you intend to re-engineer the male of the species (which is getting too deep into "Dr Evil" territory) there is nothing you can do to change that.

The only other approach is to supplement the available female sex drive with other available unmet needs, which can include a needs for financial security, a way to put self/kids/aged p through college, seed capitalk for a business and if that includes desperation then THANK HEAVEN there was a way to meet it with fair exchange.

When I was utterly desperate it still didn't cancel my other needs as a human being. I still needed the self respect (and security) of having something to give in return for money for one thing. I needed my autonomy, I needed my integrity intact.

If I hate sex work that is *my* problem, not yours, as long as I have no alternative...because there is nothing so special and sacred about me that you are not worthy to buy sex from me...and because it is *my* problem as long as I intend to sell sex to you I have not right to lay it on you...

Unfortunately, the massed forces of, feminism, church, ambition and pathological compulsion to control decided to lay that on you on my behalf...and if I try to take it back I lose all public sympathy and they get to persecute me again...but it gets better, because that was just a prelude to persuading society to persecute you as a rapist...(despite the fact that you are standing there in shock muttering "but what did I *do*") - unless you ignore your sex drive and abjure us for ever, because the point here is not whether you are a rapist or not, but whether a significant number of us are forced into dependence in a rescue industry we despise so that rescue industry can get increased funding and influence ...instead of watching in venal horror as the tap is firmly turned off.

Society will never be comfortable with sex work, but then society will never be comfortable with undertakers...but it managed not to persecute them because they are perceived as necessary.

Could that be made to apply here? Seriously?

You need our sex...sadly, because we are biologically different, we do not usually need your sex too, but sometimes we need your money...isn't that fair exchange that doesn't have to make anybody look, or feel, bad?

In dependent of each other, both types of need are considered socially acceptable after all...

[Nicole]

Welcome on boards Eileen, I am actually very positive surprised. I read may of your post in different places in internet and I admire your outspoken nature.
Thank you very much for contributing to this thread, it is much appreciated.
xx
Nicole

[carlos marvado]

Eileen is to be commended for taking the time and effort to share her experiences, views and concerns with us. It is rare for clients or non-escorts in general to get such a personal and unvarnished glimps behind the entire "happy hooker facade". On the one hand, the Rescue industry (Ruhama et al) portrays all sex workers as forced, coerced or having slipped into "this lifestyle as a result of an abusive/dysfunctional background or as a result of manipulation/grooming or addiction/desparation. The "Pretty Woman" scenario is at the other end of the spectrum and is probably a highly fictionalised and glamourised version of the true reality and experiences of the vast majority of sex workers.


The truth is that sex work probably encompasses a broad spectrum of methods of work and experiences ranging from complete slavery (Muslim women in the Bosnian war) and the type of underaged sex work associated with places such as Thailand to high class trophy mistresses maintained at great expense in luxury. Eileen, however seems to be addressing a middle ground, where woman choose to undertake this work, albeit without any glamourised preconceptions and high expectations of job satisfaction. I interpret her distinction between "elective" and seletive" prostitution from the prostitute's perspective, as being one where it is the last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt on the one hand versus a choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive. If my interpretation is not accurate, please correct me.


I agree with Eileen that the resue industry are pushing their own agenda here, whether from a radical feminist perspective, from a moralistic/theological perspective or from a somewhat less altruistic perspective, the desire to exert influence and control over others and to gain backing/funding to allow them to continue to operate and draw good salaries. I have no objection to Ruhama or any other organisation offering help to those who need and want to avail of that help or who set out to combat enforced sexual slavery or involuntary exploitation, but it is a giant leap to move from this standpoint to tell people that "we know what is in your best interests" and "we will force the type of help on you that we decide, irrespective of whether you need it or want it".


I think this is all about making themselves relevant in society by championing a perceived just cause by portraying it as a simple two sided moral debate, and using this to extend their influence and justify increased funding. As an aside, Ruhama would not be the first "NGO", which a group of concerned professionals (usually from the social sciences/caring disciplines) set up to advance a cause/agenda and to secure state funding, so that they could essentially compete with areas of the public/civil service including the HSE etc., who are already addressing these types of service needs anyway. I have seen statistics being massaged and the range of services provided and the numbers being assisted greatly exaggerated in order to justify exchequer funding and to enhance public fundraising campaign and event. Many of these NGOs are nothing more than duplicative self-serving white elephants and the easiest way to identify them is to compare the proportion of their income that goes on salaries and on publicity/campaigning/advocacy compared to the actual services that they are intended to deliver to their target market. That is the proof of the pudding.


As many of you are no doubt aware, the two religious congregations who established Ruhama have a long history of working with those affected by prostitution; but it was not just prostitutes per say, but also women who had pregnancies out of wedlock, women who were being abused through no fault of their own, young women who were maybe just a bit too free and easy, or provided too much temptation to men, and women and children who were deemed unable to look after themselves due to poverty. For these women and children, the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters (amongst others) offered help through a penitential life of prayer and obediance and hard work (mostly washing clothes). They were basically forced to live the life of nuns within an enclosed order, without having freely chosen that life style and were exploited for their labour by these good Christians. The Magdalene laundries incarcerated women and children and broke their spirits and institutionalised many of them, and those that got out where often very poorly educated and were ill equiped to make a go of life on they outside. This was allowed to happen because society at large, the state (politicians, health care system, education, legal system, gardai) and the church all colluded in hiding what did not fit our idealised view of holy Catholic Ireland from the nation........and of course, much of this edifice was state funded.


Today, neither Ruhama, nor any other organisation would get away with what was done to these people over decades in the past.........or at least one would hope they would'nt, but you do have to question people trying to force an agenda on society, offering help and solutions to people who have not been asked what type of help they really need or if they even want help, and justifying their existance as a provider of "help" to secure public funding. If Ruhama want to know what would help prostitutes, they should go and ask prostitutes, because they should know better than anyone else what they want or need.


In the meantime, it is easier to peddle questionable statistics from unrepresentative sample populations and get the public to buy into black and white soundbites i.e. prostution = trafficking and trafficking = prostitution. Of course not all trafficked people are prostitutes and not all prostitutes have been trafficked or coerced in some manner, and we already have quite strong laws against trafficking which just need to be rigerously enforced and of course policed. So instead of throwing money at Ruhama to police the bedroom antics of consenting men and woman, how about resourcing the gardai to tackle trafficking and organised and controlled prostitution instead? If Primetime could do, and if TV3 can do it tonight, and if a single guy behind a computer screen in the back of beyonds can do it for the best part of two years, then the money that goes in Ruhama, if redirected to the gardai, should well and truely be able to do it.


Ruhama are not trying to tackle human trafficking for the purposes of prostitution, rather they want to stop prostitution in all it's manifestations. To stop prostitution effectively, they need to cut off both the supply and demand side. On the demand side, Eileen covered the differences very well between the male and female libido and the fact that it is much easier for a woman to have her needs met according to her choice (the when, where and how of it). If the needs of men are greater and not so easily met (in a non-prostitution scenario), then a demand exists. An escort recently posted a thread on interesting facts that you may not have know about Ireland. It looks like it was late 90s vintage, but what was interesting in relation to this debate was the following: men going out with a girlfriend had sex on average 4 times per week, married men on average 1.5 times per week, and unattached singles on average once per six months. If we assume that the guys having sex 4 times per week are an average representative of Irish males of a legal and sexually active age and indicate how often guys would have sex or like to have sex if the opportunity presented itself, then a lot of Irish males just are'nt getting as much as they would like. Therefore we have a demand that is not being met through the normally accepted manner. The case from Limerick last November gave an insight into some of the types of men that resort to frequenting prostitutes. I would imagine that for quite a few, prostitution was the only means of experiencing physical intimacy with another human being. The sad fact of life is that there just isn't somebody for everybody in the audience. Whether a person has a disability, is not physically attractive, is getting on in years, lacks social confidence or graces or self-esteem, is socially isolated or just isn't having their needs met in the manner they would like them to be met for whatever reason; the factors which create demand are all around us. Apart from targetting clients and turning some lonely, some elderly, some disabled or some sexually unfulfilled men into criminals, having them fined, named and shamed and put on a sex offenders register, does Ruhama have any answer to dealing with these underlying factors of demand?......other than prayer and offering it up to God as some form of penance. If the clergy with their oath of celibacy can't keep their hands of women, other men (and unfortunately children in too many cases), what hope exists for us mere mortals.

[carlos marvado]

continued/


Now to the supply side. Again Eileen has discussed her own reasons for entering prostitution. While some may have been shocked by it's lack of glamour, it does portray a path of last resort, or a least worst option which many people seem to face. So if we exclude the forced aspects of prostitution such as trafficking, coercion, violence, blackmail, and those who are conned into it by false promises or who are manipulated and groomed for it via abusive/dysfunctional life situations/experiences, we are left with those who make a consious voluntary choice through lack of other viable choices or because it might be better financially than the realistic alternatives on offer. From Eileen's perspective, if Ruhama had their way and clients were criminalised, then this means of earning an income would be taken from these people or they would end up being driven into much more clandestine and dangerous situations in trying to earn a living. Therefore while claiming to work to help people affected by prostitution, Ruhama's help is to effectively make life more dangerous for prostitutes and try to deny them a living from sex work. But other than councelling and training courses (though worthwhile and beneficial from a personal developement perspective for those in need of this) they don't provide access to any employment opportunities or to social benefits or some form of safety net, that isn't already being provided for by some state agency or other. It all sounds a bit like a faith based self-help group such as maybe AA, except it's for prostitutes. Now if I were a recovering alcoholic, I would listen and hopefully learn from the experiences of a similar other, but if I were contemplating marriage I would'nt sit down to be lectured at by a celibate Catholic priest, and if I were a prostitute I would wish to engage with others who understand prostitutes and prostitution from first hand experience. What exactely do Ruhama have to offer to the voluntary prostitute who hates the work and would love to exit prostitution above and beyond what other agencies etc can offer........employment in a reasonably well paid and rewarding job, that gives her financial security, has advancement potential, gives her the flexibility she might need (as a sole parent for example) etc.? Can Ruhama extricate him/her from the mire that cause the person to enter prostitution in the first place? If we are talking low self-esteem, dependence, coming to terms with a history of abuse, then maybe they can put something in place to help people come to terms with these issues and rescue the individual concerned and start them on a new life. But if they can't provide them with a financial safety-net that meets their needs, then why are they insisting on the one that currently exists for those that need it.


This all reminds me of a Late Late Show I saw some time back, where a female former member of the Irish Defence forces was a guest. She had written a book about her experiences of a peace keeping mission to Ethiopia or Sudan or Eritrea (that general part of the world in any event). When a new Irish battalion arrived at the base, the soldiers including this female soldier were issued with a large supply of condoms on their first day. There was very little in the locality (off the base) with the exception of bars cum brothels. Many Irish troops would socialise there for both the drink and the sex. Seeminly many of the men in the village either went elsewhere for work, or were fighting in some war/civil war or had died or been killed; in any event the place was basically just women and children surviving in abject poverty. The ex-soldier recounted that very often women would provide sexual services in exchange for food for themselves and their children; in some cases a pizza would get a peace keeper what he desired. No doubt, in many cases the soldiers gave away food to these people without any strings attached, but if they were based there for six months, away from wives/girlfriends etc. they soon found out that food or small amounts of money could get them the sort of "home comforts" that the army does not provide. I wondered why Pat Kenny at the time never asked her where the other organs of the UN or all the various NGOs were who make a big issue of helping these people or fund raise for this purpose. The food and money that the women got could very often be traded for essential medicines or other essentials also. Seems to me that Irish punters in uniform kept women and children alive when nobody else was there. Of course the program and the book caused something of an outrage, after all the Irish Army was placed under the protection of the Blessed Virgin Mary some decades ago. If I can recollect, I think the condom distribution was discontinued thereafter and the village may have been placed out of bonds........whether or not something else was put in place for those women, I don't know.


So if Ruhama was to shut down the supply of prostitution, they need to be able to do what no police force, what no goverment, what no NGO, what no supranational body or organisation, ncluding the United Nations has ever managed to do. Because trafficking and prostitution are both international issues and involve moments of people whether by force or by choice, they would need to:

* end poverty and relative or comparative poverty on a world-wide scale.
* provide full employment everywhere
* end exclusion or discrimination against women (education,social, employment) everywhere
* combat trafficking, sex-tourism ect. everywhere.
* put in place decent social provisions for everyone at risk of falling through the cracks (unemployment assistance, single parent benefits, child benefits, rent allowances, deserted wives benefits, heath care, training/education) worldwide.


Ruhama might make a small start by lobbying the government to rescind some of the welfare and allowance cutbacks and ease off on taxing the already hard pressed citizens and driving them into the black economy including possibly sex work. If they prostitute the entire nation to pay off the gambling debts of bankers and developers, do they really expect us just to lie back, shut up and smile, and take whatever is shoved at us and then to really rub the salt into the wounds, accept the likes of Ruhama taking away the livelihood of 1000+ women and criminalising tens of thousands of men. The proposed law is a lunacy on many fronts. They spend their time criminalising that which does not need to be criminalised (see blasphemy law), they won't criminalise the sort of reckless behaviour which has the country in the state it is in, and they have'nt got the resources to deal with the serious criminality that currently abounds.


They don't seem to have much of an answer to anything these days that makes sense. A legal response to prostitution will not work. The legal response to trafficking or involuntary prostitution is already there and needs to be properly resourced. The only response to voluntary prostitution that has a chance of success, is no different to what the entire country is in need of, and that's an economic one. It's the economy stupid......... and to the good people behind Ruhama I say, if prayer has worked for you for the past 2000 years, then back into your enclosed orders and the protection of high walls and continue with your excellent life of prayer..........rest assured, we won't be disturbing you with the ills of the world.


Eileen it's great to read somebody who really knows what they're writting about. I would have loved to have listened to yourself and others as articulate and with the relevant experience debating all these issues with those from the Ruhama/TOTRL side. The radio program you were on unfortunately did not have such a format.


One question I have, and you may be able to answer this. Do Ruhama et al ever actually debate with sex workers/former sex workers in public (radio/TV/meetings/conferences) or do they just try to put across their slant and agenda (with all that entails) via the media and convinse others, including the general public, without any form of engagement with those with whom they would'nt see eye to eye? I have'nt come across any debate thus far and if what the Minister for Justice is planning comes about, then it will simply be a case of interested organisations being invited to make submissions and any debate that does take place being in the Dail and Senate.


Apologies to all for the inordinate lenght of my post.......t'is the only thing about me that's long.

[LaBelleThatcher]

Wow!!

Such amazing posts!

Let me just tweak this bit because a tiny misunderstanding has cropped up already (my fault) and the rest is dead on.

I interpret her distinction between "elective" and seletive" prostitution from the prostitute's perspective, as being one where it is the last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt on the one hand versus a choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive. If my interpretation is not accurate, please correct me.

That is exactly what I mean, except you got my new fangled jargon all wrong:

Elective Sex Work = A choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive. (I chose it because "elective" is a word that means "Permitting or involving a choice" whereas "selective" is a term characterised by selection and discrimination - very odd connotations there)
Essential Sex work = The last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt - which stops working when you make it "Essential Sex Worker" and is causing confusion, so let's change those terms.

• Elective Sex Work = A choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive.
• Survival Sex work = The last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt and/or provide a sustainable income

Both of which, refer exclusively to the motivation of the sex worker, *not* how she feels about the work, much less how "the work" feels about her...now I think we need to add a third category, also referring solely to the motivation of the sex worker:

• Coerced sex work = Sex work carried out under cogniscent duress, of any kind, from a third party

Suddenly it all get very simple for me. Anyone who wants to support and maximise the safety and ease with which Elective Sex Work and Survival Sex Work can exist - while respecting the needs of the wider community, which *IS* even a big part of respecting Sex Workers in giving them responsibilities as well as better rights - while coming down like the hounds of hell on all forms of Coerced Sex Work (as a the felony combination of rape and abduction it must be), is my friend...

...everybody else now has a chance to go away get their minds right...

(Arrogant much? Who me?)

[LaBelleThatcher]

Apart from which, Carlos, I don't know what to say...except a great long line of "ditto" reaching into infinity...

I HAVE to have this post on my site...

OH PLEASE!!!!

[LaBelleThatcher]

One question I have, and you may be able to answer this. Do Ruhama et al ever actually debate with sex workers/former sex workers in public (radio/TV/meetings/conferences) or do they just try to put across their slant and agenda (with all that entails) via the media and convinse others, including the general public, without any form of engagement with those with whom they would'nt see eye to eye? I have'nt come across any debate thus far and if what the Minister for Justice is planning comes about, then it will simply be a case of interested organisations being invited to make submissions and any debate that does take place being in the Dail and Senate.

Now to answer your question - and the delay is curiously relevant because I was on standby there in case Ruhama would agree to debate with me on air after tonight's documentary - but sadly, it seems, they will be too busy washing their hair after all (as you do on a monday) which, on reflection, is probably a very good thing because I honestly do not think I have the self control to be able to deal with them directly at the best of time, let alone straight after what seems set to be a travesty of a documentary (in more ways than one) that is, as usual, cold bloodedly aimed at selling out the lives of 1000 people, many of whom have families, for - well, see above...

Once upon a time they used include the same few of the women in their conferences...but the women were paid for their time and expected to speak only when spoken to. Now they have "Turn Off the Red Light" and no sense of need to include the women at all.

I have tried to plead with them privately for a little sanity and humanity of late and got nowhere, it's like trying to grip a teflon wall. They just do not seem to care, it is as if the women were pound dogs or something - not people with thoughts, experiences and opinions to contribute to their own future at all.

I cannot get comments posted on articles in the Indo...however innocuous. I have had offers from others in the NGO sector to get me airtime and media space "if you could just leave out knocking Ruhama".

As far as I can tell Ruhama have no mandate from, or consultation process with, the women at all. They have just appointed themselves to speak for and define them without reference to reality.

Alan Shatter is obviously a nicer class of person, because the Department of Justice is open to submissions on proposed changes in legislation from anyone, and, I have already checked, they know they are getting submissions from the sex worker lobby and they are happy with that. The only problem will be if they refuse to accept anonymous submissions.

[LaBelleThatcher]

Therefore while claiming to work to help people affected by prostitution, Ruhama's help is to effectively make life more dangerous for prostitutes and try to deny them a living from sex work. But other than councelling and training courses (though worthwhile and beneficial from a personal developement perspective for those in need of this) they don't provide access to any employment opportunities or to social benefits or some form of safety net, that isn't already being provided for by some state agency or other. It all sounds a bit like a faith based self-help group such as maybe AA, except it's for prostitutes. Now if I were a recovering alcoholic, I would listen and hopefully learn from the experiences of a similar other, but if I were contemplating marriage I would'nt sit down to be lectured at by a celibate Catholic priest, and if I were a prostitute I would wish to engage with others who understand prostitutes and prostitution from first hand experience. What exactely do Ruhama have to offer to the voluntary prostitute who hates the work and would love to exit prostitution above and beyond what other agencies etc can offer........employment in a reasonably well paid and rewarding job, that gives her financial security, has advancement potential, gives her the flexibility she might need (as a sole parent for example) etc.? Can Ruhama extricate him/her from the mire that cause the person to enter prostitution in the first place? If we are talking low self-esteem, dependence, coming to terms with a history of abuse, then maybe they can put something in place to help people come to terms with these issues and rescue the individual concerned and start them on a new life. But if they can't provide them with a financial safety-net that meets their needs, then why are they insisting on the one that currently exists for those that need it.

But how can they even do that much as long as they treat us like children or dumb animals with no opinions, judgement or experiences of our own worth consideration?

Take someone with low self esteem, treat them like that and call it "help" and you will literally dismantle them beyond repair.

Even before you get into the deeply destructive "Gaslighting" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting ) effect of their ideology - anyone here...doesn't matter who...imagine receiving counselling for any normal range trauma, bereavement, relationship troubles...anything that is biased by Ruhama's ideology and distorted worldview.

I have pretty fragile self esteem (I hang onto it it balance out my arrogance, mostly to help people not strangle me really ) supposing, I give you my trust and, you come at me from a perspective of telling me all my clients were just the same as rapists, that they were *MY ABUSERS* - what does that do to the contents of my head? Most importantly, what does it do to the positive contents of my head?

Any respect or affirmation I received as a human being that happened to come from a client is just *CANCELLED* - just like that...and when I look at the things I need to look at in myself for my future like my aversion to sex work, you are assuring me that is a "perfectly normal" reaction to all those rapists and artificially fostering blanket denial of the real issues I have hidden under that rock that will come back to bite me for the rest of my life unless confronted.

A lot of us are survivors of one kind of abuse or another, and the first thing we have to learn to begin to heal is to develop a reflex to automatically reject people who try to impose dysfunctional control over us, or subvert our perception of ourselves and the world...particularly when they tell us they are "only doing it for our own good". We have to learn a reflex that runs from things like that being imposed upon us "for our own good"...or we will never have a life at all.

We have to learn to run from organisations like Ruhama for the sake of our mental, and emotional health.

[carlos marvado]

Wow!!

Such amazing posts!

Let me just tweak this bit because a tiny misunderstanding has cropped up already (my fault) and the rest is dead on.



That is exactly what I mean, except you got my new fangled jargon all wrong:

Elective Sex Work = A choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive. (I chose it because "elective" is a word that means "Permitting or involving a choice" whereas "selective" is a term characterised by selection and discrimination - very odd connotations there)
Essential Sex work = The last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt - which stops working when you make it "Essential Sex Worker" and is causing confusion, so let's change those terms.

• Elective Sex Work = A choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive.
• Survival Sex work = The last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt and/or provide a sustainable income

Both of which, refer exclusively to the motivation of the sex worker, *not* how she feels about the work, much less how "the work" feels about her...now I think we need to add a third category, also referring solely to the motivation of the sex worker:

• Coerced sex work = Sex work carried out under cogniscent duress, of any kind, from a third party

Suddenly it all get very simple for me. Anyone who wants to support and maximise the safety and ease with which Elective Sex Work and Survival Sex Work can exist - while respecting the needs of the wider community, which *IS* even a big part of respecting Sex Workers in giving them responsibilities as well as better rights - while coming down like the hounds of hell on all forms of Coerced Sex Work (as a the felony combination of rape and abduction it must be), is my friend...

...everybody else now has a chance to go away get their minds right...

(Arrogant much? Who me?)

Yes I get the impression that we're singing off the same hymn sheet here. My understanding of the escort classifications by motivation for entry into this business is the same as yours.......I just managed to mangle your category titles somewhat.

Yes, please feel free to copy and paste and add it to your blog/site if you wish. You may need to cast your eye over it as my spelling can be attrocious and I did'nt bother proof reading it.

[Lucy Chambers]

Yes I get the impression that we're singing off the same hymn sheet here. My understanding of the escort classifications by motivation for entry into this business is the same as yours.......I just managed to mangle your category titles somewhat.

Yes, please feel free to copy and paste and add it to your blog/site if you wish. You may need to cast your eye over it as my spelling can be attrocious and I did'nt bother proof reading it.

Carlos.

Please.

Compress. It is the only way.