Sugar Babies
Shemales

Author Topic: UKP on the rise - Article on Metro  (Read 3719 times)


Online pewpewpew

Load of horseshit as usual, apart from the bait and switch part. Have to agree there

Odd Job

  • Guest
I thought it was quite humorous, unlike the Vice article which was just malicious.

Online Blackpool Rock

No such thing as bad publicity for UKP I guess as it helps put the word about the site out there and potentially signs up more punters but that article is the usual one sided drivel putting punters down and mocking them.
The line near the end shows that the author simply didn't get the purpose of the site as if we followed it we would just look at AW feedback and we all know how reliable that is  :sarcastic: -
"I can’t help but think that if you can’t say anything nice, then you shouldn’t say anything at all."


Offline Marmalade

clearly didn't spend much time in the site when there's far juicier stuff the reporter could have quoted.  :cool:

Offline geezer_breezer

No such thing as bad publicity for UKP I guess as it helps put the word about the site out there and potentially signs up more punters but that article is the usual one sided drivel putting punters down and mocking them.
The line near the end shows that the author simply didn't get the purpose of the site as if we followed it we would just look at AW feedback and we all know how reliable that is  :sarcastic: -
"I can’t help but think that if you can’t say anything nice, then you shouldn’t say anything at all."



I'd suggest that for this site and all its members that there absolutely IS such a thing as bad publicity. Discretion is integral to this game. Splashy and shrieky exposes do no one any favours

Offline Jimmyredcab

I'd suggest that for this site and all its members that there absolutely IS such a thing as bad publicity. Discretion is integral to this game. Splashy and shrieky exposes do no one any favours

Nonsense ----------------- unless your real name is geezer_breezer.

I doubt that very much.     :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Online PepeMAGA

clearly didn't spend much time in the site when there's far juicier stuff the reporter could have quoted.  :cool:
Clearly being singled out by Mumsnet has made you hungry for the spotlight  :lol:

Offline Marmalade

Clearly being singled out by Mumsnet has made you hungry for the spotlight  :lol:
I trust your prattish remark is in jest.

Sufaking

  • Guest
Number 2 is "super rapey"  because he wanted a service he paid for? Lol

£10 bet that the author of the article thinks that all men who visit escorts are misogynistic and that all sex workers are exploited.

Offline geezer_breezer

Nonsense ----------------- unless your real name is geezer_breezer.

I doubt that very much.     :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Jimmy our fake names are not the only calling card we leave on this site. There are IP addresses, history records, logs of traffic. There are writing styles and inferred information. Furthermore the pro$$ies we meet have records (and some CCTV footage) and phone numbers and, from time to time, some may even know our real first names.

Anyone with a modicum of tech savvy and a drop of motivation could identify anyone on this site. It would take a small amount of time but it's easy. Ever heard of hackers or social engineering? They would uncover a significant amount of embarrassing blackmail information and sensitive material.

Discretion IS VITAL to everyone on here. Maybe not you but to others, yes. There is no benefit to publicity, not for the ordinary punter. Only an increase in risk. Think about it...

Offline Jimmyredcab

Jimmy our fake names are not the only calling card we leave on this site. There are IP addresses, history records, logs of traffic. There are writing styles and inferred information. Furthermore the pro$$ies we meet have records (and some CCTV footage) and phone numbers and, from time to time, some may even know our real first names.


My first name is Jimmy ------------------------ there are hundreds of thousands of men with that name.    :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Maybe you should find another less risky hobby ---------------- can I suggest knitting or stamp collecting.  :rolleyes:

Online RedKettle

My first name is Jimmy ------------------------ there are hundreds of thousands of men with that name.    :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Maybe you should find another less risky hobby ---------------- can I suggest knitting or stamp collecting.  :rolleyes:

You have said many times you have nothing to lose from exposure, indeed you are open to people you know about punting.  That is great, but it is not the position that most of us are in. Therefore many of us make our own decisions about security and discretion that suit our circumstances. Why should that lead to such comments from you?

Offline Steely Dan

This site becoming more popular is pure good in my opinion.  More posters = more reviews = less chance of a bad punt for me.  Yes the risk goes up,  but totally in proportion.  2 in a million instead of 1 in a million.  The day I think the risk is out of line with benefit is the last day I post.

Offline Itsnotshy

We are,whether we like it or not,a sub culture. The World at large will never understand us or have sympathy.Best to not get noticed to keep under the radar.Publicity is only likely to bring down a shitstorm of prudery and prohibition upon our heads from the great,Godly and good.

Offline DrConners

I thought it was quite humorous, unlike the Vice article which was just malicious.

Agreed, the "machine gun fart" one was hilarious - don't agree with their statistic regarding B&S though, 99.9% of us stay in this situation ? Nope!

Offline Marmalade

We are,whether we like it or not,a sub culture. The World at large will never understand us or have sympathy.Best to not get noticed to keep under the radar.Publicity is only likely to bring down a shitstorm of prudery and prohibition upon our heads from the great,Godly and good.

It's not possible to be completely under the radar. It's not as if we are sone illegal subset of society: we are law abiding citizens engaging in acts that are voluntary from ourselves and the service providers. We oppose trafficking and all illegal activities. Most of us actually care and treat prostitutes well, much better than the average punter that hasn't been educated on values of politeness and hygiene. We don't bother anyone else. Yet that does not stop harassment from interfering prurient others. I agree it is best, for that reason, for a punter to protect his identity; yet that does not mean cowing to pressure or betraying the values and ethos of the site.

There are dangers in prostitution for the working girl, and there are support agencies, even if the interfering prurient have made sure that many are shut down or denied government funding. But there are dangers for punters also:
1) falling in love with a prostitute
2) spending more than one can reasonably afford on prostitutes
3) becoming addicted to seeing prostitutes
4) being exposed and publicly harassed by prostitutes
5) being exposed and publicly harassed by prurient interfering others
6) being robbed, defrauded or conned
7) being promised services that are then declined after payment has been given
(some would ask, what about disease? But studies show that WGs tend to take protection seriously and are more disease-free than the general public)

Failure to protect one's privacy or failure to keep one's head, for most if not all punters, runs severe risks, emotional, financial, career-wise, socially or family. Most mistakes are made by letting the heart and/or cock rule the head.

A sensible punter uses his head to cover all the possibilities before relaxing into an enjoyable, polite session of good, healthy sex. Which is what this site is about. To constantly portray prostitutes as sweet innocent dearies, when there is no recourse for malpractice by the prostitute, is asking for trouble. This is why I think it is important, on this forum to remind each other of the nature of the transaction, even in the crudest of terms, before relaxing into the dreamy world of having a 'pretend lover' for an hour.

Prostitutes perform a valuable service within society, offering sexual release (and often warmth and intimate human companionship), thus helping to avoid the psychological tensions men face when normal human desire cannot be satisfied. The prostitute is a willing partner, and, engaged properly, entails no emotional complication such as might wreck a family. They, and us, deserve public support, not harassment: but the part that UKP plays (in a less than ideal world) is to put the punter first and help him avoid the pitfalls, to get good value in paid sexual services in the same rationale as any paid service. It is not our intention to upset anyone. If people enter UKP inappropriately, they are to ask themselves if they should really be upset at sticking their nose in other people's legitimate affairs. The answer is they should not.

Offline Brazilian Martian

It's not possible to be completely under the radar. It's not as if we are sone illegal subset of society: we are law abiding citizens engaging in acts that are voluntary from ourselves and the service providers. We oppose trafficking and all illegal activities. Most of us actually care and treat prostitutes well, much better than the average punter that hasn't been educated on values of politeness and hygiene. We don't bother anyone else. Yet that does not stop harassment from interfering prurient others. I agree it is best, for that reason, for a punter to protect his identity; yet that does not mean cowing to pressure or betraying the values and ethos of the site.

There are dangers in prostitution for the working girl, and there are support agencies, even if the interfering prurient have made sure that many are shut down or denied government funding. But there are dangers for punters also:
1) falling in love with a prostitute
2) spending more than one can reasonably afford on prostitutes
3) becoming addicted to seeing prostitutes
4) being exposed and publicly harassed by prostitutes
5) being exposed and publicly harassed by prurient interfering others
6) being robbed, defrauded or conned
7) being promised services that are then declined after payment has been given
(some would ask, what about disease? But studies show that WGs tend to take protection seriously and are more disease-free than the general public)

Failure to protect one's privacy or failure to keep one's head, for most if not all punters, runs severe risks, emotional, financial, career-wise, socially or family. Most mistakes are made by letting the heart and/or cock rule the head.

A sensible punter uses his head to cover all the possibilities before relaxing into an enjoyable, polite session of good, healthy sex. Which is what this site is about. To constantly portray prostitutes as sweet innocent dearies, when there is no recourse for malpractice by the prostitute, is asking for trouble. This is why I think it is important, on this forum to remind each other of the nature of the transaction, even in the crudest of terms, before relaxing into the dreamy world of having a 'pretend lover' for an hour.

Prostitutes perform a valuable service within society, offering sexual release (and often warmth and intimate human companionship), thus helping to avoid the psychological tensions men face when normal human desire cannot be satisfied. The prostitute is a willing partner, and, engaged properly, entails no emotional complication such as might wreck a family. They, and us, deserve public support, not harassment: but the part that UKP plays (in a less than ideal world) is to put the punter first and help him avoid the pitfalls, to get good value in paid sexual services in the same rationale as any paid service. It is not our intention to upset anyone. If people enter UKP inappropriately, they are to ask themselves if they should really be upset at sticking their nose in other people's legitimate affairs. The answer is they should not.

+ 100

Offline Horizontal pleasures

I'd suggest that for this site and all its members that there absolutely IS such a thing as bad publicity. Discretion is integral to this game. Splashy and shrieky exposes do no one any favours
+1

Offline Horizontal pleasures


Discretion IS VITAL to everyone on here. Maybe not you but to others, yes. There is no benefit to publicity, not for the ordinary punter. Only an increase in risk. Think about it...
+1

Offline Sir Lance-a-lot

The tone of the Metro article is a bit strange, as the author is poking fun at apparently reasonable comments.  I think a lot of readers would be left scratching their heads and wondering why?

Offline Horizontal pleasures

The tone of the Metro article is a bit strange, as the author is poking fun at apparently reasonable comments.  I think a lot of readers would be left scratching their heads and wondering why?
and some would be scratching their balls....

Online Ozy84

Lol...

Number 10 was my comment!!  :lol: :lol:

Offline Jimmyredcab

You have said many times you have nothing to lose from exposure, indeed you are open to people you know about punting.  That is great, but it is not the position that most of us are in. Therefore many of us make our own decisions about security and discretion that suit our circumstances. Why should that lead to such comments from you?

We are anonymous ---------------- unless you were christened Red by Mr & Mrs Kettle.     :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

robsatathome

  • Guest
What would you expect from a publisher that's owned by the Daily Mail  :dash:

Offline mrfishyfoo

It's not possible to be completely under the radar. It's not as if we are sone illegal subset of society: we are law abiding citizens engaging in acts that are voluntary from ourselves and the service providers. We oppose trafficking and all illegal activities. Most of us actually care and treat prostitutes well, much better than the average punter that hasn't been educated on values of politeness and hygiene. We don't bother anyone else. Yet that does not stop harassment from interfering prurient others. I agree it is best, for that reason, for a punter to protect his identity; yet that does not mean cowing to pressure or betraying the values and ethos of the site.

There are dangers in prostitution for the working girl, and there are support agencies, even if the interfering prurient have made sure that many are shut down or denied government funding. But there are dangers for punters also:
1) falling in love with a prostitute
2) spending more than one can reasonably afford on prostitutes
3) becoming addicted to seeing prostitutes
4) being exposed and publicly harassed by prostitutes
5) being exposed and publicly harassed by prurient interfering others
6) being robbed, defrauded or conned
7) being promised services that are then declined after payment has been given
(some would ask, what about disease? But studies show that WGs tend to take protection seriously and are more disease-free than the general public)

Failure to protect one's privacy or failure to keep one's head, for most if not all punters, runs severe risks, emotional, financial, career-wise, socially or family. Most mistakes are made by letting the heart and/or cock rule the head.

A sensible punter uses his head to cover all the possibilities before relaxing into an enjoyable, polite session of good, healthy sex. Which is what this site is about. To constantly portray prostitutes as sweet innocent dearies, when there is no recourse for malpractice by the prostitute, is asking for trouble. This is why I think it is important, on this forum to remind each other of the nature of the transaction, even in the crudest of terms, before relaxing into the dreamy world of having a 'pretend lover' for an hour.

Prostitutes perform a valuable service within society, offering sexual release (and often warmth and intimate human companionship), thus helping to avoid the psychological tensions men face when normal human desire cannot be satisfied. The prostitute is a willing partner, and, engaged properly, entails no emotional complication such as might wreck a family. They, and us, deserve public support, not harassment: but the part that UKP plays (in a less than ideal world) is to put the punter first and help him avoid the pitfalls, to get good value in paid sexual services in the same rationale as any paid service. It is not our intention to upset anyone. If people enter UKP inappropriately, they are to ask themselves if they should really be upset at sticking their nose in other people's legitimate affairs. The answer is they should not.

MrM sir.....what a damned fine post.  :hi: :hi:

CaptainRoscoe

  • Guest
Well UKP exposure is a double edged sword.

Offline bearcat69

Quote
But otherwise, I can’t help but think that if you can’t say anything nice, then you shouldn’t say anything at all.

I think, for me, this pretty much sums up the article.

I mean, OK, in a way I can understand what the writer is getting at, and I think it's mostly meant in a humorous way. But what kind of attitude is that to take towards things? She does understand that this is a service that customers pay a lot of money to participate in, doesn't she? And that there really isn't much other way to find out who is a good service provider or a bad service provider without the reviews and comments that get posted on here. She doesn't seem to understand that I, as a punter, have absolutely no problem in paying the going rate, but I would like to get what I am paying for. It's not a case of begrudging having to pay for sex at all, I'm happy to do that, just not getting what I pay for is something I don't appreciate. You wouldn't accept it in any other service industry, so why in this one? Imagine going to get your hair cut, you pay full price at the start, they cut half your hair then rush you out without finishing the job, you voice your dissatisfaction, but no apparently it's your fault because you have a bad attitude and expect too much. :dash:

It's a bit like she makes out we're are all just a bunch of sad twats who deserve a shit fuck with some skanky prossie. Like all prossies are crack whores (she even implies this at one point) and we should expect nothing more than that. Well, that is far from the reality of most of the working girls I've met, the good ones that is, that I've enjoyed thanks to reading reviews on here and getting it straight in my mind who provides good service.

I can't help but think, it's just another bitter sister, trying to dress it up with humour, but really she's upset that men are going out there and having fun whilst not accepting mistreatment from shit whores. Long may UKP continue, it provides a priceless resource.

CaptainRoscoe

  • Guest
Well the author of the article is a dominatrix/sex worker turned stand up comedian.
Hidden Image/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

I'll let you lot come to your own conclusions.  :hi:
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 08:36:19 pm by CaptainRoscoe »

Offline sparkus

She's clearly not going to make it far in her chosen new profession of journalism if that's her writing standard.

Though I suppose 'sub' will mean something entirely different for her there and could in fact be why this piece is so cack, given the copious material to work with on here.

And while she was clearly well acquainted with gags during her time as a sex worker, they were quite laboured in this 'article' (which was supposed to be read quickly on trains/buses during commutes, between storing up women for the wank bank).

Offline TPreston

Well the author of the article is a dominatrix/sex worker turned stand up comedian.
Hidden Image/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

I'll let you lot come to your own conclusions.  :hi:

I'd be interested to know just how many times she had received £2000 for a nights services.

CaptainRoscoe

  • Guest
I'd be interested to know just how many times she had received £2000 for a nights services.

Perhaps her overnight service  included very efficient domestic cleaning. No innuendo intended whatsoever.  :hi:

Hey, if you're reading this love, you can use that as a bit in your stand up. I wouldn't open with it though.

Offline Marmalade

Well the author of the article is a dominatrix/sex worker turned stand up comedian.
Hidden Image/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

I'll let you lot come to your own conclusions.  :hi:

Do you have any pictures of her as a (probably crap) whore?  :)

CaptainRoscoe

  • Guest
Do you have any pictures of her as a (probably crap) whore?  :)

Thankfully no, as my phone doesn't allow me to view insecure "sights".

I'll grab my coat. :hi:

fredpunter

  • Guest
I'd be interested to know just how many times she had received £2000 for a nights services.

She had to charge so much cos she spends that much a day on pies

Offline Marmalade

I'd be interested to know just how many times she had received £2000 for a nights services.

Maybe the punter cancelled when he saw she was a fat devious fucking shit ('coin-operated cunt' to use her expression) and fucked off dropping his pink fluffy wallet and credit cards which she accepted as 'payment''.


No, I am not being particularly nice: A cunt that thinks she is standing up for prostitutes by slagging off punters is talking out of her fat, disused fanny flaps, and a disservice to prostitutes and the punters who are their customers.

I hope she enjoys her ill-earned gains while posing as a do-gooder before going on the anti-depressants as she realises she's not just a cunt but a hypocritical one.[/b]

Offline Ali Katt

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,961
  • Likes: 16
  • Reviews: 28
Quote
Five years later she found herself drawn towards sex work when she discovered she was in demand as a larger lady, tipping the scales then at 25 stone.
Don't get me wrong I like riding big fatties, but even for me there's a limit.

Online rubric

What would you expect from a publisher that's owned by the Daily Mail  :dash:

So basically a sensationally story shrieking about 'male depravity' with links to stories about partially dressed actresses and 'reality stars' in the right handside of the entire fucking page ?

Must be a quiet news day.


Redhead Lover

  • Guest
I read that line in the first paragraph as or lady-friendly penis.

Yes, I have one of those...

Bud$

  • Guest
Why should that lead to such comments from you?
Ignore lists are a great idea - you won't have to read them then - the comments - that's why he's on mine!!

Offline Marmalade

Don't get me wrong I like riding big fatties, but even for me there's a limit.

I don't. Though don't mind if you do. And if a lard lump could command £2000 a night I'm Rip Van fucking Winkle. She's a lying cow making up anything to give her deflated ego a lift. Disgusting.

Memo to fat slag: if you had 2 grand a night how come you didn't retire rich with a fucking yatch instead of becoming a not-very-funny not-very-well-paid, not-very-funny stand-up comedienne with one smutty line to sell the world??

Offline mrwhite

Well the author of the article is a dominatrix/sex worker turned stand up comedian.
Hidden Image/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

I'll let you lot come to your own conclusions.  :hi:
I wouldn't pay 2000p for that!

Offline Ali Katt

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,961
  • Likes: 16
  • Reviews: 28
I don't. Though don't mind if you do. And if a lard lump could command £2000 a night I'm Rip Van fucking Winkle. She's a lying cow making up anything to give her deflated ego a lift. Disgusting.

Memo to fat slag: if you had 2 grand a night how come you didn't retire rich with a fucking yatch instead of becoming a not-very-funny not-very-well-paid, not-very-funny stand-up comedienne with one smutty line to sell the world??
Being 25 stone would make her what dress size? Baring in mind 15 stone could put her around a dress size 20.

There was another Wakefield's finest Chloe Khan said she got paid something like 10K a night, but not one punter on here could be found to have seen her.

« Last Edit: May 02, 2017, 06:04:13 pm by Ali Katt »