Revealing your ethnicity on the phone

[B4bcock]

winkywanky,   some insightful observations on this thread.   Thanks for your time and effort.   

[adamwestbb]

Nope, if the WG only sees certain races then as long as she makes it clear on her profile, we're good! Her body, let her fuck who she wants after all.

[peter purves]

No mainly white chiks peter , like the sentiment illustrated in the attached tweet.
Presumably your black so you dont see the other side of the coin.

Hidden Image/Members Only

Cheers for the response. 

You are right I had not thought about it in this context and it has baffled me tbh.

What interested me - and I am probably barking up the wrong tree here - is the White and professional which is not only a 'race' statement but one of class too. It's the type of line you might see in a dating advert.

Would one say 'I am a White, Underclass from the estates?' 

Anyhow from your text, it is a popular line with this particular WG

As I said some WGs have the Tina Turner attitude when it comes to race as per the text you were very kind enough to show 

[peter purves]

This comparison is always brought up in the racial discrimination discussion. Having sex with someone cannot be compared to other business transactions.

However, it should do...

If there is something quintessentially different between having sex and other forms of 'work'.

Then this falls into the trap what politicians, clergy etc suggest that prostitution should not be accepted in a civilised society - and this is their argument basically  - There is something 'special' about sex or to use your terms 'Having sex with someone cannot be compared to other business transactions.

[peter purves]

Yes, always ask her if she see black guys or other ethnicity, If she says no then move on to the next one who deserves your time and money.

I'm white I did got asked once if I'm a black guy before. But most of time I won't see girls who discriminates a certain ethnicity, I bet a lot of good black guys would be p!ssed off at this even it's not their fault.

This is very good of you 

Especially as I do not believe all colour bar has racism at its roots as it pertains to the WG.

[freeze44]

You could flip this on it's head.

Am pretty sure all of us when looking to book a wg want to know a fair bit of detail. This will be likely to include age (and yeah add +5 at least  ), race, body size, hair colour etc etc. We all have personal tastes and what some find a turn on, others will not.

As some have said, it's for the wg to decide who they want to see and if they only want 'professional' types or market traders then fair enough. If their profile seems full of rules and bars certain types then not going to book the bossy cow 

All seems a bit politically correct the protests against sharing personal details. Why go for a punt with the potential that the wg will not want to go through with it 

[peter purves]

You can often tell from the writing style, IMO...frames of reference, use of the word 'Bro', reference to taking the 'D', the avatar, whatever. Perhaps even a seeming obsession with the size/shape/texture of a girl's arse    . I jest! Joking aside, we all give a bit of ourselves away when we write or speak on the phone.

I'm sure I write/sound like an old white guy  .

Having said that, occasionally someone will announce their race or colour here for some reason, and I will be genuinely suprised (and that can go both ways, they might be black, they might be white - other colours are available). You might call that prejudice on my part, because I have literally prejudged who or what I think someone is, we all do that and anyone who denies it would probably be lying. But that's not prejudice in a negative sense, we all have a picture of others based on what they say and how they say it, and that picture can only be as detailed as the information people give away on here.

Just to add that a critical analysis of the texts on the screen does not reveal the intent, motive of the person behind those words. Nor does it reveal if he is aware of modern urban cultural practices of certain ethnic group or races because he hangs around them.

I guess I am saying it is hard to know, even if the person comes out, what race a poster may or may not be.

[ColdZ]

as some fellow posters have already stated, I also just mention it to them by default just to save my time and money.

If they don't want to see me then I just move on, no fucks given and plenty more options where I can spend my hard earned 

[Doc Holliday]

However, it should do...

If there is something quintessentially different between having sex and other forms of 'work'.

Then this falls into the trap what politicians, clergy etc suggest that prostitution should not be accepted in a civilised society - and this is their argument basically  - There is something 'special' about sex or to use your terms 'Having sex with someone cannot be compared to other business transactions.

Whilst there may be a valid argument for saying having sex for someone is 'special' and certainly not the same as getting an MOT etc .... that argument is academic anyway as this is to do with the law.

Did you follow the link to the other thread that I posted?

This subject has been done to death on forums over the years. You can argue that it falls foul of discrimination laws which it probably does. However this also involves the laws around sexual consent. All Laws have to be tested in court and to date after many years and to my knowledge, this has never been tested. One assumes that is because it would be accepted that rape trumps discrimination.

Many other forms of discrimination have been tested where there is a conflict. It is not always straight forward though External Link/Members Only. That case will now set a legal precedent for the UK. I cannot ever foresee a similar case being brought with discrimination in Prostitution?

[Hed Master]

Obviously, everyone agrees that it’s totally the SP’s choice and right to see and not see whoever she wants to…her body, her rules and we all respect that.  (as long as it's on her profile and up front..).

But, as a white guy, doesn’t it leave you with a tinge of disgust when you read  “No Blacks” on a profile?   Especially knowing that in 90% of cases it’s just racism as any real non race issues can be sorted with 3 or fewer words on a profile..i.e.  “ No large sizes”  “No rude men”  “ etc..

Would you still see a girl if she had “ No Jews” on her profile?  How about “No Disabled”?  Would you still punt a girl who had EDL posters in her window, or a St Georges flag in her garden?
 
Now, here’s a question, would you fuck an SP would was constantly prattling on about how Hitler was misunderstood?

Question for Admin:  Are you Okaying the leaving of negative reviews  on an SP that operates a race bar?

PS. insightful stuff from WW as always....        WINKYWANKY FOR PM

[Belgarion]

Sorry to hear this. But I think if this happens then you should write a review on it and put it down as a negative so that other punters are aware of this.

How far back do you want to go? This happened before I joined UKP

[SamLP]

I’ve had it asked over the phone many times and my response is why should it matter. If there’s nothing in their profile stating who they don’t want to see, then it’s not important to be asked or to state your race when calling. If they’re not comfortable, then I tell them to forget about it and move on to someone who won’t discriminate.

The worst ones though are those who state they’ll see anyone but the look in their eyes betray it. I’ve seen those looks a thousand times. Sometimes you can’t prove it, but you know you had a sub par service because they were racist. Had one of those recently from a well reviewed wg.

[king tarzan]

I’ve had it asked over the phone many times and my response is why should it matter. If there’s nothing in their profile stating who they don’t want to see, then it’s not important to be asked or to state your race when calling. If they’re not comfortable, then I tell them to forget about it and move on to someone who won’t discriminate.

The worst ones though are those who state they’ll see anyone but the look in their eyes betray it. I’ve seen those looks a thousand times. Sometimes you can’t prove it, but you know you had a sub par service because they were racist. Had one of those recently from a well reviewed wg.

Your favourite katalina is a racist bitch...

Myself personally I've had no issues in regards to racism during sex.. very odd it would be on the first place racist sex 

[Home Alone]

Obviously, everyone agrees that it’s totally the SP’s choice and right to see and not see whoever she wants to…her body, her rules and we all respect that.  (as long as it's on her profile and up front..).

. . .

Would you still see a girl if she had “ No Jews” on her profile?  How about “No Disabled”? Would you still punt a girl who had EDL posters in her window, or a St Georges flag in her garden?
 
. . .

I wondered when someone would broaden this discussion to include other 'minority groups'.

I have two comments to offer: in 15 years' punting, I've never seen a single Profile with 'No Disabled' on it.

Secondly, it doesn't work like that on AW for clients with disabilities.

If you look below the main AW Profile photograph, there are two lists, the first of which is headed Enjoys and includes the phrase 'Disabled clients' for the SP to leave showing, or delete, as she sees appropriate. I remember discussing that very issue with my last Regular, saying if a SP deleted that phrase, I wouldn't want to see her, anyway.

My then-Regular made the point that the SP may have deleted it because she felt that her working premises are inaccessible to, e.g., mobility-impaired clients like myself.

Which reminded me of one of the conversations I've had over the years with quite a few SPs who've seen me and my walking stick at her front door.

"Will you be able to manage the stairs?", she asks. "As long as I'm following a sexy woman, I'll have no problem.", is the standard bit of patter I've developed in reply!

[SamLP]

Your favourite katalina is a racist bitch...

Myself personally I've had no issues in regards to racism during sex.. very odd it would be on the first place racist sex 

Who’s Katalina?

[peter purves]

Whilst there may be a valid argument for saying having sex for someone is 'special' and certainly not the same as getting an MOT etc .... that argument is academic anyway as this is to do with the law.

Did you follow the link to the other thread that I posted?

Many other forms of discrimination have been tested where there is a conflict. It is not always straight forward though External Link/Members Only. That case will now set a legal precedent for the UK. I cannot ever foresee a similar case being brought with discrimination in Prostitution?

Cheers!!

I remember that case but I am not sure it is applicable here. I think the case where the hotelier refused to accept a gay couple because of it's Christian values may in fact be the better example.

As for prostitution you are correct  discrimination laws cannot be applied until society fully accepts prostitution as any other viable profession.

However, if prostitution hypothetically speaking is to be accepted by society there are ways that laws can be enshrined where women's rights are put first and discrimination laws upheld and at the same time giving WGs if they are 'racist' enough scope to bend the laws and refuse to see clientele on the basis of race and get away with it  in our hypothetical society IMHO.

[peter purves]

I’ve had it asked over the phone many times and my response is why should it matter. If there’s nothing in their profile stating who they don’t want to see, then it’s not important to be asked or to state your race when calling. If they’re not comfortable, then I tell them to forget about it and move on to someone who won’t discriminate.

The worst ones though are those who state they’ll see anyone but the look in their eyes betray it. I’ve seen those looks a thousand times. Sometimes you can’t prove it, but you know you had a sub par service because they were racist. Had one of those recently from a well reviewed wg.

This is an interesting post.

Personally I do not know how one can identify that a punt is 'bad' because the WG is 'racist' vis-a-vis that she may just be a poor SP and/or you may not have 'clicked', or she is having a bad day etc?

However, your point is clearly taken and understood.

[king tarzan]

Who’s Katalina?

From Hendon..
The sexy Hungarian..

External Link/Members Only

Has serious issues in regards to drugs/racism/deranged mind...

[SamLP]

From Hendon..
The sexy Hungarian..

External Link/Members Only

Has serious issues in regards to drugs/racism/deranged mind...

So how is she my favourite considering I’ve never seen her?

[king tarzan]

So how is she my favourite considering I’ve never seen her?

I thought you have seen her..
Sorry my apologies then 👍👍


Clear fact though this is a racist escort

[winkywanky]

Cheers for the response. 

You are right I had not thought about it in this context and it has baffled me tbh.

What interested me - and I am probably barking up the wrong tree here - is the White and professional which is not only a 'race' statement but one of class too. It's the type of line you might see in a dating advert.

Would one say 'I am a White, Underclass from the estates?' 

Anyhow from your text, it is a popular line with this particular WG

As I said some WGs have the Tina Turner attitude when it comes to race as per the text you were very kind enough to show 

You're not barking up the wrong tree, she just dissed me there too  .

To be fair to Tina Turner, she spent her whole marriage getting physically and mentally abused by Ike, so perhaps she was so traumatised she became blind to the fact that there are plenty good Black guys? Also in her situation, and the industry she was in, perhaps it was rife at the time?

[Doc Holliday]

I remember that case but I am not sure it is applicable here. I think the case where the hotelier refused to accept a gay couple because of it's Christian values may in fact be the better example.

Both examples are the same in that religious belief and sexual orientation are two of the nine protected characteristics under the same Equality Act 2010. That then poses a dilemma for the courts when a case is brought and precedents are then set.

As for prostitution you are correct  discrimination laws cannot be applied until society fully accepts prostitution as any other viable profession.

No that wasn't my point.

Technically discrimination law could be applied at present, because it is a financial transaction and can be classed as 'a business'. HMRC recognises Prostitution as a trade.

However even if in the highly unlikely event that in future all forms of prostitution were deemed legal and regulated etc (thus removing this grey area), a prostitute could still argue consent and that she is entitled to say no on any grounds, under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

That would then need to be tested in court and I doubt it ever will?

[peter purves]

Both examples are the same in that religious belief and sexual orientation are two of the nine protected characteristics under the same Equality Act 2010. That then poses a dilemma for the courts when a case is brought and precedents are then set.

No that wasn't my point.

Technically discrimination law could be applied at present, because it is a financial transaction and can be classed as 'a business'. HMRC recognises Prostitution as a trade.

However even if in the highly unlikely event that in future all forms of prostitution were deemed legal and regulated etc (thus removing this grey area), a prostitute could still argue consent and that she is entitled to say no on any grounds, under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

That would then need to be tested in court and I doubt it ever will?

Indeed both examples are the same with regard to the protected characteristics. However, the nuances of both cases are significantly different and hence the different verdicts. This is what I was getting at

With regard to the example of Sexual Offences Act 2003, our discussion has been about if prostitution is no different to any other form of 'work/employment'' and thus accepted by society.

I have argued it is a contradiction in terms to suggest that prostitution should be given a special and/or separate status which then removes it from discrimination laws vis-a-vis other activities which are classified as 'work'.

[winkywanky]

It probably is literally a contradiction in terms, but then again as Doc has pointed out, forcing someone to have sex with someone they don't want to is rape.

It seems obvious (and correct) to me that the law which would 'win out' here is rape law.

[peter purves]

It probably is literally a contradiction in terms, but then again as Doc has pointed out, forcing someone to have sex with someone they don't want to is rape.

It seems obvious (and correct) to me that the law which would 'win out' here is rape law.

I do not quite see it that way...

Rape falls within the 'personal' sphere of a given society. The example I am talking about is prostitution as 'acceptable work' in a hypothetical society. From the moment 'sex' moves from the 'private' to the 'public' sphere (of work) because the WG has consented to work in the field of sex as a prostitute, it cannot be rape. Please note I am not suggesting here Prostitutes cannot be raped.

One of the skills a WG needs is the ability to switch off. One could argue why cannot the WG just 'switch off' with regard to race when she can switch off to so many other variables and other personal characteristics that a  punter may have that allows her to have sex when she would not ordinarily want to?

[king tarzan]

I do not quite see it that way...

Rape falls within the 'personal' sphere of a given society. The example I am talking about is prostitution as 'acceptable work' in a hypothetical society. From the moment 'sex' moves from the 'private' to the 'public' sphere (of work) because the WG has consented to work in the field of sex as a prostitute, it cannot be rape. Please note I am not suggesting here Prostitutes cannot be raped.

One of the skills a WG needs is the ability to switch off. One could argue why cannot the WG just 'switch off' with regard to race when she can switch off to so many other variables and other personal characteristics that a  punter may have that allows her to have sex when she would not ordinarily want to?

Intelligent 🦊 points 🥊🥊🥊🥊

[winkywanky]

I do not quite see it that way...

Rape falls within the 'personal' sphere of a given society. The example I am talking about is prostitution as 'acceptable work' in a hypothetical society. From the moment 'sex' moves from the 'private' to the 'public' sphere (of work) because the WG has consented to work as a prostitute, it cannot be rape.

Or to put in other words. One of the skills a WG needs is the ability to switch off. One could argue why cannot the WG just 'switch off' with regard to race when she can switch off to so many other variables and other personal characteristics that a  punter may have that allows her to have sex when she would not ordinarily want to?

That is demonstrably incorrect, certainly in the way you worded it

A guy gives a WG money to perform a service. Part-way through that service if for any reason she decides penetrative sex is a no-no (I think even if penetration has already occurred) then if the guy forcefully persists, that is rape. It really is different from providing any other kind of service.

This actually a philosophical argument IMO, but if you think in today's Rights for Women environment that female prostitutes will be forced/coerced or whatever by law into having sex with someone they don't want to, then I think you are mistaken.

Even from the viewpoint of 'well if you don't want to fuck everyone then don't be a prostitute' then you would be denying the girl employment (there's a law against that too). Same with disabled guys, if this issue were to be forced then the disabled community (understandably they would be demanding the same) would join in the same argument.

Providing sex for money is just different.

[Doc Holliday]

I do not quite see it that way...

From the moment 'sex' moves from the 'private' to the 'public' sphere (of work) because the WG has consented to work in the field of sex as a prostitute, it cannot be rape. Please note I am not suggesting here Prostitutes cannot be raped.

One of the skills a WG needs is the ability to switch off. One could argue why cannot the WG just 'switch off' with regard to race when she can switch off to so many other variables and other personal characteristics that a  punter may have that allows her to have sex when she would not ordinarily want to?

Wow .. do you really believe that? I'm genuinely shocked. Good luck with that argument in court 

[peter purves]

That is demonstrably incorrect, certainly in the way you worded it

A guy gives a WG money to perform a service. Part-way through that service if for any reason she decides penetrative sex is a no-no (I think even if penetration has already occurred) then if the guy forcefully persists, that is rape. It really is different from providing any other kind of service.

This actually a philosophical argument IMO, but if you think in today's Rights for Women environment that female prostitutes will be forced/coerced or whatever by law into having sex with someone they don't want to, then I think you are mistaken.

Even from the viewpoint of 'well if you don't want to fuck everyone then don't be a prostitute' then you would be denying the girl employment (there's a law against that too). Same with disabled guys, if this issue were to be forced then the disabled community (understandably they would be demanding the same) would join in the same argument.

Providing sex for money is just different.

Cheers!

I am not sure you get the subtleties I am suggesting here.

For instance, if a WG and here I am going to use your words:

 "A guy gives a WG money to perform a service. Part-way through that service if for any reason she decides penetrative sex is a no-no"

In all likelihood if the WG agrees to see the punter and then decides to have sex with the punter (business transaction/work) and then asks him to stop. In all probability it is highly unlikely the reason for stopping will be because of the punter's race because she would not have entertained him in the first place. So this, in essence, is not really a good illustration.

I would also add that if you sincerely believe :

"Providing sex for money is just different."

Then I say again this is the very same reason why those elements in society do not want prostitution to play any part in a civilised society.

[peter purves]

Wow .. do you really believe that? I'm genuinely shocked. Good luck with that argument in court 

No! Sorry, what this shows is that you do not have a clear understanding of how the Equality Act 2010 is meant to unfold in principle.

Notwithstanding there will never be a literal court case for me, you or anybody else to argue the matter as a point of law

[Edina]

What about the sex of the punter,

[Belgarion]

This is an interesting post.

Personally I do not know how one can identify that a punt is 'bad' because the WG is 'racist' vis-a-vis that she may just be a poor SP and/or you may not have 'clicked', or she is having a bad day etc?

However, your point is clearly taken and understood.

One of the things about being a victim of racism is that you develop a sixth sense and can tell when someone is racist before other people.

I can usually tell very quickly. My racist detector is phenomenal

[peter purves]

One of the things about being a victim of racism is that you develop a sixth sense and can tell when someone is racist before other people.

I can usually tell very quickly. My racist detector is phenomenal

The reason why I raised this point is that in a way it is doing WGs a great dis-service IMHO. Since it implies they cannot be racist and still do their job to a 'reasonable' standard

Do you think that just because a WG is racist she is deliberately going to give you a bad service if she chooses to see you of course??

And would you be able to detect that you were given a bad service because of 'race'?

[peter purves]

What about the sex of the punter,

Is this comment directed at me? If so would you like to expand your point?

If not, then ignore my reply...

Cheers!!

[Belgarion]

The reason why I raised this point is that in a way it is doing WGs a great dis-service IMHO. Since it implies they cannot be racist and still do their job to a 'reasonable' standard

Do you think that just because a WG is racist she is deliberately going to give you a bad service if she chooses to see you of course??

Would you be able to detect that you were given a bad service because of 'race'?

If I sense that the SP I'm with is a racist, I make my apologies and leave.

So the service won't even be given.

I don't think I'll link race to service to be honest. I'll put it down more to the SP being a bad SP

[sparkus]

I'm not exactly equipped with a baritone or sonorous voice to be taken for Afro-Caribbean and am generally unimpeachably polite, so the only grief I've had tends to be from Latina, Asian and British WGs asking if I am "black or Indian man".  All kinds of scenarios, WGs, no grounds for refusal on sight but I've had a few census-like questions on ringing up, though never a refusal (though plenty of pillow talk on why not seeing such clients).  I'm used to it by now but I can see how others would be pissed the fuck off by it if denial of service ever occurred.

[sparkus]

If I sense that the SP I'm with is a racist, I make my apologies and leave.

So the service won't even be given.

I don't think I'll link race to service to be honest. I'll put it down more to the SP being a bad SP

Never anything outright but I've had one or two EE WGs say afterwards "I don't normally see men like you," (like doing a favour or something) - when pressed to elaborate I've heard some weird and wonderful assumed nationalities (Azerbaijan through to Zambia).

I'm usually pulling up my trousers by that point so not really in a point to 'walk out' beyond what I was about to do.

[peter purves]

If I sense that the SP I'm with is a racist, I make my apologies and leave.

So the service won't even be given.

I don't think I'll link race to service to be honest. I'll put it down more to the SP being a bad SP

Cheers!

Of course! Not to go ahead with the punt is the best option - if you have spider-senses like yourself.

Likewise I would put it down to the WG having a bad day etc.

However, I am of the firm belief though that a 'racist' WG can provide a 'reasonable' service.


Edit: While I was typing I missed Sparkus' comments, which I will add below which gives tentative support that a racist WG can provide a 'reasonable' service. Hopefully, they did provide him with a 'reasonable' service otherwise my point has not been established

Never anything outright but I've had one or two EE WGs say afterwards "I don't normally see men like you," (like doing a favour or something) - when pressed to elaborate I've heard some weird and wonderful assumed nationalities (Azerbaijan through to Zambia).

I'm usually pulling up my trousers by that point so not really in a point to 'walk out' beyond what I was about to do.

[peter purves]

Hopefully, my last post as it pertains to the law - unless I can be argued against of course and then I will just concede the point

This is currently the law with regard to the Equality Act 2010

"If you’ve been treated unfairly by a trader or service provider, like a shop, bank or energy provider and it’s because of who you are, you may have been discriminated against."

External Link/Members Only

Now if we hypothetically imagine a society where prostitution is not a taboo, a profession that both male and female seek to go into and is a respected etc, line of 'work', where it can fit into:

 "If you’ve been treated unfairly by a trader or service provider, like a shop, bank or energy provider or prostitute...'

Conclusion:

If a WG refuses to see ALL Asians, using our current day Equality Act 2010, then in this hypothetical situation it would be unlawful discrimination. The issue of rape is superfluous to this hypothetical argument.

[daviemac]

Hopefully, my last post as it pertains to the law - unless I can be argued against of course and then I will just concede the point

When you go into a pub you are offering to buy a drink, it's up to the landlord whether or not he accepts that offer, there is no law that states he has to. I would imagine offering to pay a prostitute for sexual services would be the same, she can accept the offer or not.

[millbush]

When you go into a pub you are offering to buy a drink, it's up to the landlord whether or not he accepts that offer, there is no law that states he has to.

Unless it's because of your race.

[peter purves]

When you go into a pub you are offering to buy a drink, it's up to the landlord whether or not he accepts that offer, there is no law that states he has to. I would imagine offering to pay a prostitute for sexual services would be the same, she can accept the offer or not.

I was hoping not to reply tbh ..Oh well! Here goes   

This is not strictly true.

If your scenario went to court, the pub-owner must have a reason which is non-discriminatory as to why he did not serve you. If he cannot offer such a reason the court will, in the absence of any other 'reasonable' explanation, infer that it is due to unlawful discrimination. Otherwise why else would the pub-owner choose not to serve you?? 

As for your second example, remember we are dealing with ALL Asians - not individuals

And herein are the key differences

Edit:

I have just seen Millbush post  which is saying what I am saying but evenn more succintly

Unless it's because of your race.

[daviemac]

Unless it's because of your race.

According to this they don't have to give a reason.   

External Link/Members Only

[Doc Holliday]

Hopefully, my last post as it pertains to the law - unless I can be argued against of course and then I will just concede the point

This is currently the law with regard to the Equality Act 2010

"If you’ve been treated unfairly by a trader or service provider, like a shop, bank or energy provider and it’s because of who you are, you may have been discriminated against."

External Link/Members Only

Now if we hypothetically imagine a society where prostitution is not a taboo, a profession that both male and female seek to go into and is a respected etc, line of 'work', where it can fit into:

 "If you’ve been treated unfairly by a trader or service provider, like a shop, bank or energy provider or prostitute...'

Conclusion:

If a WG refuses to see ALL Asians, using our current day Equality Act 2010, then in this hypothetical situation it would be unlawful discrimination. The issue of rape is superfluous to this hypothetical argument.

At the risk of repeating myself ... yes all technically 'legally' correct. Currently a prostitute is breaking discrimination law, but has not to date (and likely will not) face prosecution because they have a 'get out of jail' defence card in the shape of the Sexual Offences Act. If ever a case was brought to court I cannot foresee a situation where the court would agree with your view, that a prostitute should, by the nature of her job, relinquish the right to consent to sex.

Pieces of legislation cannot cover every scenario, especially where two different Laws (which protect individual's rights) overlap.

This is also my last post. If you don't get it, you don't get it.

Edit Perhaps try going along to a solicitor and asking about pursuing a civil case against a prostitute who states on her profile NO BLACKS/ASIANS and get an opinion?

[peter purves]

According to this they don't have to give a reason.   

External Link/Members Only

Thanks - A very interesting read and brings about something I did not know. I did know something like this a while back - though I think the rule has changed with regard to passengers on the buses being under the jurisdiction of the driver solely ie they determine who enter the bus.

I do not know for sure here. However, I would still guess that it is unlawful to refuse a drink based under any of the personal characteristics of the Equality Act 2010. That the pub can decline to serve drinks to customer/s must be just that and nothing to do with race.

So for instance in your example, an individual Black person can be turned away from the bar. However, if over time, it becomes clear that no Blacks are being served drinks therein. Then this is clearly unlawful discrimination.

Have a look at this part with regard to ejecting customers for confirmation. Unfortunately, I cannot copy and paste because the site is protected. It seems to support my position.

[winkywanky]

Cheers!

I am not sure you get the subtleties I am suggesting here.

For instance, if a WG and here I am going to use your words:

 "A guy gives a WG money to perform a service. Part-way through that service if for any reason she decides penetrative sex is a no-no"

In all likelihood if the WG agrees to see the punter and then decides to have sex with the punter (business transaction/work) and then asks him to stop. In all probability it is highly unlikely the reason for stopping will be because of the punter's race because she would not have entertained him in the first place. So this, in essence, is not really a good illustration.

I would also add that if you sincerely believe :

"Providing sex for money is just different."

Then I say again this is the very same reason why those elements in society do not want prostitution to play any part in a civilised society.

I didn't mean that as a direct comparison with the race thing we're discussing, merely as an example that 'once sex becomes a transaction, choice goes out of the window because this is merely a service that's being provided, therefore it should be available to anyone who wants it'. It doesn't. And to suggest otherwise trivialises it somewhat.

Providing sex for money is just different, and I can still believe that even though I have paid sex with WGs, and I do think it plays a part in civilised society.

You can rationalise it all you want in terms of a transaction denied you because of your race, but it's a personal thing for a woman. Hence my stance that this is a philosophical issue, not a legal one.

We can go on arguing about this until we're both blue in the face but I doubt either of us will change our stance.

[winkywanky]

One of the things about being a victim of racism is that you develop a sixth sense and can tell when someone is racist before other people.

I can usually tell very quickly. My racist detector is phenomenal

Similarly. I have been in situations where someone has perceived racism, and it has been nothing of the sort.

When the detector is set to 'highly sensitive', that can also happen.

[peter purves]

I didn't mean that as a direct comparison with the race thing we're discussing, merely as an example that 'once sex becomes a transaction, choice goes out of the window because this is merely a service that's being provided, therefore it should be available to anyone who wants it'. It doesn't. And to suggest otherwise trivialises it somewhat.

Providing sex for money is just different, and I can still believe that even though I have paid sex with WGs, and I do think it plays a part in civilised society.

You can rationalise it all you want in terms of a transaction denied you because of your race, but it's a personal thing for a woman. Hence my stance that this is a philosophical issue, not a legal one.

We can go on arguing about this until we're both blue in the face but I doubt either of us will change our stance.

I am not rationalising or even trying to change your views. I am merely applying the Equality Act to a hypothetical situation and following things through to their logical conclusion. Even the Doc agrees with me when he says:

At the risk of repeating myself ... yes all technically 'legally' correct. Currently a prostitute is breaking discrimination law...

[SamLP]

The reason why I raised this point is that in a way it is doing WGs a great dis-service IMHO. Since it implies they cannot be racist and still do their job to a 'reasonable' standard

Do you think that just because a WG is racist she is deliberately going to give you a bad service if she chooses to see you of course??

And would you be able to detect that you were given a bad service because of 'race'?

It's all unprovable which is why I never mention it in a review if I feel that was the reason. However, as I mentioned in the earlier post you quoted, it's in the eyes, and a look I've seen a thousand times. Some wg's are just plain bad wg's, and some indeed have off days. However, with others, you can tell by the immediate look in their eyes and the way they conduct themselves. It's unfortunate, yet unprovable. Some can put their feelings aside and give a good service. Others can't.

[winkywanky]

Hopefully, my last post as it pertains to the law - unless I can be argued against of course and then I will just concede the point

This is currently the law with regard to the Equality Act 2010

"If you’ve been treated unfairly by a trader or service provider, like a shop, bank or energy provider and it’s because of who you are, you may have been discriminated against."

External Link/Members Only

Now if we hypothetically imagine a society where prostitution is not a taboo, a profession that both male and female seek to go into and is a respected etc, line of 'work', where it can fit into:

 "If you’ve been treated unfairly by a trader or service provider, like a shop, bank or energy provider or prostitute...'

Conclusion:

If a WG refuses to see ALL Asians, using our current day Equality Act 2010, then in this hypothetical situation it would be unlawful discrimination. The issue of rape is superfluous to this hypothetical argument.

You're saying that because effectively prostitution is 'underground', the the usual rules of 'discrimination by a service provider' don't apply.

And that if it were properly recognised as 'a legitimate trade' then discrimination laws could be successfully applied to it.

Then logically, if a WG refused to see certain guys - Black, Disabled, Muslim, Indian, whatever, she'd be in breach of the law, and would either have to comply or give up being a WG.

That is the logical upshot.

So she's either forced to have sex with all-comers or give up her livelihood.