Popular media on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

UKPunting is a free, independent and not-for-profit paid sex buyer site.




Author Topic: Dee and Black Guys  (Read 8301 times)

Offline herbie007

We get to pick and choose who we shag limiting the dangers we could run into, WG’S don’t have that option and have to limit their risks by experience, in Dee’s case this means not seeing black men which is off course her right, and IMO she is not a racist and mentioned that she will carry on seeing black guys she has met before but won’t see any others due to the 2 bad experiences she recently had.

Offline Cornish sub

I don't think black guys punt that much, as they seem happy to fuck any old white bleached blonde tub of lard we all reject for free, so banning them is most likely not that big a deal for the girls

but banning all white guys would put them out of business

anyway Dee has the right to choose who she wants to service as any girl does imo
I have no issue with this whatsoever. What really gets on my tits, though, is all this 'due to bad experiences' bollocks, when what they really mean is that they can't bring themselves to get physical with a black person, simple as that.

Offline ciscoxxx69

I have no issue with this whatsoever. What really gets on my tits, though, is all this 'due to bad experiences' bollocks, when what they really mean is that they can't bring themselves to get physical with a black person, simple as that.

Eh?..........and how on earth do you deduce that is what they/she are/is saying FFS?

Dee is an experienced WG. If she has had bad experiences she would prefer not to repeat, it is her prerogative surely......?
She, nor any WG, does not have to justify her decision - whatever her reason for that decision - to you or me or anyone.......she can see who she likes. And not see who she likes. Simple.



sash

black, brown whatever origin, its just like a girl leaving out bareback from likes.
guys, she is a great girl, just move on please - plenty of other nice girls ;)

Online fredpunter

I have no issue with this whatsoever. What really gets on my tits, though, is all this 'due to bad experiences' bollocks, when what they really mean is that they can't bring themselves to get physical with a black person, simple as that.

Do you read what others write? She has said she is happy to see black people she has seen before, so your statement is clearly false.

Offline Cornish sub

Eh?..........and how on earth do you deduce that is what they/she are/is saying FFS?

Dee is an experienced WG. If she has had bad experiences she would prefer not to repeat, it is her prerogative surely......?
She, nor any WG, does not have to justify her decision - whatever her reason for that decision - to you or me or anyone.......she can see who she likes. And not see who she likes. Simple.
I wasn't aiming it specifically at Dee, just escorts in general when they spout the 'bad experience' bollocks. It's never aimed at white men, only black. That's how I deduce it, FFS.

Offline Cornish sub

Do you read what others write? She has said she is happy to see black people she has seen before, so your statement is clearly false.
Well you haven't read what I've written, otherwise you'd know it's not aimed specifically at her, so your statement is clearly bollocks.

Quote
While I agree that it is a WG's body to do as she pleases, it does annoy me when WG's (in particular Eastern European ones) put a blanket ban on Black Guys.

Sometimes they do this because they are prejudiced ('I am not comfortable'), but other times it is because of bad experiences.

Now, I understand that people would not wish to repeat actions that lead to undesirable outcomes, but I refuse to believe that only black punters act badly towards WG's.

I am sure WG's will have had bad experiences with white punters, but the WG in question wouldn't say 'sorry, I don't see white men' as they would put themselves out business due to demographics.

There are other measures that can be done to avoid such experiences as far as possible. Only booking online, or only seeing guys with a certain number of positive feedback, or asking to be called in advance to root out bad punters of all races.

So for me, blanket banning is just lazy stereotyping and using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. WG's only get away with it because they know that no-one is going to cry discrimination to the powers that be for obvious reasons.  :angry:

I wasn't trying to blame victims of abuse in my earlier comment. I recognise the right of anyone to what they wish with their bodies. It was just the principle of blanket banning I have issues with. Of course I can see someone else (which I would do anyway) and the blame should lie at the feet of those w**kers who spoil it for everyone else with their behaviour as the original poster said. It is just frustrating that someone feels the need to tar everyone with the same brush, that's all.

Offline James999

just the principle of blanket banning I have issues with.

You call it blanket banning, others may regard it as learning from experience, if you stoke a strange pit bull terrier and it bites you, and you stroke another stray pit pull terrier and it bites you, then you stop stroking pit bull terriers, it's not rocket science it's common sense  :dash:

That analogy only stacks up if you believe that all black men are intrinsically dangerous. 

Offline James999

That analogy only stacks up if you believe that all black men are intrinsically dangerous.

No it doesn't it shows that people learn from experience  and act accordingly, it doesnt mean all Pit bulls will bite, it just means the person doesn't want to take the risk, it's a Free country and people are allowed to make choices  :hi:

Quote
No it doesn't it shows that people learn from experience  and act accordingly, it doesnt mean all Pit bulls will bite, it just means the person doesn't want to take the risk, it's a Free country and people are allowed to make choices  :hi:

I agree, it's just a shame that many WG's feel the need to do that.

Offline vorian

I agree, it's just a shame that many WG's feel the need to do that.

To be fair it is not that many, a while ago someone did searches and only a very few prossies stated no black men, it might seem a higher proportion to many as they do tend to get flagged up by people when found and posted about on here.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Offline Sadgit

how would they know who they are? would this all work the same way if they were white? or jewish? etc

personally, i wouldnt see a WG who doesnt see people of a race though this ban doesn't ban me. personal preference.

Have to commend Stealthagger on this.
Although we dont agree on many things his statements echo my exact position.

Your a better man than I thought (dont care if you think im a twat) have to give credit where its due.

Well done sir

Offline James999

I agree, it's just a shame that many WG's feel the need to do that.

Don't blame the victims (the girls) blame who caused the problem  :music:

Online fredpunter

Well you haven't read what I've written, otherwise you'd know it's not aimed specifically at her, so your statement is clearly bollocks.

I see, I must apologise for having been misled by the title of this thread. Anyway, I am delighted that you now agree that Dee has done nothing to warrant your disapproval, and admire that you were good enough to let us know of your change of heart.

Offline Sadgit

Dee would not be seeing anymore black guys even in duos..

some of us really know how to spoil the fun!

I think your opening statement separates black guys from other guys.
As mentioned by Lance and a few others bad behaviour is not governed by race.

I would have felt a lot more comfortable if you didn't reiterate the problem was the black guys.
The problem is badly behaved guys that happen to be black.
 
Dee decision to stop seeing black guys is nothing short of racial discrimination regardless of the events which lead up to the decision.
Once you start seeing all members  of racial ,religious  ethnic groups etc as being the same based on a experience or process of thought you are heading towards practising a form of discrimination.


You call it blanket banning, others may regard it as learning from experience, if you stoke a strange pit bull terrier and it bites you, and you stroke another stray pit pull terrier and it bites you, then you stop stroking pit bull terriers, it's not rocket science it's common sense  :dash:

Its common sense for anyone comfortable with racial discrimination.
I know we have animal rights but foolishly I believed ethnic groups to come under humans and human rights recognizes racial discrimination.
To have a sign outside your house that says NO DOGS is unlikely to get you arrested, as you are not breaking any law.
Try putting a sign outside your house that says "NO BLACKS"…..humans no matter what the race are not treated the same as dogs in law and civilized society  .

Your example is flawed  for a simple reason……It relates to the breed not the colour.
To be correct your example would have to say, If you got savaged by a pit bull of a particular colour and pattern would you be stay away from ALL pit bulls or just ones of that same colour and pattern ?

Dee had a bad experience with a man, his colour is as relevant as the colour and markings of a pit bull,  it is by her own choice she decided to categorize that man by the colour of his skin and apply it to all similar.
That is ignorance not common sense and its ignorance like this that leads to racism.

This linking of  personalities, behaviour patterns, IQ etc  to skin and ethnic backgrounds took place in concentration camps and should have been left there with the Nazis.
It has no place in our society and that is why its practised underground where it belongs.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 12:12:39 PM by Sadgit »

Offline Cornish sub

I see, I must apologise for having been misled by the title of this thread. Anyway, I am delighted that you now agree that Dee has done nothing to warrant your disapproval, and admire that you were good enough to let us know of your change of heart.
I haven't had a change of heart, I still maintain that it's a load of bollocks that it's always black men, never white, that escorts seem to have 'bad experiences' with and impose a blanket ban on. As for Dee, I've never said anything that suggests she warrants my disapproval, none of my posts have been aimed specifically at her. I therefore accept your apology for totally twisting the facts in my posts in order to point score.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 12:19:46 PM by Cornish sub »

Offline vorian

I think your opening statement separates black guys from other guys.
As mentioned by Lance and a few others bad behaviour is not governed by race.

I would have felt a lot more comfortable if you didn't reiterate the problem was the black guys.
The problem is badly behaved guys that happen to be black.
 
Dee decision to stop seeing black guys is nothing short of racial discrimination regardless of the events which lead up to the decision.
Once you start seeing all members  of racial ,religious  ethnic groups etc as being the same based on a experience or process of thought you are heading towards practising a form of discrimination.


Its common sense for anyone comfortable with racial discrimination.
I know we have animal rights but foolishly I believed ethnic groups to come under humans and human rights recognizes racial discrimination.
To have a sign outside your house that says NO DOGS is unlikely to get you arrested, as you are not breaking any law.
Try putting a sign outside your house that says "NO BLACKS"…..humans no matter what the race are not treated the same as dogs in law and civilized society  .

Your example is flawed  for a simple reason……It relates to the breed not the colour.
To be correct your example would have to say, If you got savaged by a pit bull of a particular colour and pattern would you be stay away from ALL pit bulls or just ones of that same colour and pattern ?

Dee had a bad experience with a man, his colour is as relevant as the colour and markings of a pit bull,  it is by her own choice she decided to categorize that man by the colour of his skin and apply it to all similar.
That is ignorance not common sense and its ignorance like this that leads to racism.

This linking of  personalities, behaviour patterns, IQ etc  to skin and ethnic backgrounds took place in concentration camps and should have been left there with the Nazis.
It has no place in our society and that is why its practised underground where it belongs.

OK Devils advocate again,  what about her personal choice as to who she does or does not see. For example discriminating on age, gender, weight, cock size.  If she said she was straight and a woman wanted to book her could she say no. Personal sexual services are different,  do I agree that she has made a poor choice 8th this matter as it shows poor business sense. However I do think she has a right to see who she wishes to see. For whatever reasons.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

this trend is a bit annoying....so what if she wont see black guys...there are better looking whites girls out there.
its her body and her decision.
 :unknown:

Offline Sadgit

OK Devils advocate again,  what about her personal choice as to who she does or does not see. For example discriminating on age, gender, weight, cock size.  If she said she was straight and a woman wanted to book her could she say no. Personal sexual services are different,  do I agree that she has made a poor choice 8th this matter as it shows poor business sense. However I do think she has a right to see who she wishes to see. For whatever reasons.

Tut tut tut...not even a hello.

What I find interesting is many of the profiles that are saying "its her choice... etc" are indirectly saying "its ok to practice racial discrimination if its your choice".

Last I checked "racial discrimination" was illegal.
Funny how many of the profiles saying its her choice are the same ones that where incredibly sensitive and all over me on a different thread, continuously questioning whether "threatening behaviour and violence" took place.
Despite me saying several times neither of the two crimes took place they where incredibly concerned about showing punting in a negative light and had an uncontrollable urge to voice their disapproval.Its good to have  members with such outstanding moral fibre.

However these same member seem to support the working girls RIGHT to be racist and their advise is simple...move on.
Stealthagger is one of the few profiles that openly disapproved on this behaviour which is 100% racial discrimination beyond doubt.

The excuses to support this behaviour and apply different excuses such  as choice etc  are ridiculous.
Would you support someones choice to be violent and display threatening behaviour ?

Or a WGS choice to give a bad service, not deliver, not turn up ??.....all these are choices

Bottom line is many obviously have less of an issue with racism so are prepared to let it slide on by without a problem.
Nothing negative about racism and racial discrimination...right.

Also noticed in another thread nobody took exception to this comment.

So she has a big black pimp, no surprise there.     :vomit:
Trollop.    :thumbsdown:

LanceVance
Personally I think your calls are falling on deaf ears as many of those your debating with feel individuals have the right to be racist by choice and are happy to ignore any instance.




« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 12:48:39 PM by Sadgit »

Offline vorian

Tut tut tut...not even a hello.

What I find interesting is many of the profiles that are saying "its her choice... etc" are indirectly saying "its ok to practice racial discrimination if its your choice".

Last I checked "racial discrimination" was illegal.
Funny how many of the profiles saying its her choice are the same ones that where incredibly sensitive and all over me on a different thread, continuously questioning whether "threatening behaviour and violence" took place.
Despite me saying several times neither of the two crimes took place they where incredibly concerned about showing punting in a negative light and had an uncontrollable urge to voice their disapproval.Its good to have  members with such outstanding moral fibre.

However these same member seem to support the working girls RIGHT to be racist and their advise is simple...move on.
Stealthagger is one of the few profiles that openly disapproved on this behaviour which is 100% racial discrimination beyond doubt.

The excuses to support this behaviour and apply different excuses such  as choice etc  are ridiculous.
Would you support someones choice to be violent and display threatening behaviour ?

Or a WGS choice to give a bad service, not deliver, not turn up ??.....all these are choices

Bottom line is many obviously have less of an issue with racism so are prepared to let it slide on by without a problem.
Nothing negative about racism and racial discrimination...right.

Also noticed in another thread nobody took exception to this comment.

LanceVance
Personally I think your calls are falling on deaf ears as many of those your debating with feel individuals have the right to be racist by choice and are happy to ignore any instance.

OK you make some excellent points and please note this is a Devils Advocate position, so out of interest, what do you think the solution to this problem is, it is is a subject that comes up time and time again. Not only on this forum but also SAAFE and PN.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

lets remember she is selling her body , and she has some righst as to who she sells it to, some girls put age limits on, but no one questions this, last week we had a thread about a black girl that offered better services to black men, IE OWO , but would not offer OWO to white men

at the end of the day (spoken with a david beckham accent) it's the girls choice to decide who she wants to see, and if you fall into a catorgory IE white, black, to old, to young, then we have to accept the girls wishes and move on and find a girl thats happy to see you

I never punt with african black girls because I don't find them attractive, but I have no issues with colour  as there is good and bad in all

Offline Sadgit

OK you make some excellent points
Thank you.


Please note this is a Devils Advocate position, so out of interest, what do you think the solution to this problem is, it is is a subject that comes up time and time again. Not only on this forum but also SAAFE and PN.

From one Devil to another.
There isn't  a solution as racism and other forms of discrimination have existed for centuries.

That doesnt mean we should turn a blind eye or as in some cases defend it as a personal choice.

Not so long ago I had to interview people for positions.
One guy turned up that had a disability that wouldn't affect the carrying out of the role.
I wanted to give him the job as I thought he was the best candidate.
My directors said NO as they thought it would put some of their clients off and have a negative effect on business.
None of them had a problem with disabilities (they said) but couldn't vouch for their customers.
One of them even said is it contagious….fucking ignorance.

I handed in my notice.
Nothing I could do to get him the job but I wasn't going to support an establishment that practised discrimination.It was their choice not to give that poor guy the job but my choice not to support discrimination.

What I see here is the same thing.
There is little you can do to stop it but I see many supporting it and giving fucking ignorant excuses to warrant it such as choice.

Offline Sadgit

lets remember she is selling her body , and she has some righst as to who she sells it to, some girls put age limits on, but no one questions this, last week we had a thread about a black girl that offered better services to black men, IE OWO , but would not offer OWO to white men

at the end of the day (spoken with a david beckham accent) it's the girls choice to decide who she wants to see, and if you fall into a catorgory IE white, black, to old, to young, then we have to accept the girls wishes and move on and find a girl thats happy to see you

I never punt with african black girls because I don't find them attractive, but I have no issues with colour  as there is good and bad in all

You are very misguided.
In your personal life you can choose who you want for a partner.
Tall girl, slim girl, fat girl, big tits etc.
You could even go on a singles site and write a profile stating your preference....This is all personal choice.

In a professional business capacity you couldn't use your singles profile "Personal choice" as the basis for an ad at the employment agency for a secretary.

If the WG's said they only slept with certain types of men in their private life or where even lesbians and didnt sleep with men at I wouldn't take issue.
However their ads in AW are business ads and business should be open to all and not subject to blatant racism.

The ads are bad enough but the universal acceptance of such ads is more worrying.
The Nazi lost the war RIGHT....and this sort of discrimination was seen throughout the world as a bad thing, did I miss the history class at school which said its ok its your "choice"




 
« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 01:45:03 PM by Sadgit »




Latest videos on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

Latest images on UKEscorting.com (free site!)