Popular media on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

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


Author Topic: Anyone else ever got a full refund? And even when the parlour refused?  (Read 5429 times)

Offline Shade

The use of the term "misogyny" is just gratuitous insult.
No ordinary, normal man in any way hates women; the problem is very much the reverse: there are deep biological roots of prejudice towards men generically (the great bulk of necessary lower-status men), and nothing corresponding re women.
This is compounded by the political-left backlash against ordinary people that we call PC: this is a contempt for those fka 'the workers', typically white males.
The end result is the real problem: misandry (hatred towards men).
Anyone who uses the term 'misogynist' is a misandrist.

Hah, your logic there is so mental I don't know where to begin! I mean...It's just...Nah, I'm speechless, that's just the biggest pile of nonsense I've ever heard and if you truly believe it there's no point in responding to it.

Offline sheffsteve

You wouldn't know the first thing about "logic" if it was a ring through yer nose, 'Shade'.
Evidently you don't know the first thing about politics, psychology, or any other subject, I'd bet; nor how to argue your way out of the proverbial paper bag, even with full 'elf 'n safety instructions.

Offline smiths

I have read some of the biggest shit on this thread since becoming a member here.

Personally i couldnt care less if the OPs posted events happened or not, it may be jackanory, it may not, i dont know or have anyway of finding out.

Offline smiths

You wouldn't know the first thing about "logic" if it was a ring through yer nose, 'Shade'.
Evidently you don't know the first thing about politics, psychology, or any other subject, I'd bet; nor how to argue your way out of the proverbial paper bag, even with full 'elf 'n safety instructions.

Shade is in reality a good and balanced poster on here in my experience, the tone of this post reminds me of the horrific The Donkey Work who you had a problem with as did i actually. Surely you dont want to post like him.

Offline Wife4rent

  • Banned
  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 437
I have read some of the biggest shit on this thread since becoming a member here.

It's just good healthy debate

Personally i couldnt care less if the OPs posted events happened or not, it may be jackanory, it may not, i dont know or have anyway of finding out.

But the jury is out and the verdict will be in shortly, no evidence required, like in a real court, you can still be found guilty without evidence, there is a word / phrase for it, I am sure somebody will know it

Offline sheffsteve

Well out-of-her-depth ignorance with not a smidgen of constructive comment or counter point deserves pointing out, Smiths; even if she does post sensibly on other topics.

Offline smiths

It's just good healthy debate

But the jury is out and the verdict will be in shortly, no evidence required, like in a real court, you can still be found guilty without evidence, there is a word / phrase for it, I am sure somebody will know it

I have zero interest in the views of an underhand WG who fucks punters over and crows about it. You are the lowest of the low in my eyes for your treating of punters.

Your views on anything are invalidated to me by your diabolical treatment of punters and as such you are beneath my contempt, i respect an ant more.

Offline smiths

Well out-of-her-depth ignorance with not a smidgen of constructive comment or counter point deserves pointing out, Smiths; even if she does post sensibly on other topics.

Shade is a male.

Offline Wife4rent

  • Banned
  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 437

Offline sheffsteve

And there was I being relatively polite to a pretty face!

Offline GlasgowGirl

  • Banned
  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 624
We've just got rid of the Donkeywork buffoon, and here we have another quite badly cerebrally challenged individual.
Does GG know anything much about either men/ women or current politics?
She even uses the term “incorrect”, without twigging the guffaws it induces.

As for the conjecture that if I made such statements as a public figure I'd be for the high jump: actually I have made lots of such statements as a public figure in the recent past -- on the BBC, ITV, C4 and Sky News, writing pieces for national newspapers, and having academic books published. As for the future: I'm to make a film for BBC1 about the sort of PC-fascism GG spouts here.

The misrepresentation of what I wrote is an utter scream. Apparently, I said that women have an in-built desire to rip men off!
Is GG on Chrystal meth or something?

I've concisely explained the law, which is as straightforward as law comes. It's hardly rocket science.
Why doesn't she email the police station at Sale and enquire?

Ask them about Bliss parlour and if they have successfully acted on any complaints they've had from clients.
Nudge 'em that it's a guy from Sheffield called Steve, who got a full refund. They can't have forgotten; not least because they raided the place shortly afterwards.

Sorry you are a bloody idiot. Had to say that  :lol:.  I am neither cerebrally challenged nor a 'PC-facist'. Bragging about your TV appearances, academic books blah blah blah does not mean you know anything about the law in this country, nor the role of the police. I have a full qualification in Law, although funnily enough I prefer Sex Work! In fact I'm not surprised you write pieces for national newspapers - the sort of tripe they come out with is very similar to your first post (well unless you have made that one up as well!).

Even some well respected punters on here have come out saying they think you are talking bullshit.

The mods can get rid of me if they like - then although I will be missing out, everyone else can be treated to your entertaining little stories  :rolleyes: Keep on dreaming them up whilst everyone else gets on with either punting / making money!

Offline sheffsteve

Actually I'm highly intelligent, perceptive, very well educated, and an original thinker, whereas you're utterly clueless, with nothing to say.
You've shown you don't even know law as basic as that re breach of the peace, so it's clear who's the bullshitter.

Offline cunnyhunt

Actually I'm highly intelligent, perceptive, very well educated, and an original thinker, whereas you're utterly clueless, with nothing to say.
You've shown you don't even know law as basic as that re breach of the peace, so it's clear who's the bullshitter.

Is there a reason that this site attracts such c****? do we think Brian has relatives?

He writes books, pieces for newspapers, makes programmes for the BBC, ITV etc  and yet is quite happy to be linked to a police raid on a brothel where he got his money back after complaining that he did not get his cock serviced.
I have only been here a few years but even I know that the slightest hint of association with a brothel raid and he would not work for one of those again.

He is plainly a C*** and full of b******t, he is clearly a deluded fantasist.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2011, 09:36:53 AM by softlad »

Offline sheffsteve

Extreme abuse reported to mod.

Why are pinhead abusive, non-constructive provider-side apologists allowed to post?>

Offline GlasgowGirl

  • Banned
  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 624
Actually I'm highly intelligent, perceptive, very well educated, and an original thinker, whereas you're utterly clueless, with nothing to say.
You've shown you don't even know law as basic as that re breach of the peace, so it's clear who's the bullshitter.

Way to blow your own trumpet eh!
You are boring me now. I did not spend 18 months doing a post-grad law degree for nothing, so yes I do know law. Hell, I even gave up whoring those whole 18 months when I was 21 to do that course, I assure you I wouldn't just lose all that whoring cash for nothing!

Offline sheffsteve

Then perhaps GG can quote us the law on 'breach of the peace'?
That should be fun.

The standard phrase used in arrest is: ''for behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace'.
Self-evidently this is nothing to do with a breach of the peace having occurred.
The entire point of police intervention is to prevent a breach of the peace from taking place.
So far as I'm aware, there is no restriction on the police re the scope for applying the law in this regard, which is why its use crops up in all sorts of situations, in any publicly accessible space -- which certainly would run to a parlour reception area and outside the parlour main entrance.

Maybe GG should ask Sale Police for a handout on basic law for coppers?

Offline GlasgowGirl

  • Banned
  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 624
Perhaps you should stop googling stuff and keep on appearing on TV or whatever else it is you do  :rolleyes:

Also, addressing me indirectly... "perhaps GG should do this, maybe GG should do that" is just daft.

'Women playing on male's inbuilt aversion to violence (!)' as you put it and perhaps a parlour owner raising their voice at you and refusing you a refund for not having your cock serviced properly (which is your word against the Wgs, not provable or evidenced) is NOT, could NOT possibly be construed as "behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace"  :lol: It is inconceivable. THAT is what I was saying. I can quote you pretty much any law you like, but what would be the point, since none of it is relevant to your little story anyway.

Perhaps the Sale of Goods act would be apply however - you believed the prostitute who's time you hired to be "not of satisfactory quality" and/or "not fit for purpose"  :D There are remedies available for this - small claims court being one of them - Could be a bit embarrassing for you though, considering all your public appearances!

Offline sheffsteve

Being an abusive know-nothing, GG doesn't warrant direct address; and if I was like her I'd refer to her with a simple expletive.

Abuse and threatening behaviour by a parlour owner in the parlour reception area and at the door is clearly behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace.
This would have been recorded on the parlour's cctv, together with the parlour owner's refusal to reimburse me without explanation despite my polite and reasonable request and explanation.
The idiot owner didn't even pretend that I might have had some sort of service and therefore not deserving of a refund. She just pretended that it had nothing to do with her, when clearly it had everything to do with her, being her business.

It was in conjunction with the police that I sent the parlour owner a formal notice to pay a full refund or I'd go to the County Court, and bring with me Manchester Evening News and regional TV. It would be a great novel 'human interest' story for them.
Friends, acquaintances, relatives and many others know my views on prostitution and that I use parlours/escorts, so there would be no embarrassment for me. On the contrary, I relish giving a comeuppance to those who think they can shit on people; especially when politics and prejudice is involved.

GG has a pretty obvious contempt for men, so she's a wg to be avoided.

GG has a pretty obvious contempt for men, so she's a wg to be avoided.

I don't know sheffsteve, nothing in her posts suggests that to me.  Look at the quote below.

I believe it's best to take each person or situation as they come - I have had some awful experiences with punters but I am still here 4 years later because I take each person as they come - I do not tolerate shit, but I do not tar everyone with the same brush. I have have also had some run-ins with other providers ripping me off and also stalking me via text. People are people, not classified into "punters" and "providers" - people.

Very sensible view IMO.

Offline Shade

You wouldn't know the first thing about "logic" if it was a ring through yer nose, 'Shade'.
Evidently you don't know the first thing about politics, psychology, or any other subject, I'd bet; nor how to argue your way out of the proverbial paper bag, even with full 'elf 'n safety instructions.

Okay, perhaps I over-reacted in my initial post, I apologise, and should have put it in more careful ways. But that's needlessly rude, you don't know anything about me - and to suggest I don't know the first thing about "any other subject" is just plain bizarre.

I'd be interested in having a reasonable discussion about your thoughts if that's possible though. The first statement that bothered me is this:

"No ordinary, normal man in any way hates women; the problem is very much the reverse: there are deep biological roots of prejudice towards men generically (the great bulk of necessary lower-status men), and nothing corresponding re women."

I just don't believe that to be the case at all. Women have been on the receiving end of a male dominated society for centuries, and whilst things are slowly changing, in many ways women still have it far far worse than men do. Look at how rape victims are often treated, and the hideously low conviction rate for instance.

And why do you think that there are "deep biological roots of prejudice towards men" - are you suggesting that from birth men are denegrated and looked down upon? As I see very little evidence of that. Sure, some people may treat men like that, but given how our society is structured, it's clear that that is not the case all of the time.

This was the comment that really bothered me though:

"Anyone who uses the term 'misogynist' is a misandrist."

Because I don't think that's true. Going back to your first statement - "No ordinary, normal man in any way hates women" that's very true. But unfortunately there are a lot of men who don't fit that description. Men who have had hideous upbringings, men who have had events happen to them which have led them to hate women, and men who unfortunately from various ages are psychologically unwell. I've met some in real life, and it's horrible to see. It shouldn't be the case, but it is.

And before anyone suggests otherwise - the exact opposite applies to women too of course, and in both cases - men and women - it's all rather tragic that life has turned them in to that person.

So to suggest that anyone who uses the term misogynist automatically hates men, well, I think that's just not correct at all. Sorry. But I do think that's the case.

I'd be interested in your view though, and if you can provide evidence to back up your beliefs I'd be fascinated to read it.

Offline sheffsteve

Hi Shade

Thank you for your post.
I reacted to your over-reaction, so maybe we should call it quits.

I research the biological roots of human sociality with a particular interest in the sexes. I'm published as papers in science journals and books. I also research and write re the politics of the political-left backlash against the mass of ordinary people (specifically men; they being the stereotypical 'worker' of old that the left now hates): what we call PC.
So I didn't make the statements off the top of my head.
I suppose this is not really the forum to start from first principles, bring out all of the details and the evidence for this. And even on science forums things can get heated as ideology creeps in to reactions.
Given this, maybe it was a mistake to introduce the topic.
I'll going out in a mo, but I'll have a think if I can usefully summarise, but if I try there will no doubt be floods of abuse and accusations of being a fantacist", a "c***", etc.
If not, maybe I can send you stuff by email if you give me your email address in a pm?

As for the word 'misogyny': this is a complete feminist (PC-fascist) invention. Men generically feel considerate towards women and instinctively hold back from aggressing towards them; whereas there is no corresponding feeling by women. On the contrary, there are evolved psychological mechanisms that produce in-built prejudices towards males other than the minority of those males who are higher-status.
What's interesting is why this should be.
It's down to the deepest biology, tied up with the fact that the female is the 'limiting factor' in reproduction, and the male functions as the 'genetic filter' for the whole lineage (to eliminate accumulation of gene replication error).
..... Er ... see what I mean about appropriateness re this message board?!

Offline Wife4rent

  • Banned
  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 437
Going back to your first statement - "No ordinary, normal man in any way hates women" that's very true. But unfortunately there are a lot of men who don't fit that description. Men who have had hideous upbringings, men who have had events happen to them which have led them to hate women, and men who unfortunately from various ages are psychologically unwell. I've met some in real life, and it's horrible to see. It shouldn't be the case, but it is.

I think this phrase "But unfortunately there are a lot of men who don't fit that description" can be taken out of context to mean a large percentage.

There are a lot of many bad things in this world and on their own they do seem rather a lot, but the truth is there are usually only a very minor percentage of these people compared to the rest of society. taken as a whole the percentage of many of these groups will be less than 1%.

Sometimes we get our perspectives put out by the people we have experience of dealing with or the way things are portrayed by others

PS The rest of it went right over my head, but I blame that on being short

Offline Shade

Yes, I should have been clearer then W4R, and stated "some" rather than "a lot".

And thanks for your reply sheffsteve, I haven't the time to respond now, but am interested in pursuing the discussion - perhaps that might be best left for a topic in the 'off-topic' forum at another time though...

Offline GlasgowGirl

  • Banned
  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 624
Being an abusive know-nothing, GG doesn't warrant direct address; and if I was like her I'd refer to her with a simple expletive.

Abuse and threatening behaviour by a parlour owner in the parlour reception area and at the door is clearly behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace.
This would have been recorded on the parlour's cctv, together with the parlour owner's refusal to reimburse me without explanation despite my polite and reasonable request and explanation.
The idiot owner didn't even pretend that I might have had some sort of service and therefore not deserving of a refund. She just pretended that it had nothing to do with her, when clearly it had everything to do with her, being her business.

It was in conjunction with the police that I sent the parlour owner a formal notice to pay a full refund or I'd go to the County Court, and bring with me Manchester Evening News and regional TV. It would be a great novel 'human interest' story for them.
Friends, acquaintances, relatives and many others know my views on prostitution and that I use parlours/escorts, so there would be no embarrassment for me. On the contrary, I relish giving a comeuppance to those who think they can shit on people; especially when politics and prejudice is involved.

GG has a pretty obvious contempt for men, so she's a wg to be avoided.

Get a grip of yourself. I'm abusive, I know nothing. Ok whatever. And the funniest part - I 'obviously' have contempt for men apparently. Nope, only 'men' like yourself. There are many well respected punters here in Glasgow who would testify that I'm certainly not 'to be avoided'.

The Police would have nothing to do with sending a letter 'in conjunction' with you - your story gets more and more crazy doesn't it! Does anyone think Police actually send letters in conjunction with people who claim they did not get a service in any business?  :D
In your first post they visited the parlour - now you say you wrote a letter 'in conjunction' with them. At least get your story straight.

You would bring with you Manchester Evening News and regional TV? It would be a novel human interest story for them. "Man didn't get proper service at brothel" - has a nice ring to it!

That, and the rest (the scientific 'research' you have undertaken) - wow. just wow. Surely I'm not the only one who thinks this! To be honest, I'm not even going to write what I think of you on a public forum. It's not even just a personal gripe - it's just how unhinged you actually sound / come across. And before you start on me "abusing" you -

Quote
GG doesn't warrant direct address

« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 01:28:41 AM by GlasgowGirl »

Offline sheffsteve

Not only does GG not know basic law, but she makes dogged false assumptions about how police work.
It was at the very suggestion of the police that I wrote to the parlour owner with a demand for a refund to be paid within seven days -- though I would have done this anyway, of course.
The police went to see the owner (as I previously outlined) to lean on her that my demand should be met.
So I was clearly working in conjunction with the police.

Otherwise, I haven't the remotest interest in GG's no-mark imaginings.



Latest videos on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

Latest images on UKEscorting.com (free site!)