Do you see black guys?

[daviemac]

I think typically in your example most punters would just introduce themselves and state their actual race/ethnicity.

A black man would say 'I'm a black guy, is that alright?'
A south asian man would say 'I'm a south asian guy, is that alright?'
An east asian man would say 'I'm an east asian guy, is that alright?'

I don't think anyone would describe themselves as 'coloured'.

I wasn't having a dig at your age or suggesting that being older is anything bad. I mentioned it because although 'coloured' is now very outdated and considered racist, it was commonplace terminology in the UK decades ago, so I suspect you used it without intending to cause offence, as i mentioned in the post.

Welcome to the woke brigade 

I used it as a general description of someone who isn't white leaving the option for the person describing themselves to replace it with what they deem suitable, in the same way as I mentioned several ages. It was not feasible to list all variation of non whites in the post.

However I will not amend my post simply because employment Judge Kirsty Ayre has ruled the term 'coloured' is not racist when used to simply describe someone from an ethnic minority background as a one-off comment in a case brought before her.

External Link/Members Only

So the courts have rules that coloured is not racist, but you mentioning age IS ageist and is something I find extremely offensive and that has nothing to do with my age.

You are happy to pull someone up when a term is used as a one off general description that has legally been defined as not racist yet post something far worse yourself.

[Snagbadjer]

I've seen "no black" quite a few times in both Thai and (to a lesser degree) Brazilian. I've had more than one tell me they've been robbed by one and aren't taking any more chances. There are also certain towns and cities they screw their face up in disgust when you ask where they've toured before.

[Colston36]

I think it's in AW t&c, and will look this up in the help centre.

As has been mentioned previously, the sex contract is not a normal or usual contract because of the nature of sex and consent.

Found in the AW T&C;a

8.3.   Any advertising included in Content must not:

Prejudice respect for human dignity.
Include or promote discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, nationality, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation.
Encourage behavior prejudicial to health or safety.

Providing sexual pleasure is not like running a  grocers. It is, to say the least, uniquely intimate. Every now and then  in life commonsense  is paramount.

[Snagbadjer]

Providing sexual pleasure is not like running a  grocers. It is, to say the least, uniquely intimate. Every now and then  in life commonsense  is paramount.

SPs should be able to pick and choose to see/not see whoever they want.

[Colston36]

I’ve had a SP apologise to me over the phone,
“Sorry I don’t see black men” 🤷🏼

I think we should all have every right to deal or not with the people we choose be it because of their colour or for any other reason, or this is not a free country.

[Norwichwood]

And we get to choose so why shouldn't the SP. Some of us like Thai girls - some don't each to their own. And if some ladies not seeing black guys - just find one that does - there will be plenty. Don't worry we're all getting laid.

[Snagbadjer]

I think we should all have every right to deal or not with the people we choose be it because of their colour or for any other reason, or this is not a free country.

We certainly don't live in a free country. As a punter, I don't have any biases as regards to race. I favour Brazilians but they are multiracial. And Thais are just readily available, I don't necessarily like them more than any other racial group.

I get the sense that with the "no blacks" rule a few SPs have, it's not so much that they don't like black people (they worship money, not a person's phenotype). But a lot of them seem to have a tale to tell about getting robbed or threatened or harassed by one. I remember seeing a Thai SP who said she'd been robbed by one and he threatened her and took her day's earnings. It put her off touring big cities and she said she preferred places like Lincoln, Wales etc. as it's safer for her.

[MaxVerstappen]

I think we should all have every right to deal or not with the people we choose be it because of their colour or for any other reason, or this is not a free country.

Is this a question or a statement? Either way where have you been, it’s stopped being a free country ever since the police officers show up on your doorstep because of a Facebook post, think about it pal. You are not allowed to say what’s on your mind anymore…

[Fitsarahgfe]

I get the sense that with the "no blacks" rule a few SPs have, it's not so much that they don't like black people (they worship money, not a person's phenotype). But a lot of them seem to have a tale to tell about getting robbed or threatened or harassed by one. I remember seeing a Thai SP who said she'd been robbed by one and he threatened her and took her day's earnings. It put her off touring big cities and she said she preferred places like Lincoln, Wales etc. as it's safer for her.

Throughout my long-ish career I’ve spoken to many girls, and of course, that’s what it has always been about, not sexual preferences or racism. Girls don’t feel safe.

[BrixtonBrewers]

I used it as a general description of someone who isn't white leaving the option for the person describing themselves to replace it with what they deem suitable, in the same way as I mentioned several ages. It was not feasible to list all variation of non whites in the post.

However I will not amend my post simply because employment Judge Kirsty Ayre has ruled the term 'coloured' is not racist when used to simply describe someone from an ethnic minority background as a one-off comment in a case brought before her.

External Link/Members Only

So the courts have rules that coloured is not racist, but you mentioning age IS ageist and is something I find extremely offensive and that has nothing to do with my age.

You are happy to pull someone up when a term is used as a one off general description that has legally been defined as not racist yet post something far worse yourself.

Instead of using 'coloured' You could have listed several races like you did with ages, I don't see why that wasn't feasible.

I didn't ever suggest you should amend your post, I just thought it was worth flagging that the term is outdated and generally considered offensive/racist, while at the same time acknowledging that you hadn't said it with any ill-intent.

I can't see in the article you posted where judge Kirsty Ayre states it's not a racist term, just that the incident being reviewed in court didn't amount to racial harassment.

Apologies that the age comment extremely offended you. No offence was intended at all, i (perhaps wrongly) assumed that when you so casually used the term 'coloured' you were unaware that the term was outdated and considered offensive/racist, but I think you're now suggesting otherwise, and that you were already aware, but you disagree with it?

[BrixtonBrewers]

Throughout my long-ish career I’ve spoken to many girls, and of course, that’s what it has always been about, not sexual preferences or racism. Girls don’t feel safe.

If somebody considers another person to be more dangerous purely because of the colour of their skin, that is 100% racism, there's no other description for it.

It's still of course totally up to the providers who they see as clients, and they don't need to justify it to anybody if they don't want to.

[Snagbadjer]

If somebody considers another person to be more dangerous purely because of the colour of their skin, that is 100% racism, there's no other description for it.

It's still of course totally up to the providers who they see as clients, and they don't need to justify it to anybody if they don't want to.

Accusing an SP who has been assaulted and robbed as "racist" for wanting to reduce risk to themselves in the future is a despicable thing to say.

[Fitsarahgfe]

If somebody considers another person to be more dangerous purely because of the colour of their skin, that is 100% racism, there's no other description for it.

No, it’s a risk assessment based on their personal experiences. And for some a way of avoiding having to revisit past trauma.

I see people from all backgrounds, but I don’t think it’s my place to label other women as racist or xenophobic (girls do avoid certain nationalities too, including european ones) for their choices.

It is all sad, yes, I’m sure we can agree on that.

[BrixtonBrewers]

No, it’s a risk assessment based on their personal experiences. And for some a way of avoiding having to revisit past trauma.

I see people from all backgrounds, but I don’t think it’s my place to label other women as racist or xenophobic (girls do avoid certain nationalities too, including european ones) for their choices.

It is all sad, yes, I’m sure we can agree on that.

Yes - avoiding revisiting past trauma is very understandable and that's totally different.

My statement was completely factual though.

[daviemac]

Instead of using 'coloured' You could have listed several races like you did with ages, I don't see why that wasn't feasible.

I didn't ever suggest you should amend your post, I just thought it was worth flagging that the term is outdated and generally considered offensive/racist, while at the same time acknowledging that you hadn't said it with any ill-intent.

I can't see in the article you posted where judge Kirsty Ayre states it's not a racist term, just that the incident being reviewed in court didn't amount to racial harassment.

Apologies that the age comment extremely offended you. No offence was intended at all, i (perhaps wrongly) assumed that when you so casually used the term 'coloured' you were unaware that the term was outdated and considered offensive/racist, but I think you're now suggesting otherwise, and that you were already aware, but you disagree with it?

Give it up mate, just remember when you're getting on your high horse about what you perceive to be political correctness to practice what you preach and don't use ageist terms.

Maybe read the article again. I used the term coloured as an innocuous 'catch all' term to assist members with how to communicate with SPs to get the best results yet you have turned it into accusing me of racism, something I am not.

Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only

If you genuinely think I'm racist then report me do not derail this thread any further.

[Fitsarahgfe]

Yes - avoiding revisiting past trauma is very understandable and that's totally different.

My statement was completely factual though.

Okay, but using this logic, we have many, many xenophobes on this forum- guys who avoid for example romanian SPs. But instead of labelling them as such, we leave them alone. So why not extend the same courtesy to girls who choose not to see guys of certain races or nationalities?

[Garyhart]

If somebody considers another person to be more dangerous purely because of the colour of their skin, that is 100% racism, there's no other description for it.

It's still of course totally up to the providers who they see as clients, and they don't need to justify it to anybody if they don't want to.

Agreed. They can see who they want but it’s still racism. We can read reports from a publicly available SP forum and see complaints about men stealing, stealthing and many more heinous acts come from white, black, south asian and many more men.

Why not ban other minority groups en masse too after reading their negative reports?

[LLPunting]

Agreed. They can see who they want but it’s still racism. We can read reports from a publicly available SP forum and see complaints about men stealing, stealthing and many more heinous acts come from white, black, south asian and many more men.

Why not ban other minority groups en masse too after reading their negative reports?

Sadly it's about the proportion of certain types who cause trouble in any given area based on the experience of the crew as much as the ladies themselves.  Also some nutters of all types stalk some of these ladies and thus even if she moves to another area she may well stick to her proscriptions as well as check punters out on the street before giving them the actual address.

[Garyhart]

Sadly it's about the proportion of certain types who cause trouble in any given area based on the experience of the crew as much as the ladies themselves.  Also some nutters of all types stalk some of these ladies and thus even if she moves to another area she may well stick to her proscriptions as well as check punters out on the street before giving them the actual address.

Not disagreeing but if we read the SP forum I’m talking about, the warnings and wasters section to be precise, a large chunk of reports about men pushing boundaries (stealthing, forcing them to do services that the SP didn’t consent to), it’s south asian men who are disproportionately overrepresented in the complaints. These are complaints from SPs on a public domain.

Question is why don’t we see more SPs having no South Asians allowed then?

My wider point is that you see men of other races / ethnicities doing bad things and SPs will ban them specifically, but it’s clearly racist to not apply that same logic to black punters. Why should an entire race of men be implicated for the actions of a minority when the same doesn’t happen for other races?

[Mmmaah!]

It’s because white punters form the overwhelming majority of a SP’s customer base. Even in London that would be the case.
No SP is going to blanket ban white punters, no matter how many bad experiences they had with white punters as doing so would drastically reduce their income.

[Garyhart]

It’s because white punters form the overwhelming majority of a SP’s customer base. Even in London that would be the case.
No SP is going to blanket ban white punters, no matter how many bad experiences they had with white punters as doing so would drastically reduce their income.

Agreed…..but my specific primary question (in a standalone paragraph for a reason) was about South Asian punters (SAAFE reports which has way more reports on them in the most recent pages vs other groups), which you ignored to give an answer to my secondary question, which inadvertently proves my point

[LLPunting]

Not disagreeing but if we read the SP forum I’m talking about, the warnings and wasters section to be precise, a large chunk of reports about men pushing boundaries (stealthing, forcing them to do services that the SP didn’t consent to), it’s south asian men who are disproportionately overrepresented in the complaints. These are complaints from SPs on a public domain.

Question is why don’t we see more SPs having no South Asians allowed then?

My wider point is that you see men of other races / ethnicities doing bad things and SPs will ban them specifically, but it’s clearly racist to not apply that same logic to black punters. Why should an entire race of men be implicated for the actions of a minority when the same doesn’t happen for other races?

How representative is that forum of the whole community?
I'm pretty certain most of the SPs I've seen across the years did/do not use it much if at all. Perhaps if I punted in areas with larger pops of S Asian men I might hear more from the SPs to their detriment 
Of course there are the weird behavioural Venn diags that may be at play, e.g. Are Thai girls sought more by African origin men compared to S Asians?  maybe Chinese are more avoided than sought by S Asians  maybe the Chinese are popular with the S Asians because in those catchment areas the achinese offer bb!? 
I've mentioned before that Bayswater (and environs) had a bunch of complaints about various unpleasant behaviours by the Middle Easterners around there.  As I said it's types within the context of paid sex and catchment areas but if the catchment areas preferred by any given SP are otherwise better business too then exclusions may seem universal when they aren't.  And some of our fellow punters have reviewed encounters with SPs who would otherwise have excluded them.

[Strawberry]

Because of my location and age, I tend to be booked primarily but not exclusively by white, British, over 40s - and this applies even when booked by punters in other areas or who travel (quite a few of those who book me are travelling for one reason or another, and or travelling to me/asking me to travel).

That said there is not a pattern of bad experiences linked to any one single demographic. Those who I have had to speak to the police about have been white, male, over 30.

Some people say older 'mature' men make better clients. In my experience some are, some are not and the majority of difficult, dangerous punters/clients I encounter (and I do and they are not uncommon) are (but not exclusively) white, British, over 30. Interestingly despite common belief, I find those in their 20s to be less problematic, could be a numbers thing, but as I get older I seem to be attracting those attracted to MILFs, perhaps that selects out those who have honed in on me.

I am certain someone younger, in a different geographic and urban location, may have different experiences. I can only reflect on my own.

[Mr Sinister]

Not disagreeing but if we read the SP forum I’m talking about, the warnings and wasters section to be precise, a large chunk of reports about men pushing boundaries (stealthing, forcing them to do services that the SP didn’t consent to), it’s south asian men who are disproportionately overrepresented in the complaints. These are complaints from SPs on a public domain.

Question is why don’t we see more SPs having no South Asians allowed then?

My wider point is that you see men of other races / ethnicities doing bad things and SPs will ban them specifically, but it’s clearly racist to not apply that same logic to black punters. Why should an entire race of men be implicated for the actions of a minority when the same doesn’t happen for other races?

I've seen ads with stating no Asians(South) also spoke to a wgs that filtered them out over the phone.

I'm just going on a theory so don't shoot me, but could it largely do with the fact a lot of the properties wg work out of are Asian owned? The girls or even Sergei don't want any backlash or difficulties finding places to operate in effect make money. Where's black landlords are a minority in this country, it's much more easier to impose the ban with no real repercussions

[koshkaj]

If somebody considers another person to be more dangerous purely because of the colour of their skin, that is 100% racism, there's no other description for it.

It's still of course totally up to the providers who they see as clients, and they don't need to justify it to anybody if they don't want to.

Totally agreed. It is is a losing battle on this forum though, somehow labelling a entire set of people by the actions of one (or a few) is somehow not discriminatory, and there are a myriad of other names/excuses given to it. Then the old chesnut of "are you saying escorts should be forced to have sex with people they do not want to?" gets brought out, which is obviously not the case. Escorts are free to determine who they will and will not see for whatever reason, they can avoid revisiting past trauma, all of these are valid, but it still doesn't change the central statement.

I did see one SP somewhere who stated something along the lines of "I do not see certain races, and I refuse to explain my reasons why".

Okay, but using this logic, we have many, many xenophobes on this forum- guys who avoid for example romanian SPs. But instead of labelling them as such, we leave them alone. So why not extend the same courtesy to girls who choose not to see guys of certain races or nationalities?

I avoid Romainian SPs, based solely on their reputation and I can admit that this is xenophobic as you claim, moreso as I have never visited one. If I was to be labelled as such by the community, I would accept it (because it is the truth) rather than try to justify it. Same case if I was to see a Romanian SP and have a negative experience and then used that to reinforce never booking them again.

[Garyhart]

Totally agreed. It is is a losing battle on this forum though, somehow labelling a entire set of people by the actions of one (or a few) is somehow not discriminatory, and there are a myriad of other names/excuses given to it. Then the old chesnut of "are you saying escorts should be forced to have sex with people they do not want to?" gets brought out, which is obviously not the case. Escorts are free to determine who they will and will not see for whatever reason, they can avoid revisiting past trauma, all of these are valid, but it still doesn't change the central statement.

I did see one SP somewhere who stated something along the lines of "I do not see certain races, and I refuse to explain my reasons why".

I avoid Romainian SPs, based solely on their reputation and I can admit that this is xenophobic as you claim, moreso as I have never visited one. If I was to be labelled as such by the community, I would accept it (because it is the truth) rather than try to justify it. Same case if I was to see a Romanian SP and have a negative experience and then used that to reinforce never booking them again.

I appreciate this honesty even though it’s not right, you’re not trying to dance around the topic.

[daviemac]

I avoid Romainian SPs, based solely on their reputation and I can admit that this is xenophobic as you claim, moreso as I have never visited one. If I was to be labelled as such by the community, I would accept it (because it is the truth) rather than try to justify it. Same case if I was to see a Romanian SP and have a negative experience and then used that to reinforce never booking them again.

Speaking as a member. Why are punters like yourself who choose to exclude certain nationalities not called out on the forum as racist? Why is it only escorts? why aren't escorts with a no blacks policy called xenophobic as that's what they are and without other actions xenophobia is not in itself racist.

[chrisintcov]

There was a thread a year or two ago about avoiding particular groups of SPs.  Both myself and Red Kettle (a forum helper) were accused by another user of being Nazis for wanting to avoid Romanians.  It’s a subject that can quickly descend into abuse. I only punt occasionally and I am looking for very specific attributes from a SP, being able to talk fluently throughout a longer booking is one of them, which tends to be the preserve of British girls or girls that have been here for years.  I also find sexually that black girls do nothing for me.  Am I to be compelled to book a girl I am not attracted to?

[koshkaj]

I appreciate this honesty even though it’s not right, you’re not trying to dance around the topic.

My preference is to not see Romanians SPs, but that's all it is, a preference, it is not an exclusion, which are different things in my view. I am not against seeing any Romanians, I just put more work into checking their reviews and profiles and did not see one I felt was worth the risk until recently. I am actually in the process of trying to arrange a punt with a Romanian SP today funnily enough

Speaking as a member. Why are punters like yourself who choose to exclude certain nationalities not called out on the forum as racist? Why is it only escorts? why aren't escorts with a no blacks policy called xenophobic as that's what they are and without other actions xenophobia is not in itself racist.

All good questions, I do not have a definitive answer.

I would say though, that nationality discrimination does not seem as bad. Nationality gives you an idea (which admittedly may not be correct) of the nature of the person you are potentially meeting. As this thread is about Black people, i'll follow in this vein. A Black person from Nigeria is not going to the be same as a Black person from Jamaica, is not going to the same as a Black person from The UK, is not going to be the same as a Black person from The US. They have been raised in different countries, with different values, life experiences and attitudes to women which shape the person they are. "I do not see Jamaicans", for example is totally different, imho, from stating "I do not see Black people". The colour of someone's skin has zero to do with the person they are or how they treat others. Their background and culture has far more impact. There is no perfect solution as the Jamaicans are still being negatively grouped together, but I do not have all the answers.

I think that there is more noise about the NBA SPs because those it affects, resent that they are all being tarred with the same brush, they are the most excluded demographic by far, and it is worldwide, no matter where the SP is from. Also as this is a review forum, a new SP that everyone is raving about naturally gains a lot of interest, only for them to discover that said SP has an NBA, and a lot of the time the reviewers, who it does not apply to don't bother to mention it. I can imagine reading the rave reviews, lusting over the pictures, checking the profile to see when she comes to your area and then finally making contact to be told "NBA" is going to become wearing after the first couple of times. Or worse, reaching the apartment and being turned away at the door. That experience would carry on every punt, you would never know for sure until they lay eyes on you, what their reaction will be. Eventually, you can start every communication with an SP with "I am a Black male", as the OP has advised, which would feel more than a little dehumanising.

Also i will again caveat all of this by saying SPs should be able to see whoever they want and no, they should not have to see punters they do not want to. If anyone wants to call me a racist for not seeing Romanian SPs (so far), or if i get a booking with one which turns out to be negative and I resume not booking them, i'll gladly accept it. 

[koshkaj]

I also find sexually that black girls do nothing for me.  Am I to be compelled to book a girl I am not attracted to?

This is similar to the "Should SPs have to see punters they do not want to?" line. No, you are not to be compelled to book girls that you are not attracted to.

However, it does not sit right with some others that out of all the Black girls out there, you have put out a blanket statement (which you are entitled to do), stating that they all do nothing for you. "I have nothing against Black girls, they are just not attractive/not attractive to me or "You're very attractive for a Black girl" have a whole other set of discussions to be had.

But no matter, you do you, nobody has the right to force you otherwise.