Personal security whilst punting

[WaitingforGodot]

This issue of pimps keeps being raised.  In almost four decades of punting, I've met the grand total of three pimps.  In the first case, I ended up round at his home, having tea with him and his wife.  In the other two cases, I shared a nice cup of tea and a lengthy chat about life.  Do you all consistently run into threatening pimps?  As noted, I don't (and I've punted for a long time.)  If you do, I have been very lucky because it's far from my experience.  Keeping raising this issue as if it is a real and regular threat, it seems to me, is only going to fuel the paranoia of those inclined in that direction.

[Cunning Punt]

I would suggest that not doing outcalls to your place solely because of fear of being ripped off is not a response appropriate to the risk.  Of course, it's entirely up to you which decisions you make for yourself and I wouldn't attempt to influence them.  I'm just saying let's be objective about the subject matter.

In terms of keeping our hobby secret obviously being single and not being friends with the neighbours beyond the passing acquaintanceship inevitably involved, domestic privacy is not an issue for me in that sense.

Privacy may not be an issue for you, but it is for some. That's the point. Just because others are in a different situation to you doesn't make it paranoia
While the risks may be low, many of us think 'what's the point of potentially putting ourselves in that position?'

As I said, fear of being ripped off isn't the only concern about outcalls.
My home is home, my hobby is done elsewhere and I like going to different places.

If I were paranoid about being ripped off/beaten up, I wouldn't punt at all, incall or outcall. It's about minimising a variety of risks, which also includes going on reviews/feedback here, avoiding dodgy-looking AW profiles and, in terms of health, avoiding known barebackers

[RedKettle]

I have not read all of the thread so sorry if repeating, but

Security is a personal matter for each of us to determine according to our circumstances and personalities.  What this site does is warn us of the dangers and give advice to follow should we chose to.  That is better than how I was before UKP when I was naively taking risks without thinking about it.

An example being the point raised by the OP - I had not considered it and have now.  Decided I am not bothered and will take the risk, which is fine and others can do something else if they wish.  But at least it prompted the thought.

I suspect for some on here (or at least 1 high profile member) it is a security decision not to post reviews, and again that is fine.

[WaitingforGodot]

Yes, it is fine.  Can I be clear that my posts in this thread have been to raise issues and ask questions and engender an objective discussion of the risks; the aim has NOT been to persuade anyone that I'm right and they're wrong.  Often, in Internet forums, it is assumed that when you post you're view you're trying to win an argument but this has not been my intention.  I have merely tried to point out the conclusions I have reached from many years of punting experience.  It is up to others to judge for themselves how to act, and whether or not they find my contributions useful or influential.

[Garden69]

Yes, it is fine.  Can I be clear that my posts in this thread have been to raise issues and ask questions and engender an objective discussion of the risks; the aim has NOT been to persuade anyone that I'm right and they're wrong.  Often, in Internet forums, it is assumed that when you post you're view you're trying to win an argument but this has not been my intention.  I have merely tried to point out the conclusions I have reached from many years of punting experience.  It is up to others to judge for themselves how to act, and whether or not they find my contributions useful or influential.

Well put Sir. I lift my virtual hat off to you 

[Diehard]

This was something that struck me , when I go to a meet I never carry any ID,credit cards, a strict punting only phone, and of course the exact agreed amount of cash, now what I thought as getting older if anything untoward should happen ,illness, accident, or whatever  by the very nature of what your doing the WG is not going to know who you are, where your from, or any real ID information. If your in the car they could trace you that's assuming they know were it's parked. Am I the only one whose thought about this or is it just me worrying about my own mortality. That would be a very awkward conversation with the family after the event.

Sensible precautions. I park the car at least half a mile away and simply take the cash I need and punting phone.

The day you relax and think you can trust a hooker is the day your pockets get picked and she gets your ID and then the blackmails start. Never trust a hooker.

[WaitingforGodot]

Sensible precautions. I park the car at least half a mile away and simply take the cash I need and punting phone.

The day you relax and think you can trust a hooker is the day your pockets get picked and she gets your ID and then the blackmails start. Never trust a hooker.

39 years punting, 0 blackmail attempts.  My way isn't for everyone but I can only conclude from the above that you enjoy walking for no particular reason.

[Students Notebook]

Sensible precautions. I park the car at least half a mile away and simply take the cash I need and punting phone.

The day you relax and think you can trust a hooker is the day your pockets get picked and she gets your ID and then the blackmails start. Never trust a hooker.

I went to see a Romanian girl in Cromwell Road, Cambridge and parked my car right in front of her (or perhaps I should say their , because there were several girls there ) house on what used to be the front garden.

Little did I know that the residents had complained to the police  and the house was raided soon after my visit.

The house looked like a crack den and I was in two minds about whether  to go in or not, but Luitza was soooo lovely, I couldn't help my self, stupid fool that I am.

I was very, very worried that perhaps a resident or neighbor had photographed my car/numberplate. Gave me a few sleepless nights.

[Silver Birch]

Sensible precautions. I park the car at least half a mile away and simply take the cash I need and punting phone.

Half a mile away??  Perhaps that IS a little paranoia 

[claretandblue]

Half a mile away??  Perhaps that IS a little paranoia 

+1 ,I only travel by tube to my punts so not something I have to worry about,I always use a punting phone but will often take my normal phone (switched off) and my wallet with me especially if it's a girl I have seen before

[Sonny Crockett]

I travel by train to punts so I always have everything with me, which I understand is risky. Fortunately I never had any problems.

[fairfield]

This issue of pimps keeps being raised.  In almost four decades of punting, I've met the grand total of three pimps.  In the first case, I ended up round at his home, having tea with him and his wife.  In the other two cases, I shared a nice cup of tea and a lengthy chat about life.  Do you all consistently run into threatening pimps?  As noted, I don't (and I've punted for a long time.)  If you do, I have been very lucky because it's far from my experience.  Keeping raising this issue as if it is a real and regular threat, it seems to me, is only going to fuel the paranoia of those inclined in that direction.

I do respect your punting experience and credentials, but sadly we seem to be punting in very different universes.
Just 4 months in and mere total of 11 punts, i have 'met' pimps twice. Very first punt had a hatchet faced EE madam barring way out to the front door - a B & S job where the switch was more afraid of the madam than me. No chance of walking without a bust up.
Third punt had chinese pimp and madam parked right outside exit door. Another B & S, - this time switch spoke no english, so had the madam outside shouting at me down the WG's phone to pay up.
Idea of sitting down for "a cup of tea" with these people fills me with dread, never mind the nightmare of inviting them round to mine.
If only i'd had enough paranoia early on, i might of avoided these situations.  Sorry but after a rubber, have come to believe a good dose of paranoia is a punters best protection. 

[Arley Hall]

This issue of pimps keeps being raised.  In almost four decades of punting, I've met the grand total of three pimps.  In the first case, I ended up round at his home, having tea with him and his wife.  In the other two cases, I shared a nice cup of tea and a lengthy chat about life.  Do you all consistently run into threatening pimps?  As noted, I don't (and I've punted for a long time.)  If you do, I have been very lucky because it's far from my experience.  Keeping raising this issue as if it is a real and regular threat, it seems to me, is only going to fuel the paranoia of those inclined in that direction.

Like you - almost four decades of punting - and I've never met or seen a single pimp as far as I'm aware. Admittedly 99.9% of my punts have been in London and the SE ..... but even so. Obviously if people say they are encountering pimps then it must be the case - but I wonder if there are also some folks who get a bit of a thrill out of imagining that there are pimps lurking around. It makes punting feel like some kind of urban video game. Apart from the fact that it's generating unnecessary paranoia, the other thing that concerns me about all this pimp-talk is that it plays into the hands of the pro-criminalisation lobby. Pimps = coercion ..... etc etc etc.

[Diehard]

Half a mile away??  Perhaps that IS a little paranoia 

Better safe than sorry

[Diehard]

I do respect your punting experience and credentials, but sadly we seem to be punting in very different universes.
Just 4 months in and mere total of 11 punts, i have 'met' pimps twice. Very first punt had a hatchet faced EE madam barring way out to the front door - a B & S job where the switch was more afraid of the madam than me. No chance of walking without a bust up.
Third punt had chinese pimp and madam parked right outside exit door. Another B & S, - this time switch spoke no english, so had the madam outside shouting at me down the WG's phone to pay up.
Idea of sitting down for "a cup of tea" with these people fills me with dread, never mind the nightmare of inviting them round to mine.
If only i'd had enough paranoia early on, i might of avoided these situations.  Sorry but after a rubber, have come to believe a good dose of paranoia is a punters best protection.

I'd love to know what gentleman you quoted punted in most regularly as it certainly can't have been the 21st century.

A cup of tea with the pimp? Was that chargeable time I wonder.

My experience of pimps is somewhat different and does not involve cups of tea.

[WaitingforGodot]

I'd love to know what gentleman you quoted punted in most regularly as it certainly can't have been the 21st century.

A cup of tea with the pimp? Was that chargeable time I wonder.

My experience of pimps is somewhat different and does not involve cups of tea.

On the contrary, my four decades of punting suggests that you are the one who's punting in the 19th century.  Modern parlour owners with their websites, their Photoshopped imagery, their discount schemes and their Twitter feeds have realised that being a professional businessman pays financial dividends.  If you provide a safe, comfortable, friendly and discreet environment you'll reap the rewards.  Sure, if you're dumb enough to see solo Asian girls in bedsits or EE exports in hotels there's a greater chance you'll expose yourself to risk at the sharp end of the market but anyone with half a brain doesn't go to those outlets.

No, the cup of tea wasn't chargeable time.  The pimp simply noted that he'd seen me often enough in his venue to know I was a regular customer and he was always interested in feedback from his regulars.  In fact, the next Christmas, I was offered a freebie (which I declined) as thanks for my business over the year.  Your view is extremely jaded and suggests that a). you're punting in the wrong places with the wrong sorts of WGs and b). you don't have broad exposure to the industry.  It's extremely ironic that someone who defines themselves as paranoid seems inclined the punt in the sort of places and with the sort of girls who are MOST likely to cause him problems.  Why?  It's not like there aren't a myriad of safe, high-quality alternatives available.

[Arley Hall]

I travel by train to punts so I always have everything with me, which I understand is risky. Fortunately I never had any problems.

Likewise - I always have everything with me and have never had any problems.

If you went into a restaurant and the waiter offered to hang up your jacket you'd probably take your wallet out of your pocket before handing it over. You need to use basic common sense wherever you are - a WG's flat is no different from any other unfamiliar place away from home.

[Diehard]

On the contrary, my four decades of punting suggests that you are the one who's punting in the 19th century.  Modern parlour owners with their websites, their Photoshopped imagery, their discount schemes and their Twitter feeds have realised that being a professional businessman pays financial dividends.  If you provide a safe, comfortable, friendly and discreet environment you'll reap the rewards.  Sure, if you're dumb enough to see solo Asian girls in bedsits or EE exports in hotels there's a greater chance you'll expose yourself to risk at the sharp end of the market but anyone with half a brain doesn't go to those outlets.

No, the cup of tea wasn't chargeable time.  The pimp simply noted that he'd seen me often enough in his venue to know I was a regular customer and he was always interested in feedback from his regulars.  In fact, the next Christmas, I was offered a freebie (which I declined) as thanks for my business over the year.  Your view is extremely jaded and suggests that a). you're punting in the wrong places with the wrong sorts of WGs and b). you don't have broad exposure to the industry.  It's extremely ironic that someone who defines themselves as paranoid seems inclined the punt in the sort of places and with the sort of girls who are MOST likely to cause him problems.  Why?  It's not like there aren't a myriad of safe, high-quality alternatives available.

Perhaps you would care to enlighten us all to the names and whereabouts of these amazing ultra safe parlours to which you refer.

[Diehard]

Like you - almost four decades of punting - and I've never met or seen a single pimp as far as I'm aware. Admittedly 99.9% of my punts have been in London and the SE ..... but even so. Obviously if people say they are encountering pimps then it must be the case - but I wonder if there are also some folks who get a bit of a thrill out of imagining that there are pimps lurking around. It makes punting feel like some kind of urban video game. Apart from the fact that it's generating unnecessary paranoia, the other thing that concerns me about all this pimp-talk is that it plays into the hands of the pro-criminalisation lobby. Pimps = coercion ..... etc etc etc.

This is an interesting perception. Are you suggesting that most hookers are not run by someone in the background?

[WaitingforGodot]

Perhaps you would care to enlighten us all to the names and whereabouts of these amazing ultra safe parlours to which you refer.

House of Divine
Annabellas MK
MK Escorts
Soft Touch Bodyworks
Massage Northampton
The Hot Box
One 2 One Escorts

Shall I go on?

[WaitingforGodot]

This is an interesting perception. Are you suggesting that most hookers are not run by someone in the background?

No.  I think he's suggesting that the person in the background isn't remotely interested in you for any reason other than encouraging his customers to keep coming back.  Just like any other business.  Don't you think the average pimp has better things to do than threaten his source of income?

[WaitingforGodot]

Diehard I am starting to wonder whether you are a real punter, or just someone who very occasionally plucks up the courage to pay for sex and then revels in the dangerous experience he's exposed himself to, half scared shitless and half thinking "aren't I a lad?"  Your posts in this thread suggest absolutely minimal understanding of or exposure to "the business."

[sigmund]

Managing small risks is something we all do all the time, its not paranoia. I drive at least 50 miles a day,have done for several decades, so far I've not been involved in any serious accidents but I drive a safe car and every time I get in the car I put my seatbelt on, even if it wasn't law I would do the same, not because I'm paranoid but because its sensible to take precautions against uncommon risks, agreed its unlikely they might happen but if they do it could be dreadful. Obviously you can't protect yourself entirely but there is no reason to not to do whatever makes you feel as secure as possible.

As it is I am pretty sure these girls are more interested in our money than our cocks so its not unreasonable to assume that there will be a proportion who would exploit any possibility of getting at the former without having to deal with the latter. 

[Diehard]

Diehard I am starting to wonder whether you are a real punter, or just someone who very occasionally plucks up the courage to pay for sex and then revels in the dangerous experience he's exposed himself to, half scared shitless and half thinking "aren't I a lad?"  Your posts in this thread suggest absolutely minimal understanding of or exposure to "the business."

I'm beginning to wonder if you are perhaps yourself a pimp judging by your defence of the scumbags and increasingly irritated posts.

Oh, some of the parlours you listed I wouldn't go near with a barge pole, they are anything but discreet! So in respect of questioning people's so called credentials, let's just say I have more than a few suspicions about you.

[Diehard]

Managing small risks is something we all do all the time, its not paranoia. I drive at least 50 miles a day,have done for several decades, so far I've not been involved in any serious accidents but I drive a safe car and every time I get in the car I put my seatbelt on, even if it wasn't law I would do the same, not because I'm paranoid but because its sensible to take precautions against uncommon risks, agreed its unlikely they might happen but if they do it could be dreadful. Obviously you can't protect yourself entirely but there is no reason to not to do whatever makes you feel as secure as possible.

As it is I am pretty sure these girls are more interested in our money than our cocks so its not unreasonable to assume that there will be a proportion who would exploit any possibility of getting at the former without having to deal with the latter.

Precisely, you don't need to be sigmund Freud to work that out either.

[WaitingforGodot]

Oh, some of the parlours you listed I wouldn't go near with a barge pole, they are anything but discreet!

You asked if they were ultra-safe.  They all are.  If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it.  I look forward to reading "Personal Danger at House of Divine."

With regard to my being a pimp apologist, I suggest you read my reviews.  Nothing of the sort.  I simply call it as I see it, I have many years of punting experience, and I make my judgments based on the evidence, not old wive's tales.  You claim to have never had a cup of tea or chat with a pimp.  In that case, how can you possibly know what pimps are like?  Anyone who has been around punting for a long period of time will know where the risks lie and which precautions its sensible to take.  Experience helps you define where the line between personal security and paranoia actually falls.

[Diehard]

You asked if they were ultra-safe.  They all are.  If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it.  I look forward to reading "Personal Danger at House of Divine."

With regard to my being a pimp apologist, I suggest you read my reviews.  Nothing of the sort.  I simply call it as I see it, I have many years of punting experience, and I make my judgments based on the evidence, not old wive's tales.  You claim to have never had a cup of tea or chat with a pimp.  In that case, how can you possibly know what pimps are like?  Anyone who has been around punting for a long period of time will know where the risks lie and which precautions its sensible to take.  Experience helps you define where the line between personal security and paranoia actually falls.

With respect you have no clue what you are talking about. The parlours you mention have security cameras and store clients numbers, both of which are unacceptable. They also have girls who have been banned from this site for various reasons.

Pimps tend to appear when a punter isn't stupid enough to be baited and switched and walks. I've had a number of pimps appear demanding payment. I assure you most punters do not enjoy cups of tea with pimps, nor would most want to.

Your posts are naive in the extreme, but good luck to you if you have such a trusting attitude towards hookers and pimps, that is your choice.

But don't start mouthing off because many of us don't trust or like pimps or the dishonest hookers who work for them.

[Jimmyredcab]

The parlours you mention have security cameras and store clients numbers, both of which are unacceptable.

If I owned a brothel the first thing I would do is to install a security camera.   

[smiths]

You asked if they were ultra-safe.  They all are.  If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it.  I look forward to reading "Personal Danger at House of Divine."

With regard to my being a pimp apologist, I suggest you read my reviews.  Nothing of the sort.  I simply call it as I see it, I have many years of punting experience, and I make my judgments based on the evidence, not old wive's tales.  You claim to have never had a cup of tea or chat with a pimp.  In that case, how can you possibly know what pimps are like?  Anyone who has been around punting for a long period of time will know where the risks lie and which precautions its sensible to take.  Experience helps you define where the line between personal security and paranoia actually falls.

Thanks admin. I knew he was previously banned almost immediately, dodgy prick though I didn't know who they were before.

[smiths]

I do respect your punting experience and credentials, but sadly we seem to be punting in very different universes.
Just 4 months in and mere total of 11 punts, i have 'met' pimps twice. Very first punt had a hatchet faced EE madam barring way out to the front door - a B & S job where the switch was more afraid of the madam than me. No chance of walking without a bust up.
Third punt had chinese pimp and madam parked right outside exit door. Another B & S, - this time switch spoke no english, so had the madam outside shouting at me down the WG's phone to pay up.
Idea of sitting down for "a cup of tea" with these people fills me with dread, never mind the nightmare of inviting them round to mine.
If only i'd had enough paranoia early on, i might of avoided these situations.  Sorry but after a rubber, have come to believe a good dose of paranoia is a punters best protection.

I couldn't believe this post when I read it earlier, you respect his credentials, he had been a member about a week or so, you sure respect someone quick. Well he was previously banned as I knew so my advice is at least take a bit of time before respecting a so called newbies credentials. Unlike you it takes time and posting on many topics before I respect a posters credentials.

[Diehard]

I couldn't believe this post when I read it earlier, you respect his credentials, he had been a member about a week or so, you sure respect someone quick. Well he was previously banned as I knew so my advice is at least take a bit of time before respecting a so called newbies credentials. Unlike you it takes time and posting on many topics before I respect a posters credentials.

Personally I thought the twat who is now banned was either a fluffy prick or a pimp! Cups of tea!!! 150'quid for a tea party is a new one on me.

[smiths]

Personally I thought the twat who is now banned was either a fluffy prick or a pimp! Cups of tea!!! 150'quid for a tea party is a new one on me.

Under one of his previous nicks, Nimrod he did some reviews on Divine related brothels of which HOD which he mentioned using this new nick is one. I did report him for being a pimps apologist as well as being a banned returner, whatever he was well dodgy trying to pull the wool over punters eyes on here.

Very very few genuine posting from the start newbies too UKP are as confident as he was in my observations, he was super sure of himself virtually immediately, disagreeing with me and others, that's simply not what usually happens, so he wasn't as smart as he thought he was in the end.

[Arley Hall]

This is an interesting perception. Are you suggesting that most hookers are not run by someone in the background?

Well - these were the results of a study carried out by Professor Nick Mai of London Metropolitan University .....

External Link/Members Only

To cut a long story short, only about 13% of migrant sex workers felt that they had been exploited in any sense whatsoever - and only about 6% felt that they were coerced to perform sexual services. Bear in mind that the study looked at migrant sex workers, so the figures for sex workers in general would be lower. 6% is still too many, I know - but it's quite a small minority nevertheless. So if pimps are involved they're not coercive in most cases. To my mind a pimp in the true sense of the word is coercive, and possibly even violent.

Studies such as the one above are quoted by the anti-criminalisation lobby to further their arguments - so isn't that the side that we punters should be on? We shouldn't be talking up the coercive, pimp-related stuff, because that plays into the hands of people who would crminalise prostitution.

[fairfield]

I couldn't believe this post when I read it earlier, you respect his credentials, he had been a member about a week or so, you sure respect someone quick. Well he was previously banned as I knew so my advice is at least take a bit of time before respecting a so called newbies credentials. Unlike you it takes time and posting on many topics before I respect a posters credentials.

Apologies, was well and truly taken in. He seemed so much at ease with his subject and 40 years of punting experience should deserve some respect, shdn't it?
Didn't really feel qualified to challenge him - except his fostering of the idea of 'pimps tea parties' was just so off the wall and very misleading to noobs like me, couldn't stay silent.
'Noobs tread where wiser heads walk.' And  "2 sugars please, Sergie."

[smiths]

Apologies, was well and truly taken in. He seemed so much at ease with his subject and 40 years of punting experience should deserve some respect, shdn't it?
Didn't really feel qualified to challenge him - except his fostering of the idea of 'pimps tea parties' was just so off the wall and very misleading to noobs like me, couldn't stay silent.
'Noobs tread where wiser heads walk.' And  "2 sugars please, Sergie."

No worries, believe me I have been taken in loads of times myself over the years on here. Anyone can post they have 40 years punting experience of course and it could all be bollocks. I totally agree with you about him being at ease that's why I KNEW he was previously banned, he then got cocky presumably because he thought no one had cottoned on. So as I said above he thinks he is smart but he actually isn't that smart or he would of been more subtle in his posts, his were like a sledgehammer cracking a nut too me.

My advice about pimps is you cant trust them, a small number in my experience wont fuck you over but many will, though it is the case many WGs choose to work for a pimp for various reasons, him or her providing the premises to work out of being one big reason, many WGs couldn't possibly afford to rent a premises straight away, and/or get refs and a deposit so a pimp is an option.

Obviously if a woman is being forced to be a WG then the pimp be that a man or woman are utter evil scum who I hope get caught asap and given life sentences.

[smiths]

Well - these were the results of a study carried out by Professor Nick Mai of London Metropolitan University .....

External Link/Members Only

To cut a long story short, only about 13% of migrant sex workers felt that they had been exploited in any sense whatsoever - and only about 6% felt that they were coerced to perform sexual services. Bear in mind that the study looked at migrant sex workers, so the figures for sex workers in general would be lower. 6% is still too many, I know - but it's quite a small minority nevertheless. So if pimps are involved they're not coercive in most cases. To my mind a pimp in the true sense of the word is coercive, and possibly even violent.

Studies such as the one above are quoted by the anti-criminalisation lobby to further their arguments - so isn't that the side that we punters should be on? We shouldn't be talking up the coercive, pimp-related stuff, because that plays into the hands of people who would crminalise prostitution.

There are pimps who WGs choose to work for and agree to give a cut to in exchange for the premises and/or advertising and getting them their punters, and evil scum who force women to be WGs. The latter in my view are in a big minority. The former is a fact of punting life, good or bad, pimps have been involved in punting forever and I cant see that changing anytime soon. If they get nicked though I cant say I have any sympathy, don't do the crime if they cant do the time.

Up to punters how they view pimps and some of us don't rate many if any, though any WG could have a pimp and punters wouldn't know. What should be the case if punting were decriminalised in my view is pimps were police checked so at least those with criminal records and especially violent records couldn't in theory be a pimp though no idea how good that would be in practice. I don't see decrim as happening anytime soon either, more likely the Nordic model than that sadly, the best I see is it stays as it is with the tops cops in every area deciding whether to enforce the law on brothels and the street scene.

[Arley Hall]

There are pimps who WGs choose to work for and agree to give a cut to in exchange for the premises and/or advertising and getting them their punters, and evil scum who force women to be WGs. The latter in my view are in a big minority. The former is a fact of punting life, good or bad, pimps have been involved in punting forever and I cant see that changing anytime soon. If they get nicked though I cant say I have any sympathy, don't do the crime if they cant do the time.

Up to punters how they view pimps and some of us don't rate many if any, though any WG could have a pimp and punters wouldn't know. What should be the case if punting were decriminalised in my view is pimps were police checked so at least those with criminal records and especially violent records couldn't in theory be a pimp though no idea how good that would be in practice. I don't see decrim as happening anytime soon either, more likely the Nordic model than that sadly, the best I see is it stays as it is with the tops cops in every area deciding whether to enforce the law on brothels and the street scene.

Yes - broadly I agree with what you're saying. The study I quoted was done at least 3 (?) years ago, so it could be that the situation has changed very recently. Maybe the coerced minority is greater than 6% now - who knows? I think my basic point is that we as a punting community should be welcoming this kind of study with open arms - if only from a PR point of view. If we think it's out of date we should either keep stumm (since it's working in our favour) or, if we care about truth more than anything else, we should call for more studies like this to be done.

[Marmalade]

There are pimps who WGs choose to work for and agree to give a cut to in exchange for the premises and/or advertising and getting them their punters, and evil scum who force women to be WGs. The latter in my view are in a big minority. The former is a fact of punting life, good or bad, pimps have been involved in punting forever and I cant see that changing anytime soon. If they get nicked though I cant say I have any sympathy, don't do the crime if they cant do the time.

Up to punters how they view pimps and some of us don't rate many if any, though any WG could have a pimp and punters wouldn't know. What should be the case if punting were decriminalised in my view is pimps were police checked so at least those with criminal records and especially violent records couldn't in theory be a pimp though no idea how good that would be in practice. I don't see decrim as happening anytime soon either, more likely the Nordic model than that sadly, the best I see is it stays as it is with the tops cops in every area deciding whether to enforce the law on brothels and the street scene.

Very balanced post, that I agree with. Security from pimps isn't a big issue for the sensible. In some cases it could even be improved, for instance in brothels where girls are sometimes at risk from an abusive client. But hiring a full time bouncer is not something that many of them want to contemplate. Security is situation-dependent, something you recognise quickly from punting in many different situations and countries. It's a bit like being streetwise. Once you assess a situation and the necessary precautions that you deem appropriate come automatically into play, you relax and don't think about it. The first time I went to LMP I thought really? Put all my valuables in an envelope and give it to them for the duration? But the question only lingered for a split second: it was clear that these were trustable people. A lot of other 'security' like leaving your belongings in plain sight, is really just reassurance, and most girls will actively cooperate (the same way as I will act to reassure an outcall that she is safe and her exit is clear). It means that you don't have to worry about 'trust.' It means if you drop something or can't remember how much cash you had with you, you don't jump the gun and blame someone else.

As an example of trust, I have once left a Scottish brothel having forgotten to pay -- I went back ten minutes later and they were completely cool as they knew it was an oversight. I have also left an item of value at the same place and gone back for it without the slightest worry that it would still be there. But I knew teh establishment reasonably well -- I would be more careful I hope in an unknown situation.

[Marmalade]

Yes - broadly I agree with what you're saying. The study I quoted was done at least 3 (?) years ago, so it could be that the situation has changed very recently. Maybe the coerced minority is greater than 6% now - who knows? I think my basic point is that we as a punting community should be welcoming this kind of study with open arms - if only from a PR point of view. If we think it's out of date we should either keep stumm (since it's working in our favour) or, if we care about truth more than anything else, we should call for more studies like this to be done.

It's actually much older than that (2009) but the points are accurate. Politicians don't listen to experts, especially when it concerns drugs or prostitution. They are more interested in concocted 'reports' that justify an agenda. Famously, someone, I think it may have been Harman, misquoted the figures from a NGO project which the project then quoted from the misquote. These groups rely on making the problem seem worse than it is to increase funding, expand their organisation and give themselves increases in salary. The problem doesn't require special anti-prostitution legislation any more than it requires special anti-farm-workers or anti-cockles-collector legislation. Prostitution just happens to be the most emotive. People are coercively trafficked into those and other occupations but the problem is the coerced trafficking, not the occupations.

[smiths]

It's actually much older than that (2009) but the points are accurate. Politicians don't listen to experts, especially when it concerns drugs or prostitution. They are more interested in concocted 'reports' that justify an agenda. Famously, someone, I think it may have been Harman, misquoted the figures from a NGO project which the project then quoted from the misquote. These groups rely on making the problem seem worse than it is to increase funding, expand their organisation and give themselves increases in salary. The problem doesn't require special anti-prostitution legislation any more than it requires special anti-farm-workers or anti-cockles-collector legislation. Prostitution just happens to be the most emotive. People are coercively trafficked into those and other occupations but the problem is the coerced trafficking, not the occupations.

To help get her coercion law through in 2009/10 Harman used a made up and never proved figure of 4000 trafficked for sex women, the truth played no part in her crusade. Operations Pentameter 1 and 2 found nowhere near 4000 women, it was about 10% of that or so BUT the conviction rate was very low, some of the women "rescued" didn't wish to be rescued as they weren't being forced/coerced in the first place. Now one woman being forced is one to many for me but Harman and her femi-nazi ilk and large parts of the media purposely inflate and lie about the numbers. Sadly some women are forced and its obviously them the police and others should be concerned with and putting their resources into helping and catching the scum who force them.

You are of course right about there being no need for new laws, there are already enough laws to catch evil traffickers and pimps. The reality of any new law would be driving punting further underground, it cannot be stopped in our present society, and it would primarily be designed to instill fear into punters and I have no doubt this would work with some as the risk however small of being nicked would outweigh the fun to be had. It would be incredibly expensive to nick punters punting with real Indies that's for sure, much easier to do purges every so often on brothels and the street scene but the police can do that now. One good point a punter posted on UKE was yes at present nicking punters punting with Indies isn't very likely but maybe in the future with technical advances it wouldn't be as expensive, I agree, so any law criminalising punters is indeed very bad news if it happened. I was worried about the coercion law but I recall NIK posting it will be bollocks and indeed he was right, we shall see what if anything happens with any new law, my opinion is things will stay as they are for the foreseeable future.

[Turtle Z]

It's actually much older than that (2009) but the points are accurate. Politicians don't listen to experts, especially when it concerns drugs or prostitution. They are more interested in concocted 'reports' that justify an agenda. Famously, someone, I think it may have been Harman, misquoted the figures from a NGO project which the project then quoted from the misquote. These groups rely on making the problem seem worse than it is to increase funding, expand their organisation and give themselves increases in salary. The problem doesn't require special anti-prostitution legislation any more than it requires special anti-farm-workers or anti-cockles-collector legislation. Prostitution just happens to be the most emotive. People are coercively trafficked into those and other occupations but the problem is the coerced trafficking, not the occupations.

Yes because because politicians have very few safe platforms on which to make a stand. Their cowardly response is to campaign on drugs or prostitution. Look at the war on drugs in the US, it is a 'war' that has seen paramilitary SWAT teams formed in every state, whereas once there were about 3 SWAT teams across the whole of the US. The government sinks millions into this war despite the fact that it is clearly a war without end, but that's precisely how they like it. A safe never ending platform on which they can get tough. Prostitution is no different and it is a political agenda rather than a social one.

[Marmalade]

I notice that the link to the full report is inactive. However, there's a summary here:
External Link/Members Only

I notice that the author does have relevant sociological experience. Being an academic study does not guarantee reliability (as anyone will know who does research in a specific field). Many skewed studies quote apparent supporting evidence but when you check the authors concerned they could be an assistant health worker with little knowledge of how to interpret statistics or conduct a social survey without introducing personal bias. or they take a study of SWs and quote it as if it applied to all sex workers.

Here's another decent study by (as far as I can see) a respected sociologist:
External Link/Members Only

Here's one written by an oncologist and a specialist in drug abuse, yet probably well peer-reviewed and they come to similar, sensible conclusions:
External Link/Members Only

In fact in a quick survey I found it hard to find any reputable paper on prostitution that doesn't recommend decriminalisation. I looked through about a couple of dozen. One published paper that I did find that was very slanted was written by two people who seemed unknown in the academic world. I eventually found they were workers at a sexual health clinic. It was a paper on characteristics of men who pay for sex. There were lots of "it seems" -type statements and an aggregation of data to the point where there was little specific evidence that could be traced as relevant and the whole point of the study was never addressed. Yet the paper is widely quoted. In other words, politician advocating for greater criminalisation pick the most unreliable and unverifiable of evidence to support their case, or else newspaper stories (and one can always find a newspaper story for or against anything).

The most recent government-commissioned report uses phrases like "Due  to  the  nature  of  the  work,  sexually  transmitted  infections  are  another inevitable  risk" (when the evidence suggests that STIs are often lower in prostitution-based surveys), or, after mentioning all different types of sex work including SWs, says as if applying to all sex work "it is suggested that violence is obviously a concern" (when checking the references, the "concern" was expressed by no other than Julie Bindel, also associated with the External Link/Members Only, and someone utterly without relevant qualifications other than an interest that gets her headlines. That Project, the UK's biggest ever investigation of sex trafficking failed to find a single person who had forced anybody into prostitution in spite of hundreds of raids on sex workers in a six-month campaign by government departments, specialist agencies and every police force in the country.

[smiths]

I notice that the link to the full report is inactive. However, there's a summary here:
External Link/Members Only

I notice that the author does have relevant sociological experience. Being an academic study does not guarantee reliability (as anyone will know who does research in a specific field). Many skewed studies quote apparent supporting evidence but when you check the authors concerned they could be an assistant health worker with little knowledge of how to interpret statistics or conduct a social survey without introducing personal bias. or they take a study of SWs and quote it as if it applied to all sex workers.

Here's another decent study by (as far as I can see) a respected sociologist:
External Link/Members Only

Here's one written by an oncologist and a specialist in drug abuse, yet probably well peer-reviewed and they come to similar, sensible conclusions:
External Link/Members Only

In fact in a quick survey I found it hard to find any reputable paper on prostitution that doesn't recommend decriminalisation. I looked through about a couple of dozen. One published paper that I did find that was very slanted was written by two people who seemed unknown in the academic world. I eventually found they were workers at a sexual health clinic. It was a paper on characteristics of men who pay for sex. There were lots of "it seems" -type statements and an aggregation of data to the point where there was little specific evidence that could be traced as relevant and the whole point of the study was never addressed. Yet the paper is widely quoted. In other words, politician advocating for greater criminalisation pick the most unreliable and unverifiable of evidence to support their case, or else newspaper stories (and one can always find a newspaper story for or against anything).

The most recent government-commissioned report uses phrases like "Due  to  the  nature  of  the  work,  sexually  transmitted  infections  are  another inevitable  risk" (when the evidence suggests that STIs are often lower in prostitution-based surveys), or, after mentioning all different types of sex work including SWs, says as if applying to all sex work "it is suggested that violence is obviously a concern" (when checking the references, the "concern" was expressed by no other than Julie Bindel, also associated with the External Link/Members Only, and someone utterly without relevant qualifications other than an interest that gets her headlines. That Project, the UK's biggest ever investigation of sex trafficking failed to find a single person who had forced anybody into prostitution in spite of hundreds of raids on sex workers in a six-month campaign by government departments, specialist agencies and every police force in the country.

Some interesting info thanks Marm. I am very suspicious of so called facts and stats about punting. Harman used to cite that Poppy Project at one time as one of the top most reliable sources of info.

[Arley Hall]

It's actually much older than that (2009) but the points are accurate. Politicians don't listen to experts, especially when it concerns drugs or prostitution. They are more interested in concocted 'reports' that justify an agenda. Famously, someone, I think it may have been Harman, misquoted the figures from a NGO project which the project then quoted from the misquote. These groups rely on making the problem seem worse than it is to increase funding, expand their organisation and give themselves increases in salary. The problem doesn't require special anti-prostitution legislation any more than it requires special anti-farm-workers or anti-cockles-collector legislation. Prostitution just happens to be the most emotive. People are coercively trafficked into those and other occupations but the problem is the coerced trafficking, not the occupations.

Yes - I noticed how old it was when I looked at it a bit more closely. Thanks for the other links too. Politicians certainly don't take any notice of experts when it comes to drugs legislation - that's for sure.

[punk]

You asked if they were ultra-safe.  They all are.  If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it.  I look forward to reading "Personal Danger at House of Divine."

With regard to my being a pimp apologist, I suggest you read my reviews.  Nothing of the sort.  I simply call it as I see it, I have many years of punting experience, and I make my judgments based on the evidence, not old wive's tales. 

Load of bollocks,thought you were Q, turns out you are a previous banned member.

Dodgy as the shit.