Potential criminalisation of dominatrixes??

[Ta****]

Just now, eyemblacksheep said:

Yep - though, they probably don't get many customers  Whilst not a new thing, there's a rise in guys who have had this lightbulb "I can do that" moment and list themselves as escorts, or Doms under a "nothing to lose" monicker.  

 

Or they may get ladies who have a bit of ***, may be single professional  in many cases and dont mind paying for a bit of BDSM.

 

[Ta****]

3 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

All I'm saying is... well..

MI5 is located near a lot of sex and fetish clubs and shops

Although they moved, the former Labour Party HQ was right  next door to where *** Garden was hosted.

Yes they must have known what was going on.  Some of these party members may have been customers themselves.  The whole system is built on hypocrisy.....double standards.  Lol

[ey****]

1 hour ago, TammyNatalia said:

Or they may get ladies who have a bit of ***, may be single professional  in many cases and dont mind paying for a bit of BDSM.

 

The majority of the paying market is male.  That doesn't mean all of the market is. But the majority.  Of those who are not male, a good chunk of those go to female providers.  

A lot of the successful male Dominants/SWers are gay or bi.  Or... don't mind that 80-90% of their customer base is male.  

It'd be very difficult for a Male SWer to only see female clients - this would also limit their experience, portfolio and potential.  This would also mean they'd have less feedback.

That's not to say it's impossible - but also - because it's difficult it's unlikely they would be able to do this as a living, it'd therefore just likely be a top up income or pocket ***; so they have less to lose with any law changes.

[ey****]

25 minutes ago, TammyNatalia said:

Yes they must have known what was going on.  Some of these party members may have been customers themselves.  The whole system is built on hypocrisy.....double standards.  Lol

I won't say I sympathise with politicians, because, generally I don't.  But there's situations within here - where...

There's been a couple caught in uncompromising positions involving sex workers. Something that shouldn't have been a bigger issue than "it's behind their wives back" and solved as a private issue

But then, people have gone into their voting records and found one thing or another they voted for or against and it's like... hang on

And they toed the party line in their vote and hadn't wanted to speak out to draw attention to their own wrongdoing so the whole thing becomes shade.

Sometimes it's not just the public vote against their best interests

[Ky****]

although when I was doing it 30 years ago there seemed a strange mix, there were plenty of gay men who'd pay to top me as a man, but those who'd pay for the kinky stuff, bondage and caning, it was strictly on the understanding that I spent the whole session in women's clothes-or at least as many as they'd let me keep on, so have to agree that the pro scene is different for males in terms of client wants-certainly I couldn't have been a pro sub except as a trans or at least cd

[Ta****]

3 hours ago, eyemblacksheep said:

It'd be very difficult for a Male SWer to only see female clients - this would also limit their experience, portfolio and potential.  This would also mean they'd have less feedback.

That's not to say it's impossible - but also - because it's difficult it's unlikely they would be able to do this as a living, it'd therefore just likely be a top up income or pocket ***; so they have less to lose with any law changes.

There is one, I found on Twitter ( a male disciplinarian) who says he only accepts  female clients, and that he doesn't offer sexual services.   He may be perfectly honest about that....I dont know!    So there is at least one in the UK but he may well be in a minority.  He also has a website.  He demands payment for his services which is found discreetly on his website.   He advertises on Twitter as well.

I have no idea whether he is gay or straight .

[qu****]

That's where it's so grey in law, though he may say he doesn't offer sexual services, I've read that just touching a breast, bum or pussy either with hand or flogger etc, can be seen as sexual activity, I believe it's classed as recieving pleasure

[Ta****]

1 hour ago, quietlysure said:

That's where it's so grey in law, though he may say he doesn't offer sexual services, I've read that just touching a breast, bum or pussy either with hand or flogger etc, can be seen as sexual activity, I believe it's classed as recieving pleasure

Exactly!  How would a court interpret what passes as sexual services and what doesnt.  I would say that any activity....or service.....that imparts sexual pleasure, is a sexual service.   But a client can always deny that they derive any pleasure from said activity.  Although I am not sure they would be believed!

[ey****]

This is where it also gets fun.

So.   A lot of people say they offer no sexual services for a few reasons which could include (but not in every case).

1) They believe that the activities they are doing are not sexual.   (Sometimes said by folk in denial.)

2) To double down that whatever they do or don't offer there'll be no penises going in vaginas.

3) To comply with restrictions on advertising 

4) To comply with brothel laws.

A story I've brought up a few times.  A dungeon has multiple Dominants (and submissives!) working from for sessions.  I honestly don't know if any have/had sex with clients - but they wouldn't be able to advertise it because multiple people working from the same premises and offering sex for would make it a brothel and the owner fall foul of brothel laws.

The owner of said dungeon works closely with their council.  Their council knows things like subs being allowed to cum at the end.  They know the ladies do things like strap on.  But they're not allowed to advertise this.

 The dungeon wanted to run a strap-on party and pointed the council to advertising of a strap on party in another area.  The council said what that council permits is up to them.  

Escorts/FFSW tend not to work from a shared premises.  They might work from their own home, a clients home, or a hotel room.  But, if they happened to use a swingers club or a dungeon and allowed something explicit like PIV - then this risks the premise falling foul of brothel laws.

 

[qu****]

That's where other problems come in the differences between area authorities, a different thing but my *** used to have a coffee shop/restaurant, health and safety did their usual check and said the bin needed a lid, a friend had a similar business but about 12 miles away and were told to take the lid off the bin, just pointing out standardised rules are sometimes needed

[ey****]

1 hour ago, quietlysure said:

That's where other problems come in the differences between area authorities, a different thing but my *** used to have a coffee shop/restaurant, health and safety did their usual check and said the bin needed a lid, a friend had a similar business but about 12 miles away and were told to take the lid off the bin, just pointing out standardised rules are sometimes needed

yep - so authorities can make up some of their own regional rules.

In my area there's an Adult License needed for certain activities in clubs/venues and similar exist in other areas under different rules.  So, every time some form of sex club or premises would want to open there'd always be objections so the solution the councils came with is they would cap how many licenses could exist.

Which has two different lines of benefit.  If I wished to open a strip club, I couldn't as the agreed amount of licenses are in use. 

-

We also charge shops who wish to sell adult toys or content which I'm sure is something like £2000 per year.  So the sex shops have to pay it, Ann Summers, so on.  Not every region has the same.

A few years ago someone wanted to set up one of the A&B Events (Adult and Burlesque or something? I forget) and this was met with objections from places like Ann Summers as there would be traders selling adult stuff - but the event didn't have the adult license.   Eventually it went ahead but all adult toys etc couldn't be sold - which meant a number of stalls had to withdraw.  Ironically. These stalls would have covered the full £2000 in pitch fees and it would have saved face, but, c'est la vie. 

-

This is again heading off topic but of course something to consider in general especially when doing the "how can they do something in that city but it doesn't exist in mine" 

[Ky****]

although there is the get out already used in advertising by Escort Agencies, *** paid is for time spent together and not for sexual services, anything beyond this is a matter between consenting adults in private.  This does allow get outs, otherwise if a guy pays for a nightout it would fall foul of these proposals

[qu****]

But this only works if the escort lives alone, if an angencies escorts live together in one property they will be charged for running a brothel, the same problem can happen with dungeons, if used by more than one domme, even they use it on different days, it's classed as using a property for sexual services, though how home visits by dommes or escorts are classed I'm not sure

[CityBoy-7009]

On 10/30/2020 at 11:06 PM, TammyNatalia said:

I have never liked the idea one way or another, of either having to pay for sex or being paid.  It is clear not all female sex workers who charge for their services are 'victims' of exploitation, although many clearly are, and the Nordic law seeks to protect these.

The  Nordic law would have been more useful if it had targeted sex traffickers and the women/ girls (often foreign) who are their victims.   But I suspect there is already a law against that, or there should be.

I am pleased that the law targets pimps and kerb crawlers rather than the prostitutes themselves.  But no law is perfect and very often employs blanket policies where a more nuanced approach might be preferable (not always easy I admit).

 

Independent, major reports e.g. from Amnesty International, show that the Nordic Model law (not all of the region has this - Denmark rejected it) doesn't work, but changes in countries like New Zealand, who did NOT criminalise ing sex, have higher rates of sex workers feeling safe. Many other reports etc to support this view.

 Many of the activists for the Nordic law have showed down and insulted sex workers, and claimed (it was legally disproved) that they were only taking their position because of pimps.  The Eu received proposals that represented the views of 450 sex worker organisations - to claim that these were all pimp controlled is truly disingenuous!!  The activists motivation seems quite clear - they are moralising and trying to legally en*** their own view of sex. If they truly cared about trafficking (UK police figures show that 10% of workers are coerced, 90% are consensual) they would show compassion and let sex workers themselves decide (98% of workers are against the Nordic law), not shout them down and deny their experience. A UK university women led survey in 2015 showed around 70% of workers were actively happy with their work - they used words like 'fun'.  Pro-Nordic people are using trafficking as an excuse to ban all sex work.

On Dominatrix's - I have spoken to some and they are all actively involved in BDSM as a lifestyle as well - they want to do the work, and enjoy it.

I completely agree that trafficking is awful (and you may a good point about other workers eg farms) but there are much better ways of dong this than criminalising ing sex.  We do not shut down all farming because of some trafficking, or do not shut down the fashion industry because of unethical work practices - we deal with the unethical aspect itself 

[CityBoy-7009]

22 hours ago, quietlysure said:

That's where it's so grey in law, though he may say he doesn't offer sexual services, I've read that just touching a breast, bum or pussy either with hand or flogger etc, can be seen as sexual activity, I believe it's classed as recieving pleasure

can you remember where you read this?  Was tin a UK context - court case?

[qu****]

I believe it is the UK, 

[ey****]

England and Wales: penetration, touching or any other activity is sexual if a reasonable person would think that it is, by nature, sexual (for example, sexual intercourse or masturbation). An activity would also be sexual where the circumstances or purpose of the person carrying out the activity make it sexual. For example, someone who deliberately strokes the genital region of someone else, even if fully clothed, can have sexual intent which would make this activity a sexual act.

Northern Ireland: covers activity that the reasonable person would always consider to be sexual because of its nature, such as sexual intercourse.

Scotland: if a reasonable person would, in all the circumstances of the case, consider it to be sexual.

[ey****]

that's how loose the law is

[Phoenyx]

I can't say that I am familiar with the "Nordic Model".  In the U.S., the mandate seemed to be "low key".  As long as one was not advertising on a street-corner, authorities appeared to look the other way.  En***ment was geared more toward property values, than actual acts.  Such is the truly ***-obsessed culture of the U.S..  At that time though, the internet was in its infancy.  Business was pretty-much by word-of-mouth.  So, today's reactions to online advertising could be completely different.

There was, however, one male pro Dom, who was prosecuted for accepting under-aged clients.  His crossing-of-the-line came as a shock to the rest of us.  There was also some ***, that the entire Community could now end-up investigated and shut-down.  But, fortunately, no further legal action was taken.

On 10/31/2020 at 5:43 AM, eyemblacksheep said:

So, any male Dominant (or Male SWere in general) is going to have to be happy with mostly male clients.

Not necessarily true.  You are overlooking the "bored housewife" contingent (please, no offense intended).  These ladies were merely looking for a little extra "spice" in their own relationships.  I had a rule, that such clients must always be accompanied by their husbands/boyfriends at the initial intake.  That way, misunderstandings could be avoided.  I did not accept male clients.

On 10/31/2020 at 4:16 AM, JennyWren710 said:

Are there professional Dom men too?

Yes.  Allow me to introduce myself:  The one-and-only "Lord Obsidian"---retired.

Male Doms (in the so-called "straight" community) tend to work more with organizing events, hosting underground nightclub shows, teaching classes, counseling couples, or perhaps, publishing books/producing videos.  Actual pay-for-play is often just a sideline.

[Ta****]

1 hour ago, Phoenyx said:

I can't say that I am familiar with the "Nordic Model".  In the U.S., the mandate seemed to be "low key".  As long as one was not advertising on a street-corner, authorities appeared to look the other way.  En***ment was geared more toward property values, than actual acts.  Such is the truly ***-obsessed culture of the U.S..  At that time though, the internet was in its infancy.  Business was pretty-much by word-of-mouth.  So, today's reactions to online advertising could be completely different.

There was, however, one male pro Dom, who was prosecuted for accepting under-aged clients.  His crossing-of-the-line came as a shock to the rest of us.  There was also some ***, that the entire Community could now end-up investigated and shut-down.  But, fortunately, no further legal action was taken.

Not necessarily true.  You are overlooking the "bored housewife" contingent (please, no offense intended).  These ladies were merely looking for a little extra "spice" in their own relationships.  I had a rule, that such clients must always be accompanied by their husbands/boyfriends at the initial intake.  That way, misunderstandings could be avoided.  I did not accept male clients.

Yes.  Allow me to introduce myself:  The one-and-only "Lord Obsidian"---retired.

Male Doms (in the so-called "straight" community) tend to work more with organizing events, hosting underground nightclub shows, teaching classes, counseling couples, or perhaps, publishing books/producing videos.  Actual pay-for-play is often just a sideline.

That's a nice thing to read that I did not know about!    

[SilverTiger]

Well, I very rarely come out of the male cave on these things, but here is one.    Although on the surface it might appear anti-female sensuality, it is also just as anti masculinity “to boot.”   Oh, its okay for a woman to go to a therapist and talk about her feelings until the tectonic plates rotate themselves all the way back to the original Earth Mother Pizza, but men, oh know, we can’t seek out the sensuality that we want because that would violate some higher morality.  Men, it is simple, we are sensual, sensuous beings who more often than not have a broader sense of the meaning touch than other genders.  We love to wrestle, box, do judo, arm wrestle, and would even shag a dolphin if we could catch one, assuming it was consensual, synchronized dolphin love, and things like spankings and the dynamic around it is part of many of our emotional dynamics.  And no, not every woman wants to spank her partner because they often associate that with “hitting.”   Erotic spankings and “hitting” are as different as is a hummingbird and a hippo, while they both start with “H.”

The only thing any government needs to know is, is it consensual, or, would child protective services need to know about it, or, would the ASPCA beat down your door because the sheep doesn’t have a work permit!

If they keep passing laws that they can’t or shouldn’t en***, eventually people will lose respect for what “law” is supposed to do in the first place, guard the dignity of life.