Vin DaLoo

A Poor Excuse To Back Out?

57 posts in this topic

Was in the mood for a punt today. Found a local woman on The Other Site. Photos, Feedback, Price, Location were all good, so after a couple of messages back and forth I called her on the way to work and made a booking.

When I get in to work I check my messages and she is offering me sex without condom for an extra £20. Now, I have been doing this for many years and this is the first time this has been offered and so I was somewhat shocked. I texted her to say that I did not realise that she offered BB and so I could not go ahead with the booking (this was less than 30 minutes since speaking to her, and 2.5 hrs before the proposed booking)

Her reply was that this was a poor excuse to back out, as I could use a condom if I didn't want BB; is she right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her reply was that this was a poor excuse to back out, as I could use a condom if I didn't want BB; is she right?

No. She's a skanky idiot and you were the wise one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose that technically, up to a point, she is right.

But...

You are the customer. You choose your hooker based on certain criteria and as she hadn't disclosed something which is a deal breaker for you, then she has no right to complain when you change your mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

willing to put her and clients lives at risk at the cost of just £20! you did the right thing hun, have peace of mind over the matter that you found out rather than to worry later, esp. if the condom was unlucky to rip... just ignore her reply.it only takes for that one bullet to be in chamber for her and the amount of lives she could destroy till finds out. not worth it imho.

Edited by Lady Victoria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have done the same, and cancelled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was in the mood for a punt today. Found a local woman on The Other Site. Photos, Feedback, Price, Location were all good, so after a couple of messages back and forth I called her on the way to work and made a booking.

When I get in to work I check my messages and she is offering me sex without condom for an extra £20. Now, I have been doing this for many years and this is the first time this has been offered and so I was somewhat shocked. I texted her to say that I did not realise that she offered BB and so I could not go ahead with the booking (this was less than 30 minutes since speaking to her, and 2.5 hrs before the proposed booking)

Her reply was that this was a poor excuse to back out, as I could use a condom if I didn't want BB; is she right?

Its certainly not a poor excuse in the slightest to my mind. I dont wish to punt with WGs i know offer BB, i view them as complete idiots so the fact i could just use a condom is neither here or there to me, i wouldnt be able to enjoy the punt worrying about catching something. At least she told you beforehand is how i would view this rather than after paying as has happened to me on rare ocassions resulting in me immediately leaving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies so far folks; daft thing is, there are guys out there that search this out and are willing to pay a premium for it, so why not just put it on her profile in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Up to what point is she right?

Before I go any further, just remember that I disagree with her completely and think that Vin was right to cancel.

However, technically, she was correct about using a condom etc.

Just remember boys, a high number of hookers have at least one person they shag bareback in their private lives. You don't know where anyone has been just by taking their word that they always use condoms.

Just trying to put it in perspective, but I'm by no means defending her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BB, Its one of the few negatives I look out for in profiles on the other site. If its there I dont go any further.

You did the right thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, technically, she was correct about using a condom etc.

Just remember boys, a high number of hookers have at least one person they shag bareback in their private lives. You don't know where anyone has been just by taking their word that they always use condoms.

No, she is not right in any way, shape or form. She must have a poor grasp of the risk she is taking and the risk at which she is placing her other punters (whether they want BB or not) in order to think that someone who runs a mile from such a girl is being unreasonable!

The OP was "fortunate" he was offered this option so that he could make the right decision.

A WG shagging men BB who in turn have probably shagged other WGs BB is several orders of magnitude greater risk than a WG who shags her boyfriend BB. The chance of her having an undiagnosed STI is extremely high rather than just a theoretical possibility. She simply has no idea whether she currently has something that can be passed on or not and anyone who thinks a condom is a 100% protection against STIs needs to go back to school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't be sure what anyone does apart from when they are with you, however if it's presented upfront in this manner it will give a lot of guys reason to cancel. The knowledge makes that decision for them, especially if they prefer OWO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't be sure what anyone does apart from when they are with you, however if it's presented upfront in this manner it will give a lot of guys reason to cancel. The knowledge makes that decision for them, especially if they prefer OWO.

Indeed for me its the knowledge the WG does advertise or did offer me BB that makes me wish to avoid them. If a WG indulges in BB but doesnt advertise or offer it to me i have no way of knowing so i punt on a risk to reward basis only ever doing protected penetration, the only totally safe way is to not punt which isnt an option i wish to choose. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies so far folks; daft thing is, there are guys out there that search this out and are willing to pay a premium for it, so why not just put it on her profile in the first place?

In this case i cant see why she doesnt advertise it openly, she has offered it to you beforehand anyway unlike what has happened to me a few times over the years where it was offered only after i had paid and the money safely stashed. In those cases extra money wasnt asked for, it was offered i was told because the WGs liked me so they said. I can only think they thought perhaps from experience that this leads to some punters becoming regulars so it was worth the risk of offering it over not.

In this case although i view her as an idiot she at least wanted an extra £20 for offering it, looking at some purple site profiles some dont even charge anymore than a WG not offering it. What it does tell me though is there must be enough punters wanting BB to make it worth while to the WG to offer it again over not, even bearing in mind i know some EE WGs think BB means OWO. Good business sense to learn what the terms mean to my mind beforehand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed for me its the knowledge the WG does advertise or did offer me BB that makes me wish to avoid them. If a WG indulges in BB but doesnt advertise or offer it to me i have no way of knowing so i punt on a risk to reward basis only ever doing protected penetration, the only totally safe way is to not punt which isnt an option i wish to choose. :)

My point exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, she is not right in any way, shape or form. She must have a poor grasp of the risk she is taking and the risk at which she is placing her other punters (whether they want BB or not) in order to think that someone who runs a mile from such a girl is being unreasonable!

The OP was "fortunate" he was offered this option so that he could make the right decision.

A WG shagging men BB who in turn have probably shagged other WGs BB is several orders of magnitude greater risk than a WG who shags her boyfriend BB. The chance of her having an undiagnosed STI is extremely high rather than just a theoretical possibility. She simply has no idea whether she currently has something that can be passed on or not and anyone who thinks a condom is a 100% protection against STIs needs to go back to school.

You've just contradicted yourself. Either you are putting all your faith in condom use or you're not. You can't have it both ways.

My point was that although a WG may not advertise BB, she may well be doing it, either with regulars or with her other half. Unbeknown to the WG, her other half could, theoretically be shagging every BB WG in a 20 mile radius. You just don't know.

As I already said, I think Vin was right to cancel. I think she was wrong to say that it was a poor reason to do so.

However! Now read closely and pay attention.

When she said "Well, you can still use a condom if it bothers you", she was basically right. If we're assuming that condoms are the wonder product which will keep us safe.

I will repeat for the hard of thinking. I think that Vin was absolutely right to cancel. In fact , I just wish that all girls who provide BB would be open about it.

However, in an ideal world, no WG would shag ANYONE BB and we don't live in an ideal world, so for all you know, every time you shag a hooker, you are relying on the condom, because she may well be bare-backing somewhere, even if it's only with a partner and you don't know what he's up to... or the girl he's shagging... or the other bloke she's shagging... etc. etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed for me its the knowledge the WG does advertise or did offer me BB that makes me wish to avoid them. If a WG indulges in BB but doesnt advertise or offer it to me i have no way of knowing so i punt on a risk to reward basis only ever doing protected penetration, the only totally safe way is to not punt which isnt an option i wish to choose. :)

My point exactly.

Far be it from me to put words in Smiths mouth (though I think he has effectively said this here) if he does not know that a girl offers BB then the best he can do is use a condom even though there is still an unknown risk. It is safe to say that the risk is much bigger if the girl in question has BB sex with multiple partners who themselves may well seek out BB from other WGs.

The point of the OP is that this girl thought it was unreasonable that he backed out having discovered she was offering BB. It is patently not unreasonable and she must have a poor grasp of the risks to say otherwise. But let's face it, she has a poor grasp of the risks anyway because she offers BB!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was in the mood for a punt today. Found a local woman on The Other Site. Photos, Feedback, Price, Location were all good, so after a couple of messages back and forth I called her on the way to work and made a booking.

When I get in to work I check my messages and she is offering me sex without condom for an extra £20. Now, I have been doing this for many years and this is the first time this has been offered and so I was somewhat shocked. I texted her to say that I did not realise that she offered BB and so I could not go ahead with the booking (this was less than 30 minutes since speaking to her, and 2.5 hrs before the proposed booking)

Her reply was that this was a poor excuse to back out, as I could use a condom if I didn't want BB; is she right?

You don't have to ask us that queston,you and everyone with atleast half a brain cell knows you had every right to back the f*ck out of that booking after discovering that shocking revelation about the escort in queston....2 hours or 5 minutes before appointment time.

The following music video is dedicated to the punter known as Vindaloo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLph6ePNkGQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Far be it from me to put words in Smiths mouth (though I think he has effectively said this here) if he does not know that a girl offers BB then the best he can do is use a condom even though there is still an unknown risk. It is safe to say that the risk is much bigger if the girl in question has BB sex with multiple partners who themselves may well seek out BB from other WGs.

The point of the OP is that this girl thought it was unreasonable that he backed out having discovered she was offering BB. It is patently not unreasonable and she must have a poor grasp of the risks to say otherwise. But let's face it, she has a poor grasp of the risks anyway because she offers BB!!

I agree, however, the fact that she was technically correct in stating that he was still able to wear a condom if he so wished and the fact that every shag, paid or unpaid is a step into the unknown, still stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've just contradicted yourself. Either you are putting all your faith in condom use or you're not. You can't have it both ways.

I have not contradicted myself because I am talking about degrees of relative risk and not absolute impossibility of catching an STI!

So OK, so for the "hard of thinking", let me spell out my logic in simple steps.

  • a condom is not 100% protection against STIs
  • a WG who does BB with punters has a much greater risk of carrying an undiagnosed STI than a WG who does not do BB with punters
  • Therefore the risk of catching an STI from a WG who does BB with punters is considerably higher with a WG who does BB with punters even if a condom is used in "this" punt (as they are not 100% protection against STIs)
  • It is therefore unarguably a reasonable grounds for declining a punt if you discover a WG does BB with other punters even if a condom is offered this time because the risk of catching an STI is known to be greater as a result of knowing she does BB with other punters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not contradicted myself because I am talking about degrees of relative risk and not absolute impossibility of catching an STI!

So OK, so for the "hard of thinking", let me spell out my logic in simple steps.

  • a condom is not 100% protection against STIs
  • a WG who does BB with punters has a much greater risk of carrying an undiagnosed STI than a WG who does not do BB with punters
  • Therefore the risk of catching an STI from a WG who does BB with punters is considerably higher with a WG who does BB with punters even if a condom is used in "this" punt (as they are not 100% protection against STIs)
  • It is therefore unarguably a reasonable grounds for declining a punt if you discover a WG does BB with other punters even if a condom is offered this time because the risk of catching an STI is known to be greater as a result of knowing she does BB with other punters.

Could'nt agree more Marky !....

The following video is dedicated to the punter known as Marky......filmed before his punting days when he used to have a funky bunch.>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept that a WG may sleep with at least one person bareback.

But on the job? To me that's just sell I g your health away.

That said she could also have bareback one night stands all the time. But that doesn't hold why have those and run the risk and not sell the risk? Bottom linr if she sells BB I don't want to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh gawd, I'm dragging in health @safety risk assessment! Basically, everything carries a risk. It is up to you to minimise that risk or not to do the act. Using a condom does not eliminate the risk of infection, or pregnancy. But it reduces that risk to a level where the person can decide if he/she "likes those odds". Knowing the working girl offers bareback increases the risk and then the punter has to decide if he is still okay with that.

It is personal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh gawd, I'm dragging in health @safety risk assessment! Basically, everything carries a risk. It is up to you to minimise that risk or not to do the act. Using a condom does not eliminate the risk of infection, or pregnancy. But it reduces that risk to a level where the person can decide if he/she "likes those odds". Knowing the working girl offers bareback increases the risk and then the punter has to decide if he is still okay with that.

It is personal.

I agree, assuming the person actually cares about the risks. Does a WG offering BB to every Tom, Dick or Harry care and even if she does do all her BB wanting punters, as my logic and common sense tells me its not a risk i will take in punting i dont wish to meet such idiots as i view them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now