Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Ebony Pussy Lover

Am I Safe?

18 posts in this topic

I'm a healthy man in the prime of my life in a loving but sexless marriage. I have physical & emotional needs that my wife is unable to meet. I do not wish to have an affair & take the higher risk of ruining my wife & kids' lives not to mention my own, so I discreetly pay willing women to have sex with me. Is this so wrong? Provided that the women are willing, who is this hurting? I am meeting my needs while maintaining a happy marriage & providing employment for the working girl. My marriage actually benefits from this transaction through my improved sate of mind.

Is this any business of the government's or the Christian fundamentalists? Do they really want to deal with a nation of sexually frustrated men?

The basic principle of the new law in stopping the trafficking of women for sex is admirable. However, it appears as if it is going beyond this. The police have always known where brothels are & have always had the power to raid them & close them down. Why are they suddenly taking an interest in the more respectable establishments? Is this a "shock & awe" tactic that will slow with time? Are they just trying to scare us off & make us think about what we do?

So, if I understand this right, I should be safe if I avoid walk ups, parlours, "brothels", agencies & "oriental knocking shops" & stick to genuine independents who work alone. But what about parties & massage parlours who offer HE?

Help! I wasn't too worried about this law but having read the posts on here I am now very confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not contributed on here for a while, but in my opinion if you are just starting out and are reading this forum you will be confused.

Yes, you are as safe as you were before the new legislation as long as you do not have sex with traffiked women.

Just take a deep breath and relax, it seems intense on here because of the focus of the site. If you look elsewhere even in the papers and the tv no one is interested. Yes, if the police have more power to arrest trafficer's then more power to them I certainly do not want to be responsible for encouraging any illegal activity

But I do intend to carry on paying for sex (which is legal) with women I know are English, I will not start seeing more independant's as in my opinion I would rather visit a flat with a couple of ladies whom can vouch for each others independance.

Luckily my preferance of ladies in the 20's/30's, English with English accent's and BBW's (would like to see some Cartel trying to enslave a BBW!:eek:). If on the other hand you prefer young, non-English girls, it is more difficult.

I intend to stick to my rules, but there again I did before the new legislation. I am sure there are many men whom will stick to a sensible criteria but still enjoy paying for sex (which is not an offence).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, you are as safe as you were before the new legislation as long as you do not have sex with traffiked women.

I'm not quite sure how you tell if a prostitute has been trafficked, or not been trafficked for that matter, but that is by-the-by really; because there is no mention whatsoever of "trafficked" in the new legislation, unless of course you are stating that all "trafficked" prostitutes are/have been forced, coerced, deceived etc.

53A Paying for sexual services of a prostitute subjected to force etc.

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define "safe". In my view there is no certainty in this vale of tears and sorrow.

But I would assume, for example, for most married punters risk of activity being discovered by wife is a far greater risk than risk of being apprehended by police.

And my own gut feeling is that guys that already take precautions to avoid meeting coerced ladies (i.e. vast majority of us) are relatively safe... more likely to have a very bad experience driving a car.

But what might be useful is a thread or sticky that gathers all the common sense advice that's been offered on these boards about best way to optimize both legal and moral* punting. (* In my view punting with appropriate service providers is completely moral.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have understood this legislation all started with the concern from HH about women being traffiked into the UK and forced to work - if you want to split hairs then so be it.

As far as what I call safe - these are flats that I have visited for a few years, where the ladies pay tax and I am as certain as I can be that they have not been forced, coerced etc., into the sex industry. It is my opinion and my rules - everybody else can do what they want I really not concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Define "safe". In my view there is no certainty in this vale of tears and sorrow.

But I would assume, for example, for most married punters risk of activity being discovered by wife is a far greater risk than risk of being apprehended by police.

And my own gut feeling is that guys that already take precautions to avoid meeting coerced ladies (i.e. vast majority of us) are relatively safe... more likely to have a very bad experience driving a car.

But what might be useful is a thread or sticky that gathers all the common sense advice that's been offered on these boards about best way to optimize both legal and moral* punting. (* In my view punting with appropriate service providers is completely moral.)

Nice to see someone talking common sense, I agree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I have understood this legislation all started with the concern from HH about women being traffiked into the UK and forced to work - if you want to split hairs then so be it.

There is no hair splitting about it, the legislation concerning trafficking was introduced a good 6 years ago, that legislation works or it does not, either way the new legislation does not in any way assist the existing trafficking legislation, and I say that because trafficking as described in the legislation is in and of itself is not an offence, it has to be in conjunction with any other offence under Part 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, I see no new offence making it illegal to the force, coerce, deceive etc. a prostitute for gain by a third party, therefore the new legislation is all to do with reducing the demand for prostitution per se, and any affect that it will have on trafficking will be purely coincidental and not by design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is another classic example of this Labour administration passing a law that cannot be enforced. This is just a feeble attempt by Brown to placate Mad Hattie and the other far left feminists.

Even more worrying is the proposals to allow the Police and other Agencies to intercept and read mail, email and text messages without Court approval.

The Police have already admitted that the registration numbers and movement of vehicles is being monitored nationwide and these details will be kept for a minimum of two years.

If you value your privacy you know what to do come May 6th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no hair splitting about it, the legislation concerning trafficking was introduced a good 6 years ago, that legislation works or it does not, either way the new legislation does not in any way assist the existing trafficking legislation, and I say that because trafficking as described in the legislation is in and of itself is not an offence, it has to be in conjunction with any other offence under Part 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, I see no new offence making it illegal to the force, coerce, deceive etc. a prostitute for gain by a third party, therefore the new legislation is all to do with reducing the demand for prostitution per se, and any affect that it will have on trafficking will be purely coincidental and not by design.

Isn't it so, that if someone is indeed trafficked, but not coerced, forced, duped etc. it is still not a crime to pay to have sex with her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't it so, that if someone is indeed trafficked, but not coerced, forced, duped etc. it is still not a crime to pay to have sex with her.

I think that in a slightly perverse way this new legislation has served to confirm that paying a prostitute for supplying sexual services is not illegal, with the exception of those prostitutes who qualify under the new legislation, and being "trafficked" is not a qualification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the law's stance on people who organise outcalls with independants at a hotel for example?

Is that legal?

It's not taking place in a brothel.

I suppose you still don't know if the lady is being coerced behind the scenes.

What are your opinions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm a healthy man in the prime of my life in a loving but sexless marriage. I have physical & emotional needs that my wife is unable to meet. I do not wish to have an affair & take the higher risk of ruining my wife & kids' lives not to mention my own, so I discreetly pay willing women to have sex with me.

This reflects my position entirely. Its why I started punting 5 years ago; no sex at home for 2 years at that time. I was 49 and didn't want to give up sex for good - why should one?

Punting was the logical and least harmful solution. I don't punt with trafficked girls - every girl I've seen has left me clearly of the view she was a totally willing participant.

The new legislation flows from Harman's obsession with trafficking being integral to the sex trade in this country - which is factually wrong. The law, as proposed by Jacqui Smith (a badly misinformed Home Secretary), was watered down and, unless you're reckless in who you punt with and ignore all the warning signs I believe you are still safe to carry on. I plan to this weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have not contributed on here for a while, but in my opinion if you are just starting out and are reading this forum you will be confused.

Yes, you are as safe as you were before the new legislation as long as you do not have sex with traffiked women.

Just take a deep breath and relax, it seems intense on here because of the focus of the site. If you look elsewhere even in the papers and the tv no one is interested. Yes, if the police have more power to arrest trafficer's then more power to them I certainly do not want to be responsible for encouraging any illegal activity

But I do intend to carry on paying for sex (which is legal) with women I know are English, I will not start seeing more independant's as in my opinion I would rather visit a flat with a couple of ladies whom can vouch for each others independance.

Luckily my preferance of ladies in the 20's/30's, English with English accent's and BBW's (would like to see some Cartel trying to enslave a BBW!:P). If on the other hand you prefer young, non-English girls, it is more difficult.

I intend to stick to my rules, but there again I did before the new legislation. I am sure there are many men whom will stick to a sensible criteria but still enjoy paying for sex (which is not an offence).

This is all very well, however the hidden agenda of the government is to shut down the paid-for sex industry altogether. They are clearly prepared to criminalise law-abiding punters to do this - the ends justify the means in their view. We've already seen raids in which punters have been arrested/issued with cautions even before any allegations of traficking/coercion have been made. Guilty until proven innocent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This reflects my position entirely. Its why I started punting 5 years ago; no sex at home for 2 years at that time. I was 49 and didn't want to give up sex for good - why should one?

Punting was the logical and least harmful solution. I don't punt with trafficked girls - every girl I've seen has left me clearly of the view she was a totally willing participant.

The new legislation flows from Harman's obsession with trafficking being integral to the sex trade in this country - which is factually wrong. The law, as proposed by Jacqui Smith (a badly misinformed Home Secretary), was watered down and, unless you're reckless in who you punt with and ignore all the warning signs I believe you are still safe to carry on. I plan to this weekend.

I think Harman's problem is her age. At 59 she, like millions of other women of similar age the world over, has lost interest in sex or can't be bothered with it. That doesn't entitle her to try and stop men paying for sex or impose her moralistic virtues on us :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is another classic example of this Labour administration passing a law that cannot be enforced. This is just a feeble attempt by Brown to placate Mad Hattie and the other far left feminists.

Even more worrying is the proposals to allow the Police and other Agencies to intercept and read mail, email and text messages without Court approval.

The Police have already admitted that the registration numbers and movement of vehicles is being monitored nationwide and these details will be kept for a minimum of two years.

If you value your privacy you know what to do come May 6th.

I agree entirely, the drift of Labour from Democratic Socialism to National Socialism is quite frightening. Another Parliament of "Fuhrer" Brown and his hetchmen will see the UK well down the road to a Police State.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is the law's stance on people who organise outcalls with independants at a hotel for example?

Is that legal?

It's not taking place in a brothel.

I suppose you still don't know if the lady is being coerced behind the scenes.

What are your opinions?

I would suggest completely legal, as long as the lady has not been forced, threatened, coerced or duped into it.

How would you know? Well, if you do the deal through a dodge looking bloke who brings the girl to the room and throws her crying into the room then I would suggest you're on dodgy ground. If the girl has a good reputation, own website, arranges appointment herself, and makes her own way to the hotel then you're probably on pretty secure ground.

No guarantees though. But the alternative is no sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is all very well, however the hidden agenda of the government is to shut down the paid-for sex industry altogether. They are clearly prepared to criminalise law-abiding punters to do this - the ends justify the means in their view. We've already seen raids in which punters have been arrested/issued with cautions even before any allegations of traficking/coercion have been made. Guilty until proven innocent?

I think there has been one raid reported, one caution reported and we do not know that the caution was related to forced sex with a prostitute he could have been carrying drugs. With the reported stats of 2000 brothels in London I hardly think they are going for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all gone quiet, I hope this is not the lull before the storm! Hopefully this new hideous law is as unworkable as many suggest and it becomes a lame duck. As many here have written the execution of an arrest will only happen during an intelligence lead raid on premises that are known to be used for prostitution and where the girls are working under duress. 90%+ of "Massage Parlours" are well run, the girls work there at their own free will and these places are and have been known and tolerated by local constabulary for years, so why should that suddenly change. A well known place in my local area Swansea, is situated just yards from Swansea Police Station and the Magistrates Court, the place even sponser a local rugby team with their logo emblazened on the kit, this is hardly the way of eliminating prostitution. I personally think this new law will fade away into obscurity, just like the non existent obscure so called illegality it seeks to find. May 7th will see Ms Harman fade into obscurity along with her feeble attempt to end something that is just a figment of her imagination.

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0