Printable View
The "Research Study" quotes that at any given time 70% of those on the USA Sex Guide website are visitors, while only 30% are actual members. Ummmm, just exactly how would they know that? Isn't that restricted server data? Just saying.
[QUOTE=NoSmoking; 1648842]They have a 112 page document from this research paper on Mongers and quotes a lot of posts from here.
[url]http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/illinois-johns-prostitutes-sex.html[/url][/QUOTE]
Does someone have a link to the study? I couldn't find it on the NBC site.
[QUOTE=TonyDe;1649506]Does someone have a link to the study? I couldn't find it on the NBC site.[/QUOTE][url]Http://media.nbcchicago.com/documents/FinalWeb_OurGreatHobby.pdf[/url]
How about reporting on the other side of the story. How much do the pimps and girls pay the cops to stay on that conner. Or in Rockford how much the cops get from the store fronts and the drug dealers. They should interview the girls . How many cops abused them.
[QUOTE=TonyDe;1649506]Does someone have a link to the study? I couldn't find it on the NBC site.[/QUOTE][url]Http://media.nbcchicago.com/documents/FinalWeb_OurGreatHobby.pdf[/url]
like illinois senator kirk who was recently quoted as saying that backpage is a site where anyone can go "to order up an **** girl for sex", caase, the originators of the "research" paper, obviously have ulterior motives that simply brush facts aside in favor of headline grabbing sensationalism. caase wouldn't know valid research methods if they sat on them, because like kirk, it's headlines, not the truth they are after. this is the state of fundraising, politics, and "electability" in today's world. make a splash, get people talking, and if you have to lie to do it,"oh well". i've been hobbying for decades longer than fifteen years, and i am repulsed by the distorted, smear campaign this supposedly professional body is presenting as "fact". if you want an example of pure prostitution, you need look no further than caase.
[quote=randolph; 1649396]what a crock of shit.
i have been hobbying for fifteen years. i have never seen the crap they refer to. i cannot recall one instance of a woman who seemed scared or threatened or victimized. are there women who are being taken advantage of. sure. but there are way more women stuck in loveless marriages or dead end jobs, etc etc.
men buy sex. stop the presses. big fricken deal. there are exceptions and rare instances of women being abused so in that case address the abuse not the overall existence of sex. this is like saying the best way to stop mass school shootings is to close schools. i cannot believe some government bureaucracy probably spent thousands of our tax dollars to give these crazed anti-men bitches to perform this study.[/quote]
[QUOTE=NoSmoking;1649566][url]Http://media.nbcchicago.com/documents/FinalWeb_OurGreatHobby.pdf[/url][/QUOTE]thanks. Looks like a long read.
[QUOTE=JamesDidlio; 1648657][url]http://www.wbez.org/news/study-sheds-light-men-who-buy-sex-illinois-104858[/url]
I've been seeing posts in the past 3 months about people being asked to volunteer for a study. I think it's related to the above post.[/QUOTE]I read the story and, you know, in all the time I've been on here, I can't remember one monger talking about being violent with a provider. Strange, isn't it, that they insist it's been discussed here?
A quick look at the report shows they used a very limited timeframe for the 'analysis' of posts made here: June1, 2010-August 31, 2010. Makes me wonder if they found a "juicy" series of posts that 'proved' their conclusions, and decided to just throw out anything else (they say they studied us from June 1 2010 through August 31, 2011).
Here's another link to s related story:
[url]http://www.rrstar.com/news/publicsafety/x1353233866/Report-Rockford-has-2nd-highest-use-of-website-where-men-buy-sex[/url]
[QUOTE=Castlerae;1649634]I read the story and, you know, in all the time I've been on here, I can't remember one monger talking about being violent with a provider. Strange, isn't it, that they insist it's been discussed here?[/QUOTE]That's the exact same thing I was thinking. Anything to sell a story.
[quote=castlerae;1649634]i read the story and, you know, in all the time i've been on here, i can't remember one monger talking about being violent with a provider. strange, isn't it, that they insist it's been discussed here?[/quote]i'm sure most won't agree with me and i'm sure to get flames or whatever, not that i care. you say that you can't remember anyone saying about being violent, yet the report clearly quoted the posts. i have an uncanny (and sometimes annoying) ability to remember trivial shit for a long time. i do remember reading those accounts when they were posted. when i read them, i didn't equate them as being an act of violence toward these women. but upon further ponderance, a monger just recently posted about picking up a lsw, who's english was poor and bj skills were sub-par. he stated that she wasn't allowing him to go as deep as he wanted, so his response was to grab the back of her head and force her down. the operative word being force, he even commented on the fact that she stated "me no like". i didn't look at it as "violence" but if you look at in the context of violence towards "prostituted women" it is violence. the same can be said for the **** accusations they made. plenty of times guys have made a statement of "she looked really young" but they go through with the session because she told me she just turned 19, or (and i'm guilty of this) i been seeing her ads for 2-3 years!
they also posit about sexual assaults occurring at massage parlors and i initially expressed skepticism at these statements. if you look at the situation in the light of a legal standing, when we go to the amp and move up the girls leg to the ass or kitty and she either doesn't want to be touched, or doesn't provide, that is indeed sex assault. if your daughter was a legit massage therapist, you wouldn't want one of us perverts rubbing on her body while she tried to do her job.
it essentially comes down to perspective. we are out here looking to pay for play, and will justify the situation however we see fit."i'm not paying for sex, i'm paying her to leave","we both know why we are there, so no need to play games" and so on. but if u-turn it around and look at it from a different angle, a good majority of these women would much rather be doing something else, no matter how realistic they make the experience seem. i speak on this first hand from true friendships with various providers. i'm not saying that i'm going to leave the hobby (to the slim extent that i'm still in it) or trying to tell anyone that this is a reprehensible practice and they should leave. i'm only saying that we should always remember that there is more than one way to look at and rationalize any activity. i will get off my soapbox now!
[QUOTE=Castlerae; 1649641]A quick look at the report shows they used a very limited timeframe for the 'analysis' of posts made here: June1, 2010-August 31, 2010. Makes me wonder if they found a "juicy" series of posts that 'proved' their conclusions, and decided to just throw out anything else (they say they studied us from June 1 2010 through August 31, 2011).
Here's another link to s related story:
[url]http://www.rrstar.com/news/publicsafety/x1353233866/Report-Rockford-has-2nd-highest-use-of-website-where-men-buy-sex[/url][/QUOTE]As for the limited time frame, this is generally done when doing research on something that either spans a long period of time or is still ongoing. Had they selected a 4 year time period, the paper could have been 400 pages long. If they hadn't specified a period, they could still be culling info up to today and the report still will be unfinished.
[QUOTE=Randolph; 1649396]What a crock of shit.
I have been hobbying for fifteen years. I have NEVER seen the crap they refer to. I cannot recall one instance of a woman who seemed scared or threatened or victimized. Are there women who are being taken advantage of. Sure. But there are way more women stuck in loveless marriages or dead end jobs, etc etc.
Men buy sex. Stop the presses. Big fricken deal. There ARE exceptions and rare instances of women being abused so in that case address the abuse not the overall existence of sex. This is like saying the best way to stop mass school shootings is to close schools. I cannot believe some government bureaucracy probably spent thousands of our tax dollars to give these crazed anti-men bitches to perform this study.[/QUOTE]Yeah, right! I have yet to see a 13 year old girl drugged, tied up and being forced to have sex for money. I always run into the Asian who liked about her age and states she is 25 and she is closer to 45! All I am looking for is women 18 to 25.
[quote=chrisj321; 1650212]i'm sure most won't agree with me and i'm sure to get flames or whatever, not that i care. you say that you can't remember anyone saying about being violent, yet the report clearly quoted the posts. i have an uncanny (and sometimes annoying) ability to remember trivial shit for a long time. i do remember reading those accounts when they were posted. when i read them, i didn't equate them as being an act of violence toward these women. but upon further ponderance, a monger just recently posted about picking up a lsw, who's english was poor and bj skills were sub-par. he stated that she wasn't allowing him to go as deep as he wanted, so his response was to grab the back of her head and force her down. the operative word being force, he even commented on the fact that she stated "me no like". i didn't look at it as "violence" but if you look at in the context of violence towards "prostituted women" it is violence. the same can be said for the **** accusations they made. plenty of times guys have made a statement of "she looked really young" but they go through with the session because she told me she just turned 19, or (and i'm guilty of this) i been seeing her ads for 2-3 years!
they also posit about sexual assaults occurring at massage parlors and i initially expressed skepticism at these statements. if you look at the situation in the light of a legal standing, when we go to the amp and move up the girls leg to the ass or kitty and she either doesn't want to be touched, or doesn't provide, that is indeed sex assault. if your daughter was a legit massage therapist, you wouldn't want one of us perverts rubbing on her body while she tried to do her job.
it essentially comes down to perspective. we are out here looking to pay for play, and will justify the situation however we see fit."i'm not paying for sex, i'm paying her to leave","we both know why we are there, so no need to play games" and so on. but if u-turn it around and look at it from a different angle, a good majority of these women would much rather be doing something else, no matter how realistic they make the experience seem. i speak on this first hand from true friendships with various providers. i'm not saying that i'm going to leave the hobby (to the slim extent that i'm still in it) or trying to tell anyone that this is a reprehensible practice and they should leave. i'm only saying that we should always remember that there is more than one way to look at and rationalize any activity. i will get off my soapbox now![/quote]i agree with what you are saying that is others who see it that way. i have been around and there is storys. is not that we are abusive is that they feel like we are abusive and persistent. example like when you do a girl in greek form and at first she say no but we keep on and on and offer more donation and then we see them in pain and what do you think she is going to say. not that you were very generous with her, she is going to say how much you hurt her. she still want the donation.
[QUOTE=Chrisj321;1650212]I'm . I'm only saying that we should always remember that there is more than one way to look at and rationalize any activity. I will get off my soapbox now![/QUOTE]I'm sure you could go back and comb out posts that seem violent towards providers, if you tried hard enough. But I'd say that such posts are very few and far between. Their report and the articles make it sounds as if violence, human trafficking and sex with minors are condoned and almost cheered up by the "hyper masculine" mongers that pay for these services.
Most people are not going to read the whole stupid report, but the article fails to even mention that these services are paid for because they are being SOLD by providers.
What about posts reporting of acts of violence towards hobbies? I'd expect you'd find way more of those cases- Set-ups, lies, scams, actual violence. That canadian fellow who got hit in the head with a hammer or something comes to mind, or the guy who had to use his shot gun to protect himself when someone was kicking his front door in (he had already been pepper-sprayed when he put his foot down about being. With all due respect, grabbing a lady's head to go farther down on you? Really? How many times has your boner been violently killed by the confirmation of fake pics!
Not to say violence isn't happening. What they claim is that this forum is a tool to condone and promote violence and all that other garbage. And they have the self-agrandizing goal to actually change Law Enforcement culture and policy with their bullsh study.
You say there is more than one way to look at and rationalize any activity, and that is the problem. They looked at our posts and took them to be interpreted to suit their agenda. By selective sampling and generalization, they make this forum sound far worse than it actually is.