Massage Parlor Reports

[Sr Diablito]

Sorry, but I've never liked that "lower rates of sex crimes against women" argument. That implies that instead of raping somebody a rapist will just go to a spa. Maybe true, but I don't want to hear it, and it's not a good point to argue IMO. A person who is against spa's isn't going to say, "oh, that's a good outlet for the rapists", "we'll let the spa's stay open".

Good point.

[iamioman]

Here's a good, and funny read. The funny part is when they talk about cheaters.

https://www.academia.edu/12125214/De...d_Exploitation

There may be some sound data in that report, but one of the very first conclusions she bases her whole arguyment on is completely bogus and makes a rookie mistake of confusing a correlation with a cause.

She cites the growth in online reviews of providers in RI over a 10+ year span as evidence that prostitution in RI increased greatly during those years. Go back and look at the years. They are the years (starting in 1995) when the public at large started getting on the internet in a big way (1995+).

Of course there aren't going to be as many online reviews when there weren't as many people online to post reviews. I would bet you $1000 there's a similar increase in the rate of restaurant reviews in RI over the same span of yuears, does that mean people went out to eat (or ate that much more) during those same years?

She may think she has noble goals but if this report is any indication Hughes is a bullshit academic.

[Member #4942]

I have read good things about Opulence, but I have also read that they are professionally dressed. Have they started wearing more skimpy outfits like the girls at the former Main Avenue?

As you know, I prefer AMP's and am only reporting from PM's. But at both Enso and Opulence isn't it what they're wearing or not wearing at the end that counts. IMHO? I really doubt that I will ever go to Opulence but any reports here would be welcomed, I'm sure.

And I really loved those shorts that Yoko and Cece wore.

[Ambrose]

I have read good things about Opulence, but I have also read that they are professionally dressed. Have they started wearing more skimpy outfits like the girls at the former Main Avenue?

No, their clothes are covering them from their necks to their feet. Like the new ordinance states, looks like they are going by the rules.

[Choir Boy]

I think we're "beating a dead horse" and need to get back to reporting the good and bad at the spas. For example, is M still the best "other worldly" experience? But seriously, the spas are open and seem to be "safe", and we need to continue to help one another.

A number of PM's to me have been very favorable about Opulance. Techs are young, beautiful and have become accommodating. May be worth a visit. They sure look good on BP every day.

I have read good things about Opulence, but I have also read that they are professionally dressed. Have they started wearing more skimpy outfits like the girls at the former Main Avenue?

[Member #5912]

Here's a good, and funny read. The funny part is when they talk about cheaters.

https://www.academia.edu/12125214/De...d_Exploitation

[Rebrobate218]

Good deduction, and because the spa girls never walk the street it is in fact another reason that the argument for legalizing spa's to reduce rape is a ridiculous one. Maybe it can be argued somewhere but not in providence.

I read an article which basically said that in the state of Rhode Island STD rates where lower when the spas were not criminalized. That article did not get the play of all of the undercover journalist going into spas. Maybe it can be argued in Providence.

[Member #5912]

That was my first thought when I heard that to and I similar objections, but I think what the argument really is is that when an activity is criminalized it has to operate in the shadows and attracts shadowy people.

Ex. When sex for money is legal, a brothel / spa / individual can work in a well lit professional environment with security cameras, etc.

When it's illegal, women wanting / needingi to do that kind of work have to work out of their homes or on the street. Either of which puts them in potentially more risky situations (craigslist strangers, people wanting rob / rape them).

So not it's not that johns will rape women if they can't pay for sex legally, It's that douchebags who might rape have more targets in women that are easier to prey on when prostitution is illegal. (women walking along late at night in not-particularly safe parts of the city instead of working in a well lit business with a screener and other employees in case anything happens).

Good deduction, and because the spa girls never walk the street it is in fact another reason that the argument for legalizing spa's to reduce rape is a ridiculous one. Maybe it can be argued somewhere but not in providence.

[iamioman]

Sorry, but I've never liked that "lower rates of sex crimes against women" argument. That implies that instead of raping somebody a rapist will just go to a spa. Maybe true, but I don't want to hear it, and it's not a good point to argue IMO. A person who is against spa's isn't going to say, "oh, that's a good outlet for the rapists", "we'll let the spa's stay open".

That was my first thought when I heard that to and I similar objections, but I think what the argument really is is that when an activity is criminalized it has to operate in the shadows and attracts shadowy people.

Ex. When sex for money is legal, a brothel / spa / individual can work in a well lit professional environment with security cameras, etc.

When it's illegal, women wanting / needingi to do that kind of work have to work out of their homes or on the street. Either of which puts them in potentially more risky situations (craigslist strangers, people wanting rob / rape them).

So not it's not that johns will rape women if they can't pay for sex legally, It's that douchebags who might rape have more targets in women that are easier to prey on when prostitution is illegal. (women walking along late at night in not-particularly safe parts of the city instead of working in a well lit business with a screener and other employees in case anything happens).

[iamioman]

...There has also been some research recently that states that countries that have legalized prostitution have lower rat
es of sex crimes against women. ...

I haven't seen international statistics about this but someone researched rates of violence against women in RI that appeared to show a lower rate of crime against women when prostitution wasn't illegal, but thje numbers don't work if you look at more than a couple of yeears pre and post decriminalization if you don't look at a very specific range of years the numbers don't show any correlation.

[Member #4942]

I think we're "beating a dead horse" and need to get back to reporting the good and bad at the spas. For example, is M still the best "other worldly" experience? But seriously, the spas are open and seem to be "safe", and we need to continue to help one another.

A number of PM's to me have been very favorable about Opulance. Techs are young, beautiful and have become accommodating. May be worth a visit. They sure look good on BP every day.

[Rebrobate218]

Casey wrote a good post, but it's good for us not the Providence Journal.

This was for a spa in Philly, but the same bullshit applies.

[Rebrobate218]

Casey wrote a good post, but it's good for us not the Providence Journal.

This is a cut and past of what I put on another site.

I lived in Rhode Island a few year ago when indoor prostitution was not a criminal offense. What happened was that a decade earlier the state legislature rewrote the prostitution laws and addressed street walking only. This made prostitution inside of a building not legal but not illegal. So the strip clubs were straight-up brothels and you had many massage spas in Providence. When legal issue became common knowledge it was an embarrassment to the state and they change the law very quickly. The argument was that it was to protect trafficked girls and women when in reality the state had egg on its face. After the law was changed and blowhard crusaders like Donna Hughes and the Polaris foundation made a lot of noise the cops raided all of the massage parlors in Providence. They arrested a lot of girls and spent huge amounts of resources on this and only got several misdemeanors convictions for prostitution. The city of Providence and the State police found no evidence of human trafficking or sexual slavery. Next the cops raided a few of the strip clubs and set up phony Craig's list pages, etc. They managed to arrest the mascot for the Patriots. For a while they left the Asian spas alone and targeted Latino's and where still not able to evidence human trafficking.

Donna Hughes and her group insisted that the spas were a hot bed of sexual slavery. I guess she is a better investigator than the state police. Somebody actually looked at her research and the number people trafficked into this industry and crunch her numbers. If they were true than every Asian in Providence would have had to have been trafficked. Dr. Hughes quickly change her focus to low level pimping. What I find amazing is that these activist seem not to have the well being of prostitutes in mind but are simply offended by the idea of prostitution. Also, it is always slavery, poverty and drug addition never come into play.

[Ambrose]

Sorry, but I've never liked that "lower rates of sex crimes against women" argument. That implies that instead of raping somebody a rapist will just go to a spa. Maybe true, but I don't want to hear it, and it's not a good point to argue IMO. A person who is against spa's isn't going to say, "oh, that's a good outlet for the rapists", "we'll let the spa's stay open".

Casey wrote a good post, but it's good for us not the Providence Journal.

[Member #5912]

You should send this to the Providence Journal. I think it's time that people who are clear thinking start to change the narrative. There has also been some research recently that states that countries that have legalized prostitution have lower rates of sex crimes against women. The government has never been able to stop drugs or alcohol. Nor have they ever stopped the sex industry. They do have a history of driving vices underground into the hands of criminals.

Sorry, but I've never liked that "lower rates of sex crimes against women" argument. That implies that instead of raping somebody a rapist will just go to a spa. Maybe true, but I don't want to hear it, and it's not a good point to argue IMO. A person who is against spa's isn't going to say, "oh, that's a good outlet for the rapists", "we'll let the spa's stay open".