What is the closure of backpage going to do?
Tiredtraveler
Solo PL
I do not know if you are aware of the fact that all "adult" classifieds on backpage.com have been censored.
No escort or body rub etc are allowed because of the thought police in DC.
I recently had a dancers tell me while she was currently working is in a club she also worked as a part time escort for extra income. Her opinion was that girls that were escorting full time were going to gravitate back to the clubs to make contacts and work with club managers to quietly earn 'extra' there.
Do you think this will happen and will it increase the quality of the dancers?
No escort or body rub etc are allowed because of the thought police in DC.
I recently had a dancers tell me while she was currently working is in a club she also worked as a part time escort for extra income. Her opinion was that girls that were escorting full time were going to gravitate back to the clubs to make contacts and work with club managers to quietly earn 'extra' there.
Do you think this will happen and will it increase the quality of the dancers?
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
14 comments
Perhaps it may increase the mileage in some clubs, but not everyone will regard that as an increase in quality.
Honestly though, I've never used Backpage and always regarded it as the monger equivalent of the cantina scene in Star Wars.
Remains to be seen, of course, how long this lasts. It is a bit harder than it used to be to find providers, and there's always repercussion when that happens
And yes, Backpage ads for the most part are the bottom of the barrel selling themselves to those clueless suckers who are too lazy to look for other options.
At least BP has mostly real adds for the most part. There's a few scams but they're easy to spot. But I agree as escorts go, BP is mostly the $200 an hour druggies. There are exceptions...like my new g/f.
Not quite. BP fucked themselves over by editing ads to make them seem less like trafficking, rather than simply rejecting the ads. The latter would have protected them from liability in most cases, just like virtually every other such venue that simply publishes ads, like newspapers and magazines. The former, however, makes them *directly* culpable in the eyes of the law, and there's case law to back it up.
I think they were hoping to garner sympathy from traditional First Amendment advocates, but those folks are likely to look at them meddling and...decline to help.
It's illegal to say, "Fuck me for $200" but not illegal to say, "Spend time with me for $200". Or is it?
Why couldn't BP just tell the government to go fuck themselves?
The conservative nanny state is frightening if implemented. No more free speech in any of its forms...we'll see if TUSCL is even here in 4 years. But at least I can shoot anyone I want if they frighten me.
If, however, they reject that first ad, and then later accept a version from the advertiser that has the suspicious parts removed, they are *not* liable, the advertiser is. Legally, anyway.