Candyland Kelly

It is not as advertised. The lady they are using is much older than 23. I talked to the operator of the agency and he told me that he would correct the mistake but as yet has failed to do so. This is just to let you all know to beware when using this agency.

That's what the asian agency doing business. I'm the old customer for their girl BiBi. As what I know, she already 30.

That's what the asian agency doing their bussiness. As what I know their girl BiBi is older than 30.

That's what the asian agency doing their business. As what I know their girl BiBi is older than 30 too.

Not sure why you have posted the same comment, three times!!!.

Bibi is likely older than 20 (she looks very very young and that is how all small cute girls look like that is younger than their age but the smile gives her away otherwise I would have insisted on an ID if the wrinkles were not there due to smiling lol), but I really don't think she is older than 30 LOL!!!!!!!!!!.

you got the point there i dont believe she is older then 30 but may be quite close taking from her smile

lol

newbie mistake, thinking that the pictures were correct. Been reading all the reviews and cowboy diary then I fall for this. Kelly is not the girl on the site. Not a negative review but just not the girl in the picture. She only started yesterday.

To be very straighforward, we never ever use any fake photo of the girls and we never BS.

Kelly's photo was taken by K-Bear (Brad). You can see her photo on his website also: http://www.gtagirls.com

Sincerely,

Mark

what about suki?

What about suki??!!. Her picture is real. Boobs are real too.

Suki is for real I saw her twice I had a great time

very sweet and sensual nice boobs though. 2 weeks

Ago plus last Saturday I had badluck with this agency

I tried to booked with Julia as I got there she didn't

Answer so i call back and they say that she doesn't

Do blacks they will give me a discount. So last Saturday

I booked again with April this time they told me no problem

I will get my discount and she's working till midnight, got there

At 10:30pm still got no answer I call back again the same bs

Story Julia don't do blacks, April was already off for the day.

what a BS services at least advertise that certain of your girls

Don't provide services to certain ethnic group. And also

I did experience the same discrimination with that agency

lalaland.

Posted via Mobile Device

I tend to disagree April with all due respect. If she had seen him first and then she didn't want to see him for whatever reason that would be okay as I too believe it is entirely up to lady to decide whether she would like to go ahead with the paid date AFTER she sees him and if she didn't like she can always say no. But in this case she didn't even see the gent and made a general statement that she does not do blacks no matter how good (or bad) looking or clean (unclean) or educated (uneducated) or classy unclassy they may be. This is a discrimination based on race NOT sexual preference. When I go to strip bars there are ladies of various races and colors. My preference is for pale brunettes but if I see a cute classy black lady I will take her to the CR too and enjoy my time as much. But if I say (God forbid) I don't see blacks period no matter how cute or classy and just for skin color, this is not sexual preference lol, it is racism in my view. Granted, it is not the same but for all I know he could be Sydney Poitier lol!!!.

Btw, Backhawk, I did see Julia and you didn't lose much by not seeing her.....

While I agree an SP has every right to state and have honored a sexual preference in ethnicity no atter how backwater or jim crow it may seem....I think there was definitely a problem with their communication of that fact allowing the client to make arrangements twice than standing him up.

I will personally NEVER even bother...not that my obvious pigment "dissability" would have granted me entry.

It would be nice to have some sort of list so that clients wouldn't feel slighted by actually showing up to an appointment and being turned away. "sorry...you didn't sound black on the phone"

*rolling my eyes*

I completely agree that this was an issue with the agency. They should not have made a customer go through this not once but twice. Its a poor way to run a business but its not the SP'S fault in any way shape or form.

Posted via Mobile Device

I agree this definitely an agency issue it is bad business, also if a girl has a preference they should indicate that in her profile or when they are booking her don't waste the clients time. The Agency should recognize that men tend to book women they could never approach in real life and since the agency special is asian girls they should understand men of different races facinations with them and point out the SP that aren't biased.

I totally disagree with your statement April Dawn. Discrimination based on ethnicity, culture, race, skin colour, language, accent or religion, sexual orientation. According

to your quote ''Any SP has the right to say no to whatever age, sex, race, religion, height, weight, glasses no glasses person that she wants to.'' To me it is a pure

definition of descrimination.

I can understand a SP can refuse if the customer has a bad Hygiene, rude,

influence of drugs and alchohol. SP runs a business, their role it's to provide

a sexual services. If they refuse the customer based on his race, weight,

religion, age, then I think the SP should advertised it. Customer has the right

to know who they dealing with it's in their best interest. There is nothing more

frustrating when you go a SP and they refuse you it's such a waste of time.

Imagine going to any restaurants, or home depot, future shop, any malls

they don't want to serve you because of the way you look like. What's

the point of running a business. I thought money has no colors, seems

that for some SP's it's not always the case.

I totally disagree with your statement April Dawn. Discrimination based on ethnicity, culture, race, skin colour, language, accent or religion, sexual orientation. According

to your quote ''Any SP has the right to say no to whatever age, sex, race, religion, height, weight, glasses no glasses person that she wants to.'' To me it is a pure

definition of descrimination.

I find it very scary that you are suggesting that when a woman becomes a sex worker, she gives up her right to consent. You can't compare the services of sex workers to Home Depot. We are sharing a very intimate part of ourselves with you and often even letting you inside our bodies. Women have the right to say no, and it's not up to you or anyone else to determine when it's okay or not okay to say no. Her body, her choice!

I'll admit I discriminate and for very good reasons. I tend to avoid people my age, mainly because I don't want to bump into people I know. I also discriminate based on language. I only take clients who can speak English comfortably and I do not care what their first language is. Communication is extremely important to a good encounter together. In the past, I've seen clients whose English is questionable and there was confusion about rates and boundaries. It can be quite scary when you try to communicate your boundaries, but they don't understand!

I won't deny it's discrimination BUT (don't be too shocked) people (and yes sex workers and women are people too) have the right to discriminate when choosing who to be sexually intimate with!

Would you hold hobbiests to the same standard? Many hobbiests are attracted to one race over another, to a particular age group, and I've noticed that some Francophones prefer escorts that are also Francophone. Would you criticize, for example, a man who has a preference for women with an "exotic" look for booking sessions with women who match his preference? Would you criticize an English-speaking man for preferring women whose first language is English? If a man prefers mature women, should he be forced to see younger SP's or MA's, just so he doesn't "discriminate"??

Quite frankly I am both shocked and disturbed at some of the comments made in this thread (of course an SP has every right to refuse service based on her choice but refusing service based on race!!!!!!!!!! getting so much support!!!!!!) however, as per my promise (to myself) to stay away from debates on touchy subjects on this board, I will refrain from further comments.

Discrimination based on ethnicity, culture, race, skin colour, language, accent or religion, sexual orientation. According

to your quote ''Any SP has the right to say no to whatever age, sex, race, religion, height, weight, glasses no glasses person that she wants to.'' To me it is a pure definition of descrimination.

Well, yes - but that's not the point. The point is that we all discriminate when we're considering who we're going to have sexual relations with. Can *you* honestly say that you'd be equally willing to hop into bed with anybody, without any regard to their age, or race, or religion, or body type, or looks? Can you really, honestly, say it'd make no difference to you at all? That you're completely indiscriminate in who you choose to sleep with? I know I can't, and I wouldn't expect anyone else to, either.

Incidentally, if you're *completely* indiscriminate in who you choose to jump into bed with, other people will probably judge you for that, too. You can't win :)

I can understand a SP can refuse if the customer has a bad Hygiene, rude, influence of drugs and alchohol. SP runs a business, their role it's to provide a sexual services. If they refuse the customer based on his race, weight, religion, age, then I think the SP should advertised it.

To be fair, some do - especially on the age of clients. There seem to be quite a few ladies that don't generally see younger guys.

Customer has the right to know who they dealing with it's in their best interest. There is nothing more frustrating when you go a SP and they refuse you it's such a waste of time.

 

Imagine going to any restaurants, or home depot, future shop, any malls

they don't want to serve you because of the way you look like. What's

the point of running a business. I thought money has no colors, seems

that for some SP's it's not always the case.

But this is *not* like any other business. SPs get up close and personal with their clients in a way that no other businessman or businesswoman does. And although it's true that one person's money is no better or worse than another's, most SPs are not so desperate for the folding stuff that they can't pick and choose who they see.

As far as timewasting goes, if you think that an SP may not choose to see you because of your skin color/body type/age/religion/nationality/tattoos/piercings/whatever, then your best bet is simply to tell them about these things when you first make contact. That way, if they do decide to discriminate, not too much time is wasted on either side.

I have to say descrimination is wrong and is very hurtful to experience.

But these women are not a Wal-mart store who aren't allowed to deni doing buissnes for what ever reason.

The sugested opinion's that a women working in the sex industry must have any type of sexual relations with anyone she does not wont is so wrong. This is treating them like worthless meat. Its outright scary for women in this indury and is causing

This is starting to turn into a rant and needs its own thread under womens rights and human trafficing. so I'll stop hear.

All women need to be treated like respect and dignaty.

Rubs

This is not your average business. SP's should have a right to who they choose as a clientele, regardless if you think it is a racist choice or not. I also agree that it should be made clear in the listing that a certain type of person they will allow. I have seen a post where it was written, no black guys. Where is the issue there? Racial preference should be listed is there is any, otherwise it should be safe to assume there is none.

Agreed..but the original point is getting hijacked. Sexual preferences are fine...we all have them. But wasting somebodies time and effort in researching booking and showing up only to be turned away for a reason that could have easily been avoided if there was forewarning is a problem. Refusing service based on race goes against provisions in the Canadian charter of human rights. But this situation is not applicaple for reasons I think we all know are obvious.

It's funny (Funny strange and not funny HaHa!). Reading through the string of threads on the refusal of services based on race and many valid points are brought forward. I believe the key's to keep an open mind and read it for what it is. Sexual preference and a woman (or man's) freedom of choice to have sex and not the actual service's itself.

Let's call a spade a spade. When someone calls up an SP for their services (for legality purposes and because prostitution is against the law), you're not paying for sex but for temporary companionship (companionship would be defined to me as time spent with 2 adults for temporary friendship and discussion). Anything past the point of debate and discussion with the SP is purely both consenting adults.

Sure the expectation to have sex is there between both parties and is implied. What would have happened if April consented to meeting with S****t Ad****r and the advancement was made to have sex and she denied? What then? You paid for companionship, not sex. See what I mean? Better to know before than spending money.

I don't think you'll find an SP's right to deny services in the CCHR!

I myself am not black but my grandfather was. My grandmother...Irish. They've seen their fair share of racism in their lives. The fact is, we really don't know how April truly feels and if she really is a racist. Just because she's denied services to a black man doesn't make her a racist and, once again, comes down to sexual preference, avoiding disappointment and rejection.

Jay

Posted via Mobile Device

When someone calls up an SP for their services (for legality purposes and because prostitution is against the law)

Just to set the record straight here. Jay your watching too much American TV. Prostitution in Canada is very much legal! What is against the law is..

1) Public "Place" Solicitation (Street walkers, soliciting in a hotel lobby/casino etc..)

2) Public Sex (In view or in a public place out of view)

3) Pimping (Living off the avails)

4) Brothel (Common Bawdy house)

5) Underage (Under 18 years of age)

6) Procuring (Helping someone first hand get involved in this business)

So if you solicit someone online or over the phone and arrange to pay for sexual services in a hotel room that you rented or your personal home and the lady is over 18 years old then you are not breaking the law here in Canada.

If you do not beleive me read the criminal code of canada (Section 210-214) ... it's easy to read (Not written in a complicated legal way).

Assuming that it is illegal and making posts like this just causes others to beleive you and causes further issues.