![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-254112-100x100.png\")
add this one to the list of business ideas i wish i'd thought of...
add this one to the list of business ideas i wish i'd thought of...
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1713-100x100.png\")
Why is there a picture of Mary Poppins and Alice accompanying this story?
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-21970-100x100.png\")
@B: Because those are my idea of what British prostitutes look like. It's a costume drama joke.
If I have to explain the joke, it kills the joke. Now I am sad about the dead joke.
@Chris Walters: If there are (legal) prostitutes that look dress like Mary Poppins in Britain, I may have to visit London.
I am sorry about the death of your joke, it was a good one, even if I didn't get it.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/css/images/default.gif\")
@B: I think because Poppins was considered a \"prostitute\" if you strip away the niceness of Disney, and look it from the dark side... at least that how I think it was described to me once....
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-145911-100x100.png\")
Best. 3 way. EVER!
@nightsky: Only if Alice is legal. Otherwise, you'd be pulling a Polanski. I guess pulling a Polanski requires 'ludes, but you get the idea.
@G.O.B.: Come on!: I would ordinarily find an off-color joke like that amusing but in this case, it's not. We tend to get so focused on the thirteen-year-old's age that we forget that she said no.
Willing statutory \"rape\" = Sometimes funny.
Anal rape of a drugged-up unwilling young woman = Never funny.
@JennQPublic: I wouldn't have said anything had the woman not come out and said she wanted the charges dropped. Apparently, she's moved on.
For the record, I hope Polanski gets the sentence he's been running from for decades. I'm not an apologist, like some of the fucking moronic sycophantic fans in France who are apparently fine with drugging and raping. It's disgusting that their sphincter-licking of a director let's them pardon rape.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-68654-100x100.png\")
@G.O.B.: Come on!: you don't even need to go to france to see that - have you been watching the news? half of hollywood is beating the airwaves in defense of him. can't you see he's suffered enough already? he's had to live his life jetsetting from villa to villa! live the poor man alone.
yeah. i'll leave him alone. in an 8x8 cell.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-6536-100x100.png\")
@mac-phisto: The whole thing makes me want to vomit in rage.
Now whenever someone starts in on how Hollywood is full of [godless sodomites or whatever the usual rant is] they'll actually have evidence to back that up: a whole list of people who admit they find nothing wrong with someone drugging and raping a child.
(Unless you maintain your innocence and are found not guilty in court. Roman Polanski is not cooler than Michael Jackson so I do not understand this even from a rabid fan POV.)
All this time when people started throwing those hyphenated insults at Hollywood I dismissed it as insane hyperbole but apparently they were right.
Seriously, I wonder about our government sometimes. That site has been around for ages. I remember a bunch of us having a good laugh about the ratings of the local hotel nearly 10 years ago! In fact, according to Alexa, they must have just celebrated their 10th birthday - [www.alexa.com]
Alexa also lists other sites owned by the same person and, strangely (and slightly creepily) teacher-training.net is listed...
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-52435-100x100.png\")
What do you think? If prostitution is legal, should ratings websites exist for it?
Yes. There's nothing wrong with telling people the food or service was lousy at a restaurant, right? Or to praise the food and service at a different one?
@Applekid: Exactly, if they're allowed to be prostitutes they should also be rated as other services are. Angie's List and BBB style.
If you are allowing your countrymen (and I would imagine some women) to purchase these services, you should allow them to rate these services for each other.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1238020-100x100.png\")
@Applekid: Seriously, these ladies are supplying a service. While I do question the sex industry in areas where it's not regulated, that's not the issue here.
If I were seeking a prostitute, I'd like to know which ones have funny bumps down below or like to knock johns out and steal their wallets.
Punternet will just resurrect as c...(rhymes with Mike Hunternet).
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-129735-100x100.png\")
@G.O.B.: Come on!: I went to High school with a Michael Hunt (he went by Mike...but I am not sure that was by his own choice). We all believed that his parents did not love him.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-505944-100x100.png\")
@Rachacha: I was driving through rural South Carolina some time ago and almost went off the road when I saw a large sign encouraging people to vote Mike Hunt for Aiken County Sheriff. It was not a joke. He did win.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1175017-100x100.png\")
@JulesNoctambule: I still laugh when teenagers get the mall PA system operator to ask for a \"last name Hunt, first name Mike. Mike Hunt please report to the office\" and I'm 25. Is that a bad thing?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-261962-100x100.png\")
It is weird that it's based in CA. However, I still don't see a problem with it.
Is it somehow different if the employees who run the site are in CA but the server for it is located in England? If so, that's how I imagine it should be run.
I find nothing wrong with legally maintained prostitution, although I still wouldn't personally partake in it.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-349596-100x100.png\")
@madog: Exactly. Prostitution still exists in states with laws, there's absolutely no way to stop every case of it.
I personally don't condone this industry but putting this up on the internet is just as bad as advertising your \"gifts\" on other sites, such as craigslist ETC...
This doesn't alleviate the problem, Minister. It only stalls it.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1306088-100x100.png\")
@Verucalise(wantsherfigureback): I kinda want to know what problem that would be. If it's not illegal what's wrong with someone paying for sex if they can't get it for free? Why is free sex somehow more \"moral\" than paid?
@LadyTL:
I 100% agree with you, LadyTL.
P.S.
I would never actually partake in this practice, but I support those who make the choice (Yes, it is a choice, everything in life is.)to do this. It's their body, and noone should ever tell you what to do with your own body.
@MostlyHarmless: I see an emotional difference not a moral difference. Just cause it is paid for doesn't make it worse than if I got a one night stand from a bar.
@MostlyHarmless: Once again that is an emotional difference in terms of a connection rather than some sort of idea that the sex is superior just because im married. For all I know there is some sex god out there who is not my husband who would give me mindblowing sex but I'm still not going to seek it out because I perfer the emotional connection. To me the act of having sex is not \"better\" or more moral simply becuase it is my choice to not sleep around. Mostly becuase of the fact that what is a good choice for me my not be a good choice for someone else and I am not going to try and force it on someone, particularly when the act of banning it one hurts more people not helps.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-869432-100x100.png\")
@MostlyHarmless:\"So you see no difference between having sex with your SO and having sex with a prostitute?\"
The fact is, even with a spouse or SO, someone always pays for sex. The difference with a prostitute is that the price is clear and costs less in the long-run.
@JulesNoctambule: Actually I'm betting my relationship is stronger then most because unlike people who act all superior simply becauseof their hang ups about sex, I don't get upset when my husband watches porn. Also we have a very open relationship about sex so we can actually tell each other if we aren't enjoying some part of the sex.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-35381-100x100.png\")
I think that prostitution isn't really a good idea, but people are going to do it regardless so is it really a bad idea to have a place where people can tell other people about their experiences to make it safer?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-580579-100x100.png\")
@zjgz: Alexa Albert covers an interesting angle of this issue in her book Brothel. Many prostitutes (in the case of the book, ones working in legal brothels in Nevada) object to the rating websites as customers occasionally disclose prices- a practice that can hurt the women financially, as prices change depending on the woman, her mood, and the attitude of the customer. The publicity is a double-edged sword as well; a good review can garner a lot of business, but one review from a surly customer can drastically reduce business as well. I believe the driving force behind the American review sites is quality of service rather than safety, although this may be different in the UK as the business is not regulated. (I doubt it's motivated by safety concerns there, either, but that's purely my opinion.)
The ratings sites make a lot of people uncomfortable, but I consider them a natural development. As a society we rate businesses and look for recommendations regularly, and prostitution is, after all, a business.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-562864-100x100.png\")
@zjgz: Yes, it's a bad idea. A site like this just encourages prostitution.
You agree that prostitution is a bad thing - better to make it illegal in all of its forms.
@GuinevereRucker: Give me one example of any time something was banned and people stopped using or doing it just because it was banned? It would be better just to regulate it so that people aren't being forced into it and not as prone to abuses or other problems.
@LadyTL: You're right. People are going to murder people no matter what, so we should just regulate it so people don't feel bad when they kill others.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-391013-100x100.png\")
@LadyTL: Exactly. There are really good ratings sites in the US for \"service providers\" despite its illegality, and all the moral outrage in the world won't stop its oldest profession. Legalize and regulate already!
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-158340-100x100.png\")
...And punternet just got more hits because I never knew it existed. It's kind of funny, the whole review thing. Definitely a good time waster for weekends, when tech news tend to dry up (although they've been dry in general recently).
Arnold should tell the British government minister, \"tough titty\".
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-761932-100x100.png\")
Perhaps the British government should have read the First Amendment to the United States Constitution before they asked The Governator to shut the site down.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-86807-100x100.png\")
@pgh9fan1: Nothing about this makes any sense whatsoever. Shouldn't England be illegalizing prostitution??
/not that I'm against it
@strathmeyer: I had no idea it isn't illegal in the UK. I guess all the horrible food can be forgiven.
Arnold will thank the guy because he has never been able to find a comprehensive source for reliable prostitute recommendations.
Nah, the pros are cheaper. They know when to go home and never whine about you taking out the trash.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-53958-100x100.png\")
It's a minor point but \"punter\" generally means \"someone who pays for something\" not specifically johns.
So, \"Best Buy Aggravates Punters with Horrific Customer Service\" would be a perfectly acceptable headline unrelated to prostitution.
@Julius Seizure. (the CANUCK one): I always thought a punter was a customer of something widely considered unsavory, such as a casino, racetrack, brothel, etc.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1223549-100x100.png\")
@Julius Seizure. (the CANUCK one):
Thnaks--I read a lot of british car magazines, and when they talk about car shoppers, they often say \"punters.\" I had my suspicion Consumerist's defionition was misleading.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1504-100x100.png\")
@Julius Seizure. (the CANUCK one): Seems kind of odd to use a 6 letter word (punter) to replace a 5 letter one (buyer) when it doesn't add anything descriptive (but maybe I'm missing something).
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-525207-100x100.png\")
@Julius Seizure. (the CANUCK one):
I was going to post this earlier, and never got around to it. Came back to say it, and was glad someone else had! I'd say \"punter\" is closer to \"customer\", except for the fact that it also means \"someone placing a bet on something\". For anyone who's not a speaker of British or Australian English, it doesn't strictly mean someone who uses the services of prostitutes. That's one of its lesser meanings, in fact!
@MsAnthropy: And \"John\" doesn't strictly mean a person who visits a prostitute, as there are plenty of \"John's\" out there who do not. I see no problem with the translation.
@Englishee Teacher: Um, if you say the term \"here come a john now\" you really mean a man who is going to pay a hooker. Unless you know a bunch of guys named John, and the man in question is one of them.
And that, mon ami, is called context.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1004377-100x100.png\")
Sorry, I'm utterly baffled by the entire premise here. 1) If prostitution is legal in Britain, why is a ratings website not? 2) What jurisdiction does Schwarzenegger have over privately run/hosted websites in California anyway? Imagining that it was a site rating sex workers in California even, I still don't see how he'd have any authority to shut it down given the 1st Amendment. It could readily be accessed by law enforcement personnel to aid in tracking/busting prostitutes and their johns anyway.
@mianne: Yeah, I never understood all the police departments getting pissy over the adult services listings on craigslist. Don't those make their work easy? Just call the damned phone number and set up a sting. We're not talking about rocket surgery here...
@mianne:
You're absolutely right--Arnie has no right to shut down a website that rates prostitution services--no matter where the pros or the site is located.
Is it based in as in the the site is updated by someone in california or is the server the site is hosted on in california and the updates are done by a frustrated english schoolboy?
Prostitution isn't legal in Britain. But it's not illegal either. However, it is illegal to solicit trade as a prostitute, to seek out a prostitute, or to 'live off immoral earnings'. So whilst it's not illegal, it's akin to saying that you're allowed to take drugs, but not possess them.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-354198-100x100.png\")
@jeremymiles: If it's illegal to \"live off immoral earnings\", then many a brit lawyer and businessman will be facing time in the pokey!
Exactly. It's rather odd, but being a prostitute in itself isn't illegal... it's the pimping, soliciting, brothel-keeping and all that that's against the law. The actual exchanging of sex for money isn't illegal in itself.
Ruight, but that's the point: if the exchange of sex for money is lawful, then prostitution, itself, is lawful inasmuch as the act of exchanging pecuniary value for sex acts is, in fact, the definition of prostitution. I appreciate that the attendant acts are outlawed, but itis, strictly speaking, accurate to say that prostitution per se is legal there.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-83192-100x100.png\")
Also Punter =! John.
Punter means customer, it be like saying client = john. Which would make every lawyer a who..... Never mind bad example.
I see this as just another example of the outdated puritanical and tyranical \"values\" that people want to force on other people to make themselves feel superior. This minister needs to come into the 21st century and relize that you aren't going to make something not exsist just by removing it from where people can talk about it.
Jerry Jones is only worried if the punters try to strike his jumbotron, not his prostitutes.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-536653-100x100.png\")
@Chris Walters: That photo is a lame choice, particularly since the Alice character is supposed to be a child. Child prostitutes are hilarious if they're wearing Victorian garb? WTF. Your idea of a joke has totally backfired, as far as I'm concerned.
@SnowQueen: clearly, Chris should have checked with you about the demographic profile of acceptable prostitutes.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-436259-100x100.png\")
@Elcheecho: Though I find it hilarious, I am quite surprised that people have not raised more stink about it already.
Maybe because this was posted evening time, and people are not hateblogging from their jobs so much?
Are they violating California law by having a prostitution rating website?
@MooseOfReason:
Of course not--the first Amendment is alive and well even on the left coast, so any attempt to outlaw such expression is unconstitutional ab initio.
@treimel: Just because a law is unconstitutional doesn't mean it's not the law? So a person could violate a California that would be ruled unconstitutional if a case involving it ever made it to the Supreme Court. Saying that a law is unconstitutional != saying that it does not exist.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-762676-100x100.png\")
...did anyone miss the part about prostitution not being illegal in England?
I mean, other than the guy in England?
It's a shame that England on the one hand is growing up to the point where it can properly recognize sex workers as a legitimate industry, but on the other hand still totes along it's moronic puritanical \"values\" about it being too naughty for teh interwebs.
Eff you people. For $50 every 15 minutes.
So, if some other country decides something is illegal there, which is perfectly legal here, then that website has to go too?
Well help us all if Saudi Arabia finds out there are women-owned websites! And if they ever do a google search for women... it'll be war!
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-21984-100x100.png\")
@LastError: China is pretty good at deciding something is illegal and censoring the website - with the help of some global internet companies...
why should ca or anyone else be allowed to shut down a website in the us it would be a violation of the first amendment to shut it down
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1034061-100x100.png\")
How are those girls in the picture? Full service?
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-441571-100x100.png\")
I myself prefer to research appliance purchases beforehand. .... I'm sure most men would prefer to get the best \"bang\" for their buck too.
@SnowQueen: It made me a little sad to see Alice implied as a prostitute, since the books are very close to my heart. Thankfully it's early on a short working Friday so my Giveashit muscle is too fatigued to work. :)
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-17616-100x100.png\")
@SnowQueen: I'm fairly certain Chris is not promoting child prostitutes.
Just hot chicks in Alice garb that are hot.
Prostitute was bobcat, not cougar as requested. Would not buy again.
Oddly...at hookernet, you can rate punters.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-255368-100x100.png\")
Why doesn't the British Government actually USE the information on the site to catch and prosecute these criminals? Kind of hard to have a site rating prostitution when you get rid of all the prostitutes...
And isn't it a little odd to be asking the Gov of CA (the Porn Capitol of the World) to shutdown a site rating the quality of sex?
@SacraBos:
prostitution, in itself, is not illegal in England. Soliciting sex for money, pimping, running a brothel are all illegal, though.
@treimel: But then wouldn't the site still be helpful? If they're actually talking about visiting brothels or dealing with pimps in the reviews, just make some arrests.
Did anyone not grasp the irony of that website and others of its ilk for US based prostitutes?
Basically it is a Consumer based ratings/reviews of illegal prostitution. Viva la internet for allowing information to flow free...
@Chris Walters: My first thought was 'Why is there a picture of those annoying Loli-style people on my Consumerist? Where are the cats??'
Clearly, I need less internet in my life.
I don't feel that the real issue at hand here has anything to do with prostitution specifically. Rather, I think it has everything to do with the fact that another country is trying to get us to censor data which is both stored here in the states and is illegal in the states. If the UK has a problem with the site then fine. Perform the work necessary to ban access to it from within your own country and leave the rest of the world out of it. It is their problem. Not ours.
Hell yes the hooker sites should exist.
Wanna guess what % of the viewers are buyers and what % are just voeuyers?
According to Alexa, one site I just tracked has 18,000 visitors per month. The site? One lady, working in my home town. Think she really services 18,000 guys per month?
Hell no. 17,999 of those visitors who just want to peep at the pictures.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1107446-100x100.png\")
Shut it down just for being chauvinistic... they should be rating the male prostitutes as well....
Okay, seriously, it's a service business, they should have no problem being rated. And frankly, government has a lot more important things to worry about, like deficits, jobs and the future instead of where a few people are enterprisingly making their money.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-318831-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-83385-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-169958-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-131723-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-307161-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-76217-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-176865-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-741824-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-44893-100x100.png\")
If Arnold shuts it down in CA, they'll just move the site somewhere else.
@Esquire99: i wish to refer you to a little site called The Pirate Bay. they have been kicked out of a few countries now, but they just move to a different ISP or a different country.
@Esquire99:
and thus driving more valuable tax dollars out of the state