Teenagers?

[ICU 812]

Hi All,
I was doing some research for an up-coming adventure into the active hobby world last week. I searched for very short spinners (<5'2"/<100 lbs). Sadly, my opportunity to schedule "time away" and off the grid has evaporated and any hobby adventure will have to wait till October or so.

While looking for short-n-skinny ladies, I seemed to keep running into an unexpected number that were younger than say, 21. So I did a quick search with the only criteria being age 18 to 19 (any H/W, any ethnicity etc). To my surprise, there are 20 o r so providers with a showcase here on ECCIE, who are only 8 to12 weeks out of high school!

There are many reasons to avoid seeing someone that young, we can all think of ways that it can go wrong. Over anything else though, I would hesitate to see any of these ladies for fear of being iinadvetantly involved with an underage girl.

I was surprised at the high number here on ECCIE . . yet .there must be many more on BP or just UTR. Have things changed here? Is there something going on, or am I an out of touch old fart?

[ZedX79]

How do you know they are really 18 or 19? What are you going to do? Check their id? There are plenty of early 20 somethings that can pass for 18 or 19.

[Sensia]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Hi All,
I was doing some research for an up-coming adventure into the active hobby world last week. I searched for very short spinners (<5'2"/<100 lbs). Sadly, my opportunity to schedule "time away" and off the grid has evaporated and any hobby adventure will have to wait till October or so.

While looking for short-n-skinny ladies, I seemed to keep running into an unexpected number that were younger than say, 21. So I did a quick search with the only criteria being age 18 to 19 (any H/W, any ethnicity etc). To my surprise, there are 20 o r so providers with a showcase here on ECCIE, who are only 8 to12 weeks out of high school!

There are many reasons to avoid seeing someone that young, we can all think of ways that it can go wrong. Over anything else though, I would hesitate to see any of these ladies for fear of being iinadvetantly involved with an underage girl.

I was surprised at the high number here on ECCIE . . yet .there must be many more on BP or just UTR. Have things changed here? Is there something going on, or am I an out of touch old fart?

Better to be safe than sorry, and I commend you for being leery of any lady that looks younger than a 20 year old. The problem that I am seeing is that many "managers" some even from the streets have gotten wind of these boards. They are now advertising underage girls and making them appear older in their showcase. This is going to be a big problem for a lot of these escort boards (due to the heavy LE activity and clamping down of sex traffickers) if they don't start requiring some type of ID that shows proof of age. I don't know how that can be done without stripping the anonymity factor away for a lady who is of legal age but looks younger. There will always be men who will go for the very young girls and they really couldn't care if that is an underage girl or not. Nor do some care if these young girls have been coerced into the hobby.

[ICU 812]

The media says that underage girls are offered on BP. We all know they are out there. The value of ECCIE is the good information about providers. What does it take for a provider to become verified for ECCIE? The Girls I found all had a showcase here.

Perhaps ECCIE management could simply up the age for a verified provider to 21 years old. I know there is a way to beat anything (fake ID, new clothes and a make-over), but it would an explicit step away from encouraging some kid-dropout from high school seeking approval/legitimacy on this board.

I don't care if anyone thinks that its "not fair", and I realize that it won't be a hard fix . . .

Ok—now I have talked myself into it. I propose that ECCIE management make a policy change to not verify providers under the age of 21 and not allow them to participate in any way. Furthermore, reviews of providers under the age of 21 should not be published or credited.


ECCIE already has a strong policy forbidding even discussion of underage sexual activity. This proposed change should not be a problem.

Any thoughts? Have I really pissed anyone off . . .didn't mean to, but don't really care.

[NIKKILOVE]

I just recently watched an episode on 20/20 where they went undercover on Ad boards to arrest minor's and their management...

Out of like 9 girls posted on BP & CL... who's ads stated they were 18-24.... ONE of them was of "legal" age.. the other 8 they busted were ages 13-17. Every one of the young ladies were being ran by "management".

[Wakeup]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

There are many reasons to avoid seeing someone that young, we can all think of ways that it can go wrong.

I can't.

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Over anything else though, I would hesitate to see any of these ladies for fear of being iinadvetantly involved with an underage girl.

Why?

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Perhaps ECCIE management could simply up the age for a verified provider to 21 years old.

Why?

Originally Posted by ICU 812

I know there is a way to beat anything (fake ID, new clothes and a make-over), but it would an explicit step away from encouraging some kid-dropout from high school seeking approval/legitimacy on this board.

Again, why are you discouraging this?

Originally Posted by ICU 812

I don't care if anyone thinks that its "not fair", and I realize that it won't be a hard fix . . .

It has nothing to do with being fair, it has everything to do with being an adult and being able to make their own decisions.

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Ok—now I have talked myself into it. I propose that ECCIE management make a policy change to not verify providers under the age of 21 and not allow them to participate in any way. Furthermore, reviews of providers under the age of 21 should not be published or credited.

Ludicrous...

Originally Posted by ICU 812

ECCIE already has a strong policy forbidding even discussion of underage sexual activity. This proposed change should not be a problem.

Except these girls aren't underage.

Go ahead and assume that anyone who advertises that they're under the age of 21 is actually a minor...just don't expect any of us to buy into your irrational fears...

[Sensia]

Well seeing that the law is now actively going after these type sites and our little community over age issues it would be prudent to have a thoughtful discussion on it and maybe the owners of these boards can start having dialogue with their legal advisors on the subject. Here are links to what is happening around the country;
Escort site sues over new law requiring verifying ages in sex related ads

Washington State takes on underage girls and escort websites

http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/201...ew-wa-law.html

First Amendment Lawyer gives advice on Escort ads and websites pertaining to underage girls

As I said before there is a huge influx of underage girls who are on back page and now being reviewed here on eccie, there by getting approved for provider because of those reviews. It might be prudent to start verifying age in some way other than a digital check box saying one is of legal age.

[bbkid]

That was me who clicked the "like" button on wakeup's post. I agree with what he said. I see nothing wrong with 18 & 19 year old girls here. Well, other than there ain't enough of em'.

[NIKKILOVE]

The question is how do you know they are 18 or 19? You don't .. just like you don't know if she is 25 or 45. None of these boards require providers to "prove" their age...at least not here, P411, Horndogs or BP. So maybe some are not being over worried but just concerned. Makes sense that some men do not want to deal with kids... or the consequences that come when LE gets involved.

Because the first time you say... "I did not know"... you already know what they will say... and it will not be in your favor.

Yes, at 16, 17, they may think they can make the choice to get in to this life, but legally, they can not. BUT THAT IS THE ISSUE.. a lot of these girls are run aways, reported missing by their families, etc.. and are being "managed" out of fear. It is a dead in street to deal with ladies so young.. in any form of this business..

[zme]

It is absolutely correct for ICU to be concerned about the possibility of the girls being underage. And the main cause for concern is not just danger to the hobbyist but concern for the girls themselves. There are terrible things happening to minors in terms of them being kidnapped, trafficked and exploited. I would hope that no one would want to be part of something like that in any way.

And yes, 18 or 19 year olds should be able to do anything they want. But I think it is reasonable to verify age if it is feasible. I am not sure it makes sense to pick an arbitrary age like 21 and only allow people below that age to join because someone would just adjust the age they are lying about appropriately. There can be 21 year olds who look 18 and there can be 16 year olds who look 21.

I don't think anyone is disputing that 18 year olds can do anything they like. The question is whether we should turn a blind eye to the possibility that minors could be joining ECCIE and even worse that they could be forced to join by pimps. It is in the nature of human traffickers that they would lie about what they are doing and it may not be bad to do some verification. I can imagine that some providers might object to providing proof of age and a compromise might be to add a flag on a providers profile that shows whether they have been age verified or not. Then hobbyists would be free to make their own moral decisions.

[sophia rose]

I had to provide proof of age/identity to P411. True, I guess it could be faked as it is through a photo of you holding up your ID to your face, and then a close up photo of the same ID, but still...

[ICU 812]

Thank you Zane:


There are a lot of valid ideas her on all sides of this issue . . .even the guys who want to see legal age teens (which I find to be an interesting fantisy).

And any rule or policy can be circumvented in some way.
What I was dancing around, i guess, was that If ECCIE becomes known as a place where you can connect with a really young looking "19 yeqr old" (nudge-wink), the same way that BP has become, then the site and its membership (all of us) will draw the attention of Aunt Elly and Uncle Leo. At the very least, we could lose this site as a meeting place.
Worse things are possible.

If the ownership/Admins/Mods were to prohibit reviews of anyone younger than 21 and: If there are no verified providers or showcases under the age of 21: it will be harder for sanyone to present some 16 year old girl as a being a 21 year old adult woman. This may be “un-fair” but I don’t care.

As I said: All things can be gotten around, but there must be some effort made to distance us from underage trafficing.

I don't consider my suggestions to be THE WAY. There must be many other things to be done and other ways to get it done . . .but we, as a community, should do something.

REspectful Cheers to all

[Wakeup]

This site is doing everything required by law of it with regard to membership and the posting rules...absolutely no need to do any more...

It's not like LE isn't here already...this completely arbitrary rule change won't make them go away...

There's no argument that can be made for that change that isn't either arbitrary, capricious, useless, or unenforceable...it stays...

[seeker7]

The former porn star Traci Lords made many XXX movies before the industry discovered she was 16, not 18 or 19 as she claimed. A Houston High School coach was caught doing a student who was 17, not 18 as she claimed. Cost him his job. Just say'in. Be careful out there.

[Eva Damita]

It's funny you brought this up... a client and I were just discussing the teenage issue today...can a 18 year old please you as a more mature woman can? Sure, but I've learned that as I get older and more experienced, my clients experiences improved. I was going on 19 the year I graduated with a bday ON the cut-off date.