Answering Your Questions

Although I am not in Sydney, it's pleasing to read about a parlour that is trying to do the right thing by workers AND clients.

 

My only other comment is that services like BBBJ should not be a parlour decision but a WLs. And one she should not be criticised for (whichever way she chooses to swing).

Hi Fred! 

 

Sorry if I didn't make it clear in the entry - the decision is NOT the parlours hands. It is with the individual women should they so choose to offer unprotected services. There is video, but no audio recording in the intro room and the parlour could not attempt to police such a rule if they tried. I am sure unprotected oral services have been performed, but I have no knowledge of these personally and every single woman I have spoken to there claims not to perform them. 

The decision is entirely up to the individual woman what services she provides at WO. I do not provide any DFK or massage for instance, but take BDSM and fetish bookings that others do not. There is no judgement as far as I am aware of anyones choice to provide or not provide anything. We always have the option of declining to see a client if their preferences do not align with ours - no judgement from management what so ever. 

As the majority of the women at WO do not perform BBBJ, management has signs that read 'No unprotected services are offered here. We practice safe sex.' These are in multiple languages. Management is protective of the women when clients have rudely insisted on BBBJ and will NEVER ask an inexperienced woman to do a booking with a client who has requested this as a service (who thinks they can manipulate a green working girl). 

WO is attempting to make a parlour that works for the individual workers and their approach is different to others I have experienced. In other parlours I have worked in there are strict no BBBJ policies and I do not think that is inappropriate. There is significant pressure to perform BBBJ in this industry and if one review pops up that a man has received BBBJ at one parlour, more will flock - if this is not the kind of service the management wants to be standard in their premises, that is entirely okay for them to decide in my books. No one should feel any pressure to perform unprotected services of any kind. 

 

I hope that clears that up. Please feel free to inbox me for further clarification. 

Its good to see a parlour that looks after the girls, could never understand why you wouldnt want girls happy in their work providing customers with what most are craving..companionship of an attentive woman.

 

Fred Astaire said: My only other comment is that services like BBBJ should not be a parlour decision but a WLs. And one she should not be criticised for (whichever way she chooses to swing).

I have to agree with Fred here. After all, WO is in Sydney where bareback services is not prohibited by state laws. With the exception of BBFS, I know most brothels in Sydney allow the girls to offer whatever extras they like in the rooms including BBBJ. The management of WO must be careful not to be seen as over-controlling or punters will start going elsewhere. It's okay for the girl to tell a punter she doesn't provide certain services but it's going over the top to have signs like  'No unprotected services are offered here. We practice safe sex.'  especially in a brothel in Sydney.

I have to agree with Fred here. After all, WO is in Sydney where bareback services is not prohibited by state laws. With the exception of BBFS, I know most brothels in Sydney allow the girls to offer whatever extras they like in the rooms including BBBJ. The management of WO must be careful not to be seen as over-controlling or punters will start going elsewhere. It's okay for the girl to tell a punter she doesn't provide certain services but it's going over the top to have signs like  'No unprotected services are offered here. We practice safe sex.'  especially in a brothel in Sydney.

 

I firmly disagree. The mechanism of employment parlours provide is typically that workers are contractors. A parlour offers advertising, management, safe sex equipment as well as the ability to rent a room on the premises to perform services with clients - sometimes a place to live as well. In return the worker signs an agreement to abide by the house policies. 

 

While unprotected oral services are not illegal, a parlour is within their legal rights to have a policy against any unprotected services and to refuse to continue a working relationship with a worker who violates this policy.

I can understand that as a client you don't understand the strong pressure to perform unprotected services that we as workers face. You may have attempted to seek unprotected oral yourself at some point and been refused by multiple providers or treated with disrespect and hostility. It may seem that unprotected oral is hard to find. However the lived experience of workers in the industry is that we face constant and enormous pressure from clients and often our agents/management staff to perform services without protection. I am asked during at least half of parlour bookings for unprotected oral, and about ten percent for unprotected full service intercourse. In about 1/3 of all private intros I do I receive a request for unprotected full service. When I worked for an escort agency I was told I MUST perform unprotected oral. About 80% of the messages and emails I receive from my private advertisements request unprotected services - even though I state clearly I do not provide them (but will provide oral if pathology is cited). 

 

Parlours have a legal requirement to provide condoms and to provide information to workers and clients about safe sex practices: 

"The proprietor must ensure that all new sex workers are well informed of the need and proper use of personal protective equipment such as condoms, dams and water based lubricants and that ongoing education regarding safe sex practices is provided...There must be no coercion to work as a sex worker, or inducement to practice unsafe sex."

"For their part, employees must co-operate with employers in meeting their OHS obligations. This means that if an employer provides work equipment, systems of work or personal protective equipment designed to protect employees and others in the workplace, then employees must use them. In this context, work systems might include requiring employees to follow a set procedure when cleaning sex aids or disposing of tissues or condoms. In addition, employees must take reasonable care of their own health and safety and that of others in the workplace." (Brothels: Health and Safety Guidelines 2010)

 

Every single parlour i've worked in displayed signs about safe sex and the requirements for it. They might not be noticeable to clients who are more focused on getting into a booking - but every single parlour in Sydney and Melbourne I have worked in or interviewed at has had signs in the waiting rooms/intro rooms and inside the working rooms about the policy on safe sex. It's generally done as part of the legal requirement to provide safe sex information to clients. 

 

You may have attempted to seek unprotected oral yourself at some point and been refused by multiple providers or treated with disrespect and hostility.

Please don't make assumptions about me. I only take up BBBJ/CIMS when a provider advertises it. I don't ask for or harass sex workers for those services. Quite often, I get a surprise BBBJ from a brothel girl in Sydney who is trying to establish her client base. Who am I to turn down her generosity? Point is that BBBJ (and BBFS to a lesser extent) is commonly on offer in Sydney. There's a reason why punters ask for it. Can't blame them. Blame your co-workers instead.

 

 

Every single parlour I've worked in displayed signs about safe sex and the requirements for it. They might not be noticeable to clients who are more focused on getting into a booking - but every single parlour in Sydney and Melbourne I have worked in or interviewed at has had signs in the waiting rooms/intro rooms and inside the working rooms about the policy on safe sex.

Sydney and Melbourne have different sex work laws. I give them due consideration depending on which state I'm in.

Please don't make assumptions about me. I only take up BBBJ/CIMS when a provider advertises it. I don't ask for or harass sex workers for those services. Quite often, I get a surprise BBBJ from a brothel girl in Sydney who is trying to establish her client base. Who am I to turn down her generosity? Point is that BBBJ (and BBFS to a lesser extent) is commonly on offer in Sydney. There's a reason why punters ask for it. Can't blame them. Blame your co-workers instead.

 

Sydney and Melbourne have different sex work laws. I give them due consideration depending on which state I'm in.

 

You missed the point I was making. I never assumed anything. I merely stated that as a man who seeks the services of sex workers, there is a possibility at some point that you've asked for unprotected services and been met with a rude response. I would have thought that statement was harmless enough for you not to take offence? But it seems you take offence no matter how understanding I attempt to be. 

 

Also you stated above that you think signs that state a policy on safe sex are "over the top". You have reviewed multiple establishments which I all know have signs stating this exact mantra in multiple locations on the premises - I was merely pointing out that you may have been too distracted to notice them. Therefore perhaps this signage is not "over the top" at all and doesn't detract from your experience of visiting an establishment. 

 

Despite your experiences, which I have at no point attempted to discredit, I am merely saying I think the lived experience of sex workers should perhaps be believed just as much as that of clients. That my experiences of having men attempt to force unprotected oral and unprotected intercourse are real. That men do rudely demand these services and attempt to manipulate women into performing them - just as i'm sure there are plenty of sex workers who are rude to clients and attempts to manipulate clients. All these are very real things that happen. Just because you are a nice person, does not mean all clients are nice. Your refusal to accept that men have any share of blame in endangering the health of workers is frustrating and saddening to me.