A few weeks ago, I received the following email:
Good evening Miss Calhoun,
Due to my work I am fortunate enough to be regular visitor to this very lively and storied city of New Orleans. I find its culture and social diversity incredibly inspiring and refreshing. Unfortunately I’ve also found that the city’s acceptance of cultural cooperation and sundry comes to a towering road block when one begins exploring the possibility of retaining a provider. Being relatively new but not completely green to these kind of arrangements I became quickly aware of the circumspection many providers have with concern to dealing with black men, particularly younger black men. I’ve speculated a great many possibilities as to why; knowing many black men having an almost innate instinct to haggle I’d placed that as the primary nuisance. Nevertheless it can be quite dispiriting when delving in attempting to find an adequate match and you see on ad after ad “No Black Men” or “No Black Men” followed by some specific age provision.
Now Miss Calhoun this is not an indictment of you whatsoever and I hope you haven’t taken my note as one to this point. I simply stumbled across your well written blog and had chosen to address you as you seem more than capable of giving me sufficient response.
Now the actual question after my lengthy and hopefully not too platitudinous preface lol, which is not at all by chance a protracted two part inquiry.
Is the issue itself in servicing black men or is it a servicing a specific kind of black man? Because I don’t view the two as an amalgamation. If it is indeed the latter, and its the uneducated, undereducated, unrefined, inelegant and plain cheap black hobbyist, then would not a 5 minute conversation with him unveil many of his faults and raise red flags? Taking into account some courtesans personal preferences, is it truly necessary to prohibit and disfavor all from service?
I’m interested to hear your response. Thank you for your time.
Here’s my reply. I’ve decided to post it here as well, since this isn’t the first time the topic has come up, and I’m not ashamed of how I feel about these “No Black Men” policies.
“No Black Men” or “NBA (No Blacks Allowed”) policies:
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Everyone chooses who they will or will not see depending on their own personal preferences, beliefs, hunches, and prejudices.
And some people are racist.
I assume that the majority of black clients wouldn’t want to meet with a racist provider anyway, so I guess having an “NBA (No Blacks Allowed)” policy, as disgustingly bigoted as it is, is at least straightforward, honest, and doesn’t waste anyone’s time.
Sidenote: “No Blacks Allowed” is petty much the most repulsive name I can possibly think of for this “policy,” as it conjures up images of legally/governmentally-sanctioned public signage from the Jim Crow era. And yet, many providers unashamedly post it in their ads. Like they’re not even concerned with pretending not to be racist. But yeah, there’s something to be said for a bigot’s honesty, I guess…
Why Some Escorts Don’t See Black Men
I think the reasoning behind this “policy” is that many ladies assume that bad clients (read: violent, thieving, etc.) are more likely to be black. But the sad thing is, ladies with “NBA” policies are obviously not very adept at protecting themselves from bad clients in the first place; their stated “NBA” policies are a dead giveaway that they don’t know how to properly screen clients. If you know how to screen individual clients, you don’t need a policy that disqualifies a whole race, because you know how to identify individual bad clients and disqualify them while still being inclusive of perfectly good gentlemen who may be of that race.
It’s fine with me, though. Let the other white ladies miss out on great new clients. More for me ;)
For what it’s worth, I’ve also heard Black escorts in New Orleans say that they don’t like to meet with Black men because New Orleans is a very small town and it’s way too likely that they’ll show up only to realize that it’s someone they know, or worse, are related to. Or, they may later realize they have mutual friends, and then the escort’s privacy could be threatened. I understand this 100% because I’m from NOLA and I can vouch for the fact that it’s like 2 degrees of separation here, max. Everyone is connected to everyone else somehow. Most escorts would like to avoid situations where someone had that kind of info to hold over their head.
And then I’ve heard escorts who are in relationships say that their boyfriend (who is Black) asked them not to meet with Black guys, and they’re honoring that request. Maybe the boyfriend knows that the girl really isn’t all that attracted to White guys, so he’s OK with her meeting with them, but he feels uncomfortable when she meets with Black guys. Whatever, that’s their relationship and it works for them, apparently. I’m not here to judge someone else’s partnership.
Re: haggling–I’m really not sure that black men have “an almost innate instinct to haggle” (as you suggest). I can attest to the fact that clients of all races will attempt to haggle. It’s more of a character trait than a race trait. Actually, when I think about it, I’m not sure I can ever remember a black client attempting to haggle with me. Either way, that problem is easily solved: if the provider posts her rates on her website/ad, if she clearly states that her rates are non-negotiable, and if she states that she will not discuss rates via email or phone, then no haggling can occur. The prospective client can attempt to haggle, but she doesn’t have to participate in that process. Besides, any client who would attempt to haggle about rates that are designated “non-negotiable” is disrespectful, and he’s not someone most providers would be excited to see.
Does that help to clarify the whole “NBA Policy” issue?