I joined several escort review boards and started advertising online in June 2010.
As time went by I heard stories, read public forums and private Ladies Only Lounge (LOL) threads and
noticed that the same few women were repeatedly mentioned as being troublemakers.
When CL Erotics shut down, I joined several escort ad sites including vancityads (vca) in Feb 2011.
I joined the LOL on vca because it seemed like a reasonable thing to do.
I didn’t know the online history of their LOL leaders, but I soon figured out that some of them were the
ones with bad reputations I had read about.
Conclusion by team: Challenging the practices of review boards and standing up for the rights of workers does not
constitute being a trouble maker. We should all be grateful that there are some workers who do
stand up and speak their minds.
I am writing here about Anita, pillowtalk/Classy Sweet, Tara1 and Brandi.
At first, all I did was read in the LOL and never posted at all. As the months went by, I was shocked by
most of what I read there.
The LOL is supposed to be a safe place for ladies to share info about bad dates and discuss confidential
issues in private, but there’s a lot more than that going on in their LOL.
I watched as the leadership slandered reviewers and schemed to ruin men who gave SP’s bad
reviews or disagreed with them on the boards.
There were no posts that the volunteers found that were intended to ruin any men.
Disagreeing with the sex buyers who tended to only write bad reviews or reporting
this reviewing behavior does not constitute ruining men.
They openly express their hatred of all review boards, strategize on ways to undermine them,
and discourage SP’s from joining or participating on them.
Some workers are extremely uncomfortable with being reviewed and find it
humiliating to read about intimate details of their sessions. We are all allowed to have
our opinion on review boards and are free to express that opinion. Volunteers could
find no posts by any of the accused parties which could be construed as “strategizing “
to undermine review boards. Volunteers also could not find any posts related to
discouraging workers from joining review boards. There were some related to harms
that can happen to a worker who takes part in a review board, but nothing
threatening or bullying in terms of forcing workers to not take part.
They encourage SP’s to refuse to accept clients who are known reviewers.
The volunteers could find no posts related to this by any of the accused sp’s. Warnings
about a particular reviewer being negative or challenging as a client are in the best
interest of worker safety.
They slander and bully SP’s who speak up to defend the men and other unpopular SP’s.
The volunteers could find no posts where any of the accused slandered any workers.
In fact, Ms Sarah posted more than a few times degrading and slanderous comments
about the accused naming them man hating manipulative bitches.
I watched them bully and intimidate younger or newer ladies into doing what they told them to
do under threat of being banned from the LOL, denied access to the Black List and bullied off the
The only people ever banned from blacklist areas and ladies lounges by the workers in
question were banned for breach of confidentiality. These areas need to be safe for
workers to post information about their experiences with clients in privacy with no
fear of reprisal.
There was no evidence discovered by the volunteers to support the accusation of
bullying younger or newer workers.
There are relatively few websites where SP’s can socialize and advertise in the Vancouver market, so this
is a serious issue for those concerned.
How can these women even pretend to have the best interests of the industry and of other SP’s at
heart? Why do these women have leadership roles in an LOL?
These women have actively taken part in working towards sex industry stabilization posting in many
forums, posting in non sex industry forums and taking part in events. Their role in the ladies lounge
came to them because of their hard work and long standing reputations as supportive to others working
in the industry.
I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised by what I read, because they already had a public reputation for
outing clients and board members, as well as conspiring to ruin SP’s they dislike or view as competition.
The volunteers could find no evidence of this. One of the accused however survived an assault and
reported to police. This is not outing a client. It is rather a brave action on her part in which she put
herself in harms way to protect other sp’s from this dangerous person.
I have met people whose personal and professional lives have been devastated by this group of
troublemakers, so I know these are not rumours, they are facts.
Ms Sarah did not provide any contact information to the volunteers to support this claim so it is not a
proven fact at all.
How my battle started.
There was a huge blow up in the vca LOL near the beginning of 2012. Pillowtalk/CS, Anita and friends
were really pissed off about something that happened, and after watching silently for days, I spoke up to
defend the people they were attacking, and they all turned on me.
In the post referred to, Ms. Sarah attacks fortunate one using a lot of profanity and declaring her “ a
bitter, angry, vindictive, unforgiving, man-hating, self-serving, manipulative bitch.” In this post Ms.
Sarah also states that she has violated private sp lounge protocol’s in regard to confidentiality.
The post is vicious and attacking of fortunate one.
In the post, other members also call fortunate one a prolific bully, however standing up for
accountability in reviewing and promoting fact based education about the industry while unappreciated
by some does not constitute bullying.
From that moment on I was a target of their anger, and they became enraged when I eventually told
them I had saved copies of threads containing threats and slander they were spreading in their efforts to
destroy certain men and other SP’s.
Ms. Sarah stated that she has saved pm’s and thread links but supplied no such evidence to the
volunteers. Therefore, this does not constitute evidence at all. Simply saying you have something, does
not make it fact.
Let me point out that everyone who has access to the LOL has the ability to copy and share information
posted there, but it’s strictly forbidden.
Shortly after that, that they banned me from the LOL, because they said they didn’t feel they could trust
Ms. Sarah outed herself as being in breach of confidentiality, the number one rule for safety amongst
sp’s accessing and contributing to the blacklists and private areas. She has shown herself to be
There’s a lot of pressure not to reveal secrets we read in the LOL, and that is the threat these ladies have
held over my head since banning me. They would brand me as a traitor who can’t be trusted, so I was
afraid to tell anyone what happened.
The confidentiality of the sp lounge and blacklists are the key component of them functioning. Workers
must feel safe posting. Ms. Sarah violated that rule and proved that she cannot be trusted. Volunteers
could find no evidence that any one of the accused ever named her a traitor or threatened to do so. If
there was evidence in the form of messages, none was submitted so this is also unproven.
It was about 10 months ago that this started, and since then I have been subjected to an ongoing
campaign of bullying and intimidation by these women.
Volunteers could find no evidence of this even after reviewing hundreds of posts.
They have turned other SP’s against me, and posted rude comments in my threads (even in my ads) on
several industry sites. I’ve received threatening messages, they’ve spread malicious gossip and slander
about me, and have tried to discredit me among my peers.
No evidence was submitted by Ms. Sarah and from what volunteers could see, there were no attacks of
this nature made by the accused sp’s.
I tried giving them some space.
I quit posting on vca for a long time, except to place my ads, because I knew they would never forgive
me for standing up to them and never stop trying to get me banned from their site. These women were
some of the original founding members on vca and obviously have a lot of influence over the male
I thought that if I gave them some space and let some time pass, all might be forgotten.
I continued to post on several other sites and was really disappointed to see pillowtalk and Anita writing
negative comments about me there too.
There were no posts found by the volunteers that reflect this statement and no links to the posts were
supplied by Ms. Sarah for consideration by the group.
I tried being nice.
After many months went by, I decided to participate more on vca again. Not surprisingly, the ladies
weren’t happy to see me back. I tried to be nice, obey the rules, not offend anyone or start drama, but
they continued to gossip about me publicly and privately.
There was no evidence found by the volunteers to support this statement. No messages or links to posts
were supplied by Ms. Sarah to confirm these allegations.
I did contact Van Wilder, the site administrator on vca when this first happened, but I couldn’t tell him
everything. I only mentioned that I thought I’d been unfairly banned from the LOL, he said he couldn’t
do anything about it, so I let the matter drop.
I was determined not to interact with pillowtalk/CS and Anita on perb, so avoided writing in threads
they posted in and didn’t address them directly online.
I kept my mouth shut.
To protect their LOL, I’ve kept my mouth shut about what happened and I’ve let myself be labelled a
bully by keeping quiet and not explaining the circumstances.
The volunteers could not find any reference to Ms. Sarah being a bully made by any of the accused sp’s.
I also wanted to keep quiet to protect others who are fearful of retaliation from this same group of
There was a battle on a private board between myself and pillowtalk last year and I know other
members were puzzled and disappointed in my behaviour.
I kept quiet and let them think badly of me because I was afraid of the influence this group of women
have in the industry through their LOL and ad site.
The sp’s in question do not appear to have any special privileges or to carry any particular weight/power
over the industry.
I decided to speak up and fight back.
As time went by and pillowtalk/CS and Anita realized they couldn’t get rid of me on vca, they both
started to attack me on perb.
The volunteers looked for evidence of this on perb, but couldn’t find any. Ms. Sarah provided no links to
threads or posts where this had occurred.
I ignored them for months, but when they started posting comments that could affect my business
reputation, I finally decided to speak up and defend myself.
Volunteers could not find the posts referenced here and Ms. Sarah did not provide any links to support
I got tired of feeling like a victim and started posting responses to comments they made, but that has
only caused their attacks to escalate.
Volunteers could not find the posts referenced here and were provided with no links by Ms. Sarah.
Now they’re condemning me for the comment I posted about Anita recently, and for responding to
comments pillowtalk has been posting about me on perb.
Volunteers could not find the post referenced here and were provided with no links by Ms. Sarah.
They call me a bully.
Volunteers could not find any posts where the accused sp’s called Ms. Sarah a bully.
I kept silent while they posted dozens of disrespectful comments about me over the last year, and now
that I have expressed my opinion of them publicly, they are crying ‘victim’ and labelling me the bully.
Volunteers could not find the posts being referenced here and were provided with no links by Ms. Sarah.
They’re now demanding that I apologize to Anita, pillowtalk/CS and Brandi for the awful things I’ve
posted about them, while not one of them has ever apologized to me or admitted they’ve done
These women see themselves as blameless in their conduct as leaders of the LOL, and now call me a
bully for daring to stand up to them and challenge their opinions.
Cyber bullies with a gang mentality.
The posting history of this group of women proves the kind of bullies they are. The bulk of their own
writing condemns them and others have commented on their destructive influence on multiple boards
Volunteers could not find the post being referenced here and were provided with no links by Ms. Sarah.
When we look at the amount of damning public evidence compiled over the years, added to private LOL
abuse on more than one site, and firsthand accounts of malicious things these women have done, it’s
obvious we are dealing with cyber bullies with a gang mentality.
Volunteers could not find the posts being referenced here and were provided with no firsthand accounts
or links to posts of these personal accounts
I have to admit that I’ve been very afraid of these women, of their influence in the industry, and what
they could potentially do to my career and my reputation. I’ve also been fearful for my safety,
wondering if this could ever escalate to physical violence.
This is a stretch, at no time have any of the accused sp’s been reported to behave violently.
I know grown men that are afraid of them too, so don’t call me silly.
There are men and women who would like to come forward and confirm the things I’ve said, who can’t
do it for fear of retaliation, but I know you’re out there silently cheering me on.
This was our first attempt at testing our conflict resolution policies. Very quickly it became clear that
there were some problems with the policy.
The amount of evidence that was reviewed was enormous and took an incredible amount of time.
During this time the accused sp’s reputations were affected as well as their ability to earn money.
In the future it is proposed that unless direct evidence is submitted by the accuser, posts of this nature
will be deleted. Basing this kind of harm on rumor and conjecture is an attack, is bullying and harms the
Volunteers were reluctant to take part for fear of being swept up into the drama themselves. This
prompted Susie to organize the volunteers separately so no volunteer knew who the other volunteers
were. This worked well ensuring the confidentiality of individual volunteers but maintaining a broad
group to review the evidence.