Definition for below Radar/Sonar or Stealth

Discussion in 'General Industry Related Topics' started by Carl M, Jun 1, 2001.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Monk

    Monk

    Messages:
    3,381
    There were several insights in that Solon.com series that I found insteresting, if not a bit scary. For example, the commodity these providers placed on information about their clients (if I remember correctly, the sold and traded names and numbers to each).

    I was so curious about this that I asked some other providers on another board whether they ever traded names of their clients with each other. They deinied ever doing it, but you have to wonder. I mean, the name of a good client is worth a lot.
  2. HAPPY GUY

    HAPPY GUY

    Messages:
    208
    Agreed: the Salon series, Tracy Kwon or something like that, was pretty entertaining, but the ending was very abrupt. Also, the boyfriend was a big dork. I lost interest in the end when they had some weird sort of shenanigans at some provider convention in San Francisco.

    Interestingly, one subplot dealt with a high-end madam who advertised on the Internet and was busted in a rather high-profile manner. It definitely pre-figured that Glamour Roses woman.... Uzo, was that her name?
  3. EarlyRiser

    EarlyRiser

    Messages:
    122
    It's probably relative. Some years back, a provider who had a presence on the internet/in newsgroups might well still have been under the radar - in a sense. But the internet has become another "utility", another branch of the media. Now she'd have to stay off the internet to be off the radar, I think. Or,maybe, be on the internet (in a forum or two), but discreetly, and certainly w/out her own web site. (For that reason I worry a bit, sometimes, about my own favorite, Julie of NYC: is she too high profile??)

    Regarding the serial in Salon.com: was a very good series, until near the end, when she decided to marry the prince and the series abruptly ended. Hey, I thought nobody, leastways not women, believed in those happyendings anymore. (For you guys who havent read it, by "the prince" I mean the unbelievably obtuse guy who seemed never to figure her out and who proposed, especially since, in the series, the guy's sister seemed to have figured her out). The premise was a Canadian-Chinesewoman who started in her career in her teens and moved on to NYC. But there were interesting insights into the workiing girl's condition - including to kiss, or not to kiss, and to orgasm, or not to orgasm. (At the end there wasome drama - an IRS-investigator was stalking her, for supposed investigative reasons, and then got busted himself). I downloaded a lot of the stories onto a different computer, and will upload the urls is anybody cares.

    Somewhere else I saw a piece, also on the web, discussing how the web had changed the econommics of sexual work. Was contended that the ability of providers to advertise on and make arrangements over the internet had eliminated the middlemen (middlepersons? pimps? madames?), and had also led to higher prices (since there were fewer risks for the providers - but that might not actually be true, I suppose, if LE hangs out on the various boards and decides to be a pain in the ass and take its job seriously).
  4. Slinky Bender

    Slinky Bender The All Powerful Moderator

    Messages:
    19,709
    Perhaps the following is not what CarlM meant, but it is what I mean, so I'll say it:

    If a lady is on all the boards, and then something happens to make her wish she wasn't any longer, so she goes "under the radar", it doesn't make her "retired". To some extent, this is what I referred to recently in another post about "disinformation". There are ladies who wish to be under the radar, so some guys are telling everyone that they "retired", which in fact they know is not true. While I respect the rights of anyone to privacy, there is something wrong when guys knowingly spread wrong info on the boards, even if it is for the "right reason".

    While I won't tattle on ladies who don't want anyone knowing that they are working, I might be tempted to point out when I know a guy is knowingly spreading false info......

    [Edited by slinkybender on 06-01-2001 at 08:14 PM]
  5. John Blackthorne

    John Blackthorne

    Messages:
    690
    Not an exclusive term

    Ladies have been traveling for years to see prearranged clientele, for example. No reason to advertise at all. This fall in the "under radar" category.

    Circuit ladies who occasionall want to work as indies qualify here, too.

    Any provider who for whatever reason does not post information, whether general or for a tour, is is "stealth" mode. And being very smart, too.

    JB
  6. Monk

    Monk

    Messages:
    3,381
    CarlM:

    That's only true if they were once "above the radar". There are a whole slew of providers in New York who have established a business of regulars by word-of-mouth. They shun ads and the Web so as not to attract attention to themselves from LE (and us riff-raff :) ).

    Didn't Salon publish a "fictionalized" account of just such a provider written by a former working girl not that long ago?
  7. justme

    justme <i>pop and click tainted</i> Vinyl ( is dead )

    Messages:
    9,566
    Below Radar/Sonar or Stealth - would be plenty pissed off to find out you've plastered her name all over Internet hobbyboards

    webscort - would be plenty pissed off to find out you haven't plastered her name all over Internet hobbyboards
  8. Carl M

    Carl M Hanging by a thread

    Messages:
    86
    There has been some misnomers about the above! Basically below Radar when applied to providers means: A provider due to personnel reasons eradicates all important contact information- phone numbers, web sites and email- BUT is still providing services to a select few! So these providers are still working and not retired! If the provider says she is Retired hence below Radar no longer applies!