coffindodger

Jobcentres Offering X-Rated Porn Work.
Government-run Jobcentres are offering unemployed women jobs on X-rated websites.
Jobseekers are told they can earn up to £700 a week if they strip naked on webcams and have sexually explicit conversations with customers.

Women looking for clerical work were given applications for sex line jobs when they went to sign on at Jobcentre Plus offices in Birmingham, Warwickshire and Shropshire.

Faceclick, the adult agency recruiting for the work, encourages applicants to perform "activities that you feel comfortable with" when naked in front of the camera.

It features photos of its clients under various titles including "just legal 18", "fetish" and "role play".

One 19-year-old woman, who wanted to remain anonymous, told the Birmingham Mail she was shocked a taxpayer-funded government agency was effectively recruiting for the sex industry.

She said: "My job in a call centre is a fixed-term contract that's coming to an end and I've just taken out a car loan so I'm desperate for work.

"But I'm not so desperate that I'm prepared to perform disgusting acts on an internet sex line."


http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-..._In_Birmingham

The Dean

I'm puzzled by one thing............. the potential for a discrimination lawsuit based on physical ugliness.

"Bonkvision.com is an equal opportunity employer, and promotes equality irrespective of racial profile or religious belief, as long as the employee is horny as hell and doesn't look like Quasimodo's uglier sister."

Bahtatboy

A few jobs back the HR dept (they were quite sane, rare as the case may be) required all interviewers to have undergone a very comprehensive recruitment training programme. When asked if I discriminated at work, I said, "Yes, of course I do, that's what I'm paid to do". What the berk giving the training hadn't grasped was the simple concept that the absence of discriminating is taking action that is indiscriminate. When recruiting I discriminate against those who don't have the appropriate qualifications, ability, experience, attitude, frankness, work ethic and a whole host of other things. But I won't discriminate on gender (unless its necessary to do so), race, religion and so on.

If I recruited for Bonkvision.com I'd use the same set of values: I don't believe there's any legal or moral issue about selecting performers (or anybody else) based on their ability to do the job, part of which comprises retaining customers. Nobody in their right mind would recruit Nora Batty for that job, which is exactly the same as discriminating against a moderately unattractive woman (or bloke, for GayBonkvision.com. Right, where do I apply?).

kittycat1

I beg to differ, you look at the magazines on the top shelf in many UK newsagents, and for mainstream ie Playboy, yes I would say a pretty face and stunning figure is required, but what about the other mags, the big boob fetishes, the feet fetishes, the morbidly obese fetishes, or the up front and personal graphic mags, from what I've seen the girls/women are hardly stunners, also the more extreme/x-rated you are prepared to go the less interested they are in a pretty face or perfect body.

Refering to the woman being quoted in the article, I know quite a lot of women/men (producers/cameramen/performers/hair and MUA) in the porn industry and they are all pretty savvy, the performers are not always the prettiest of girls, you also get a lot of failed models turn to the glamour industry, whether they be too short or just the wrong look, its an industry that pays very well and is full of interesting people. Of course there is a dodgy side but there are a lot of very reputable people working in the industry ( production side- a lot of people from the fashion industry who are trying to earn a living), people are always too quick to judge and assume its a lot of shady characters.

I don't see the difference in advertising this job to advertising a job for normal models...

Euc-

Back home there was a lawsuit against the state a year or so back. When you lose your job you can get unemployment benefits, however when you're receiving this money they do require you to actively look for a job. If you are unsuccesfull for a certain period of time they will give you a job, if you don't take it you lose your benefits.

Now, since prostitution is legal and an officially recognized job, it is not uncommon to see an opening (no phun intended) for "Prostitute m/f" (as of course you\re not allowed to discriminate on basis of sex). In that case she was offered a job as prostitute which she had to take or she would lose her benefits. She didn't agree, filed a lawsuit against the state and lost.

Dunno what the relevance is actually, just felt an appropriate topic to share

Bahtatboy

I really hope that's an urban myth...

The Dean

She was told to take a job as a prostitute, or lose her benefits? Don't believe that - more details please.

Spugsy

indeed, back in the day I was always a fan of 'readers wives'

coffindodger

That go's back a year or three lol.

typical

Es ist ganz großer Mist.

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp

Bahtatboy

Gesundheit!

Millhouse

nothing better than a beaver shot taken in the living room of an 80s council house with the husbands face in the mirror above the TV.

Bahtatboy

Think I shot into manhood courtesy of Playboy. Could never get my head (small or big one) round the Readers' Wives thing--porn's for idealistic escapism surely, not far-too-close-to-home realism.

Arcadia

But Wasn't Fiesta/readers wives the ''poor mans'' porno? My brother had that many under his bed the legs didnt touch the floor. There was a section for the ladies as well..My Ex knew someone who got refused because he didnt ''measure up''.

Readers wives..pasty skin, tits like tennis balls in socks, and worst of all..Wilton carpet and brown Draylon settee's..Urgh!