Hacker News Reader

Comment by ACow_Adonis | Hacker News Reader

I feel like I'm missing some cultural context here that made this a semi- difficult read: obviously? the word "massage parlour" is some local euphemism for some kind of sex work and its implied they aren't actually masseurs/masseuses? but can someone explain to me exactly what the nature of the arrangement/work/ business she's working in is?

is it just prostitution and for some reason they don't call it that in Canada? is it legal/illegal? is there an implication about its location? are they in some regulatory grey zone? is it men just dropping in to be touched or is it something more? are they just operating on a drop in schedule and does that imply something about the relative standing of the establishment compared to other sex work etc? are they contractors or operating their own business?

please help me out HN :/

View on HN

It's a grey area. Prostitution isn't legal but nude massage is. So these places advertise as massage parlours. This article explains it a bit more head on:

https://torontolife.com/city/the-parlour-game/

But then it's not even grey where I am in New England and we still have "massage parlors" that are constantly getting shut down for prostitution.

I struggled with that aspect as well, but after reading the piece entirely, it becomes clear that massage parlour is used as an euphemism.

Also about being legal or not, it's probably work in the lite-grey zone (it's not Texas after all). The schedule looks something like, during a fixed period of time at night you just wait until you get scheduled/picked. That said, I don't think it is very important for the article.

I felt it was because just as soon as I realized she was talking about a rub and tug where she gives handjobs instead of massages, she then mentions a mutual shower that I have no idea what she’s talking about. Are they both naked in the shower and nothing happens? Are these massage parlors in Finch Alley awesome? Does all of Canada specify “parlor” to mean $80 late night showers with prostitutes as distinctive from spas where people might have a license?

This always happens to me when I read editorials from Commonwealth countries, the euphemisms are so deep and ingrained that I have no idea what they’re talking about.

I could empathize better with more context.

“I rubbed massage oil on a man’s chest at 1am and I was tired” that’s an entirely different article

> the word "massage parlour" is some local euphemism for some kind of sex work and its implied they aren't actually masseurs/masseuses?

I'm genuinely curious where you live that this is not the case. It is such a euphemism in every Anglophone country, and (large parts of?) Germany and Italy. It is usually illegal (or at least unlicensed) even in places where prostitution has some kind of legal status.

In Australia there are legal brothels, there are legit massage joints and, as I've heard, something in between.

I'm told, if you're looking for an actual massage and the reception doesn't have a HICAPS terminal (similar to the credit card one but for health insurance) you're in the wrong spot.

I spent a fair bit of my youth where there's been legalised brothels (or at least I assume they were through most of my childhood) and sex work. And on the other hand there's also physiotherapists and actual massages. I don't particularly like massages that much, personally, but if needing one I go in and tap my health card and that helps cover it.

So presumably there was no need to hide the business behind the euphemism/front, everyone just knew that if you wanted sex/porn, you went to a brothel in suburb X. Even where I am now, i know there's brothels and presumably private sex workers and if i want a massage I go and I book a massage.

> Even where I am now, i know there's brothels and presumably private sex workers and if i want a massage I go and I book a massage.

I don’t think many people would be able to mix up these places after seeing them. If you only wanted a massage for health reasons you would almost certainly not consider going there.

yeah that bothered me too and I was hoping it got better a few more sentences in

there are places to get massages that aren’t sex work so using euphamisms as both to placate a cultural appetite and coping mechanism is odd and needlessly confusing.

I’m halfway through the article like “is this another sex worker that can’t acknowledge what they do in plain English, while the rest of us are supposed to repeat ‘sex work is work’ for the labor rights along with the ironic convenience that will come with it, or is this a place to get a massage“

Reply on news.ycombinator.com