Miss J - UK

[clay99]

Looks like a new lady has popped up in the UK

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

On her Twitter feed can see her do 3 reps of 40kg shoulder dumbbell press. Insane

[clay99]

⚡ Support Saradas

Keep the archive alive with Bitcoin

1QDxcxUx8pnsZvauyVxTqaJrWkeNhQrPdK

Donate →

[boyofwinter]

Sort of, profile says you can only meet her at the gym. I've done a few sessions like that but the limit is disappointing.

[clay99]

Yep sadly she doesn't do muscle worship sessions. She told me it's £300 for 1.5 hours of gym training. You get to watch her and help her with putting weights away. Not worth it.

Ms powerpack another British Fbb is doing sessions for £350. I think she works with Rene C. I know she works out in a gym in North London.

[FemFlexUSA]

I only rarely like to knock anyone's hustle, but in this regard, I think my issue is with her being listed on the SessionGirls website when she does not do or intend to do actual sessions. I get that the site is allowed to be many things and that there's no requirement that SG have only what I like, but I do question why the non-"provider" would write "If you email me regarding sessions / Skype it will be ignored as I have specified what I do above" on a site that is literally named "SessionGirls".

Small gripe, but given the rise of the girls-seeking-paypigs advertising in the session community, I felt it was worth complaining about out loud.

[crazycrazy]

I only rarely like to knock anyone's hustle, but in this regard, I think my issue is with her being listed on the SessionGirls website when she does not do or intend to do actual sessions. I get that the site is allowed to be many things and that there's no requirement that SG have only what I like, but I do question why the non-"provider" would write "If you email me regarding sessions / Skype it will be ignored as I have specified what I do above" on a site that is literally named "SessionGirls".

Small gripe, but given the rise of the girls-seeking-paypigs advertising in the session community, I felt it was worth complaining about out loud.

Let Jen Thomas list whomever she wants to. I don't begrudge Jen her monthly listing fees just because I have absolutely no interest in the provider.

[Boselectah]

I only rarely like to knock anyone's hustle, but in this regard, I think my issue is with her being listed on the SessionGirls website when she does not do or intend to do actual sessions. I get that the site is allowed to be many things and that there's no requirement that SG have only what I like, but I do question why the non-"provider" would write "If you email me regarding sessions / Skype it will be ignored as I have specified what I do above" on a site that is literally named "SessionGirls".

Small gripe, but given the rise of the girls-seeking-paypigs advertising in the session community, I felt it was worth complaining about out loud.

Let Jen Thomas list whomever she wants to. I don't begrudge Jen her monthly listing fees just because I have absolutely no interest in the provider.

Trouble is, my impression is that SG is "normalising" half-assed service providers AND exorbitantly high rates. I doubt I even bother looking at SG once a month anymore - chances of me finding an attractive, lean, muscular and reasonably affordable sessionette in my locale are hugely unlikely.

[FemFlexUSA]

I only rarely like to knock anyone's hustle, but in this regard, I think my issue is with her being listed on the SessionGirls website when she does not do or intend to do actual sessions. I get that the site is allowed to be many things and that there's no requirement that SG have only what I like, but I do question why the non-"provider" would write "If you email me regarding sessions / Skype it will be ignored as I have specified what I do above" on a site that is literally named "SessionGirls".

Small gripe, but given the rise of the girls-seeking-paypigs advertising in the session community, I felt it was worth complaining about out loud.

Let Jen Thomas list whomever she wants to. I don't begrudge Jen her monthly listing fees just because I have absolutely no interest in the provider.

Re-read - you responded to something, but not what I actually wrote. You're suggesting that I "begrudged" something about Jen/SG that wasn't there. I clearly stated that the site can be what it wants - which means, by definition, that I agree Jen can run HER business how SHE wants - and identified that my issue is with the so-called "provider" and what she wrote. That set of statements is in no way an attack on Jen or her income model/stream.