The Social Science of Prostitution

[DarkClouds]

Why is it that we want girls. And girls want things (shopping). What don't they want us back?

[DarkClouds]

Not sure where to post this, but I'm looking for tips on how to post ads on CL. Every time I post something (with very neutral language in my mind) it gets deleted a few days later. And yet, I see ads like this one, still up 5 days later. This one is a ripoff artist BTW, so don't bother -- I am just sharing it as an example.

https://hartford.craigslist.org/hws/...686801582.html

What are the unwritten rules?

Also, what alternatives are you aware of that work well? Reddit personals?

[DarkClouds]

https://stream.org/ohio-issue-1-can-...-prostitution/

[DarkClouds]

https://fortune.com/2023/10/28/backp...michael-lacey/

[DarkClouds]

https://www.southwestjournal.com/cou...tion-is-legal/

[DarkClouds]

The playing field has (had?) leveled a lot with the advent of Seeking. I've been following the "no repeats" rule for years now and have had plenty of action. Seeking might be going downhill though because I hear they might start requiring I'd verification, which I would never do (remember Ashley Madison? But likely another platform will come along to take it's place and my "no repeats" philosophy will continue to flourish.

I've only had 3 that I've become serious regulars with and I couldn't agree more with what you said. From my experience, there's a decline in service after about 10-15 visits. That's when the game playing also starts. I don't deal with any of that anymore like I did when I first started just for the sake of having a good time. The economics of this industry isn't in our favor. There are way more of us than there are of them, especially if they're young, hot, and don't wear their habit on their sleeve. But girls who care about being good at this and developing and maintaining regulars will respond surprisingly well if you tell them when you're unhappy with their service.

[Von1995]

Feel free to move this to a more appropriate thread / forum. I tried to find one but couldn't.

I've often wondered about the pros and cons associated with repeating in this hobby. Personally, my best experiences are always the first meetings because the ladies are on their best behavior. It's usually downhill from there because once the ladies get to know you they start to take you for-granted and their attitude goes from bad to worse. Also, the novelty or surprise element is lost. Yet, I see many gentlemen talk of whether or not they will repeat with a lady (whereas I only think in terms of whether or not a lady is worth sharing with another gentleman, since I rarely care to repeat).

I am interested in other perspectives. What do you think?

I've only had 3 that I've become serious regulars with and I couldn't agree more with what you said. From my experience, there's a decline in service after about 10-15 visits. That's when the game playing also starts. I don't deal with any of that anymore like I did when I first started just for the sake of having a good time. The economics of this industry isn't in our favor. There are way more of us than there are of them, especially if they're young, hot, and don't wear their habit on their sleeve. But girls who care about being good at this and developing and maintaining regulars will respond surprisingly well if you tell them when you're unhappy with their service.

[Stylish]

Feel free to move this to a more appropriate thread / forum. I tried to find one but couldn't.

I've often wondered about the pros and cons associated with repeating in this hobby. Personally, my best experiences are always the first meetings because the ladies are on their best behavior. It's usually downhill from there because once the ladies get to know you they start to take you for-granted and their attitude goes from bad to worse. Also, the novelty or surprise element is lost. Yet, I see many gentlemen talk of whether or not they will repeat with a lady (whereas I only think in terms of whether or not a lady is worth sharing with another gentleman, since I rarely care to repeat). Perhaps the benefit of repeating is to avoid the hunt (which takes energy and can go wrong). But without the hunt where is the fun?

I am interested in other perspectives. What do you think?

[PsyberZombie]

STOP THE PRESSES !!

James D 2004 & I actually AGREE on something !!

That was the most erudite & insightful Post you've ever written , J·D·04


p.s. To those of you who think I'm just being sarcastic =

English is not J·D·04's native tongue ; he speaks & writes English a whole LOT better than I speak
Mandarin Chinese , so give him a break , willya ??

[James D 2004]

I almost commented on that garbage paper but chose to save my effort instead.

If you haven't read any academic paper, they are all about attracting money, or made the money spent look well spent. So with the minimum effort, they made it look much bigger than it is, and intimidate the readers and referees with math or something else, so nobody bothers to find all the faults and let it publish. It's a number one defense - making a interesting conclusion, and don't let anyone knows how you arrive at it.

I find that these articles made by "outsiders" are attracts readers that are also "outsiders", who are fascinated by prostitutions, never bold enough to try, or tried once or twice with no concept the whole picture.

The amateur authors did not collect and major new raw data, and if they do I doubt they get the useful ones. Their interpretation of existing data is very doubtful to me. That is, what they include into their calculation is very dubious.

Like the conclusion that prostitutes in wealthy western countries is relatively not well paid. Anybody who can collect a comprehensive salary scale of prostitutes all over the world is wishful thinking. Say in US, even if we do the research in USG, do we know how many are $40 streetwalkers, $100 sw, $120 AAMP, $140 MP, $160 AAMP, $250, $300, $700, and $1000 per hour? There's no way to have some reliable average or total.

Also, other than two females who doesn't know a thing about prostitution, anyone can tell you that you need well paying johns relative to the local population, and very often they come cross border. Very often the girls go abroad. I would say this is job most affected by globalization ever. Girls in poor countries are supported by large numbers of sex tourist. If the place isn't a popular sex destination, you need a fewer number of foreign johns to pop up the price. In wealthy countries, girls rely on local johns so the price can't be much higher than their johns.

Price in US is diluted by vast number of foreign workers. Some illegal, some freshly legal, some n th generation. But if you look the same and have the same pussy, you just can't charge a lot more than the others.

So actually it's not at all interesting and don't waste your time.

[PsyberZombie]

Women don't need to pay for sex like men do. About any women even fat ugly ones (although they have less choice)can get a man to fuck them just by sitting on a barstool at a local bar or nightclub. Take any decent lookin women into a nightclub and she can pick about any guy in the place to have sex with. A hot chick can fuck any Man in the whole bar by simply asking them and inless that guys gay He going to say yes.

If women's sex drives are equal to men's , why can't any decent looking guy get laid by any chick in the bar ??

You just helped prove — not dis·prove — my point , S·L

[StreetLooker]

Women don't need to pay for sex like men do. About any women even fat ugly ones (although they have less choice)can get a man to fuck them just by sitting on a barstool at a local bar or nightclub. Take any decent lookin women into a nightclub and she can pick about any guy in the place to have sex with. A hot chick can fuck any Man in the whole bar by simply asking them and inless that guys gay He going to say yes.

[PsyberZombie]

Two good points it makes are:

1) Before it was widely accepted that women's sex drives were as high as men's, studies of prostitution focussed on prostitution as social deviance. This treatment looks at them as economically rational actors.

If women's sex drives were as high as men's , there would be an equal number of male prostitutes walking the streets getting picked up by 'Janes'

If women's sex drives were as high as men's , there would be an equal number of strip clubs catering to women that featured male strippers [ The Chippendales don't even count = that's a novelty act where groups of women go to bond by acting like what they think men act like in strip clubs ]

..... there would be an equal number of AMPs where women went to get rubbed all over by male masssueses

..... there would be an equal number of brothels that offered male hookers for their female clientele

.... and there would be a food that permanently reduces a man's sex drive by 90% like there's one for women
[ that food is called Wedding Cake ]

[Top Gallant]

A fairly classic microecon treatment without real reference to morality, except as something utterly dependent on material factors.

It treats women's motivations (high income against a low skill level and low capital investment) a bit more thoroughly than men's. It just seems to assert as given facts that men have a higher sex drive, desire partner variety more than women, and are reproductively capable over a longer period of time. Some micro-economic analysis of men's reproductive/sexual strategies might also be useful.

Two good points it makes are:

1) Before it was widely accepted that women's sex drives were as high as men's, studies of prostitution focussed on prostitution as social deviance. This treatment looks at them as economically rational actors.

2) The social status / social capital of male customers is much more diverse than the range of social status / capital of the female providers.

*** Don't let the math intimidate you ... the ideas are presented in plain, if a bit technical, English. Most of the math can be skipped.

[stoxnbonds]

Leafing through an old Econ journal from 2002 in search of something quite different, I discovered a very serious and well-argued piece of technical social science. The article is entitled "A Theory of Prostitution". I was happy to see it was written by two female economists.

The authors were intrigued by the fact that prostitution is a low-skilled, low investment, undeniably female occupation -- typical indicators of a low-paying career -- yet generates a high relative income. That is, in relation to average incomes in their respective countries, prostitutes are pretty well-off.

But, it gets stranger.

Wealthy countries (USA, Canada, Western Europe, Japan) have the *lowest paid* prostitutes relative to per capita incomes. In poorer countries, prostitution is one of the more lucrative jobs a woman can have, so on a relative basis, they are more well-off than many of their neighbors, including many men. But not so in wealthier countries.

The authors weave a detailed and interesting argument that explains the above facts and more.

If you're not used to reading economic journals, you may find the logic somewhat alien -- it takes some practice. And there is math here-and-there, but you don't have to do math to get their points.

For your edification I searched it out on the web. Enjoy.

Stox

http://the-idea-shop.com/papers/prostitution.pdf