View Full Version : The Morality of Prostitution
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
[
7]
8
Daddy Rulz
10-12-04, 12:14
RN
Taboo's:
I may have expressed myself poorly, perhaps inhibitions would have been a better word. What I'm talking about is activity's that a lot of women here in sex prison would hesitate to engage in because "it's not done or proper".
Having been a sex worker you choose to disregard "conventional morality" in place of your own. I think when one does that it is natural to perhaps re-examine other "conventional morality". For example, the fact that monogamy and commitment are not synonyms, that perhaps you might enjoy being with different variations of partners. I think having had more sexual experience's with more men than non-providers it puts you in a position to evaluate experience's on their merits and if you enjoy them as opposed to having pre-conceived opinions. If you don't like anal it's not because somebody told you it was bad but because you tried it and don't like it.
For myself in making the decision to monger extensively in BsAs I have discovered that there really is nothing wrong or un-natural about my healthy sexual appetite. I enjoy a variety of sex with a variety of partners. I'm not an unattractive man, I have a decent job, I'm articulate and playful. I've never had a problem meeting or seducing women I just tired of all of the difficulties involved when a casual sexual relationship suddenly turned more than casual. I find in mongering I can play as I like without having things turn messy when a woman discovers that I really was serious when I said I had no intention of being involved in a monogamous relationship. In disregarding conventional morality (prostitution is bad, the women are ****** and the men are losers) I've allowed myself to be what I am, and enjoy what I do without shame. I think some of the women I am with can sense that lack of shame and the session perhaps becomes more enjoyable for them as well. Most of the women I have sessions with I do so because I just don't think they are hot but also because they seem to project a feeling of friendlyness and I do believe that we connect on more than a physical level. Not being in love, but rather being in like if you will allow. Though I could be wrong and just happen to have an eye for good actresses.
Then again I may be full of shite and assigning values because I would like to fantasize about these women having them. How the hell would I know I've never lived that life. If I'm wrong and need "correction" just tell me where and when ma'am.
:)
DR
I confess that I also just don't get this whole trust thing -- that's the reason I brought up actors/actresses before, because it's their job to give illusion, to play a part. Same same sex workers. But if I shouldn't worry about the truthfulness of an actor/actress when they're not on stage (now, ego and/or ego fragility can be a different issue, as can be the question of whether some ever truly see themselves as being off-stage...) then why should I worry about the same thing with a retired sex worker?
Rolly Polly
10-12-04, 13:51
RN,
You come from a country that legalized sex work and I think that plays a big role. In the US, to be part of that industry you are automatically involved in some sort of deceit.
If sex work was illegal across the board in every country would you not put it in a category of a shadey form of business?
I mentioned car salesman and lawyers before because they both have stigmas, but neither is all bad or all good. Many, if not all, industries have stigmas and stereotypes as do races and religions, but it's not a rule to live by.
Some sex workers have partners, sometimes called "drivers", that they work with to hustle people. So, obviously they are not all hustlers, but there is enough corruption in the industry that makes a red light go on.
Rolly Polly
10-12-04, 14:21
The legitimacy or illegitimacy of any industry is decided by the people in the industry, not the industry itself.
I'd be willing to put a wager on the fact that a nice size portion of sex workers around the world (maybe even a majority) in all aspects of the industry have been involved in some form of scam, theft, or hustler type deal at least once.
Rolly Polly
10-12-04, 14:42
Mainly because I said all aspects of sex work all over the world. In that, I am including the ones who do it for drugs and alcohol, the ones who are in the industry as scammers from the get go, and the ones who are trying to make a quick honest buck.
Also, certain areas of the world are more famous for having the potential of getting ripped off. Let's take Cuba for instance. Most of the girls there are in the sex industry because otherwise they can't afford things like soap, tooth paste, food, and clothes. Many of these girls are the sweetest little things you'll ever meet, but turn your head and they will rob you blind.
The ones that are in it to make an honest buck are the minority. If you look at it from your perspective of why you were in the industry and what kind of person you are today then everything looks rosey, but that is not a world wide representation of the industry.
"maybe she is really 40 even though she says she's 25 - but that's not a lie, its her job description."
Bullshit. Of course it is a lie. It is absolutely a lie and in my ex-country could also be construed as fraud: misrepresentation of a material (at least for some mongers) fact upon which a contract was based and for which monetary or other consideration was given.
Anything anyone says that is not the truth is a lie. Your credibility is diminished by saying otherwise.
Incident in the office
(Posted on my home board, Lisbon, please go there fellow mongers if you are ever likely to visit the capital of portugal, we are proud of our girls. This is a true story, with some relevance maybe)
There’s a lovely woman at work, mentioned in an earlier post, a cashier-secretary. She has a charming-not-glamorous thin pale freckly face; hazel eyes, nice teeth, long copper-colour hair, and a petite curved slender body that sometimes tops the bill in Mur’s erotic daydreams when Lori is ‘off duty’. Right now she’s resplendent in mini-t-shirts, showing back, bra strap, shoulder and flat midriff, all tanned to light mocha – and tight pink or black jeans showcasing a butt to sigh, cry and die for, which stands proud on her shapely legs, thanks to heels that set her taller than her male colleagues (not difficult). A Botticelli girl, for those of you who visit art galleries between shagging sessions.
She got married in May, aged 27. Her body remains that of a 17 year old, and she’s still at the stage of this relationship where the sex is non-stop. She often arrives in the morning with a delicious fragrance of fresh fucking hovering around her like an erotic aura. This is a relaxed friendly workplace but not the kind where sex chatter and banter are always flying around. Muri would not permit that. The guys sometimes flirt a little; she teases sweetly back, but always within the limits of decorum. She regards Mur as a nice fatherly old dear, and for his part he treats her with affectionate, scrupulous respect and frankly feels a tad guilty when he catches himself dreaming of peeling down those tight trousers.
Monday, Muri was bent over a colleague’s PC, examining a dismal spreadsheet. Drowning in Excel Ennui, he was also tuning in to a conversation across the room. Two men, a colleague and a visitor, were discussing prostitution. Ana (we shall call her) was at her own workstation, pecking the keyboard with pretty polished nails, her new ring winking on an exquisite finger.
Mur caught the essence of the conversation (in English). It was “once a prostitute, always a prostitute, how can you ever respect a girl who’s been a wh*re, how can a man dip his cock where so many others have spunked, once a girl starts opening her legs for anybody she’ll be doing it all her life, any deluded fucker who falls in love with an ex-pro will get the cuckolding he deserves, etc etc”.
And the stranger came out with the eternally stupid cliché: “I’ve never needed to pay for it, I’ve got a real life, a guy who pays for sex is a sad sack, I always shagged for free and now I’m married I’ve got everything I want at home, believe me.” With more drivel to the same effect, a foolish conceited smirk on his face. Like saying that because you know how to cook at home, you’ll never go spending your money in a restaurant.
Purse your lips and stay cool and professional, Muri, there is no point getting involved, so concentrate on that spreadsheet. If they do not stop in five minutes, ask them politely to get on with their jobs, meanwhile do NOT enter the fray…
But it was Ana who erupted. She swivelled on her chair so hard it moved into the middle of the room and she said (very fast in Portuguese, so this is a rough translation),
“Men are such liars and hypocrites! How dare you disrespect a girl who does prostitution? A woman has a right to do what she wants with her body and if men want to buy sex why shouldn’t she offer? She doesn’t degrade herself, it’s you guys who degrade yourselves by talking shit. And don’t go like ‘I’ve never paid for it’, that’s the biggest mountain of shit of all, because every man has paid for it, at some time or another, every single one of you, why do you think there are thousands of prostitutes in Lisbon, it could be your wife or your sister, your girlfriend, you wouldn’t even know, you’re so sure of yourselves, they’re just ordinary women and sure, they do sex for money, there are millions of other people earning money in criminal ways, cruel ways, so leave these women in peace, the reason you despise them is because you’re secretly wanting to be doing ‘broches’ for money yourselves, and I repeat - ALL men have paid! Even ***** (Murilloa’s real name) has probably paid for it some time or another…!”
These last words were uttered more quietly, almost sadly, looking into Muri’s eyes.
‘EVEN *****’!!
If only she knew!
First reaction was, how ironic, that because he is quiet, reserved and cultured, (yeah, and old and tubby) Muri should be regarded as the most unlikely monger on the block. Then he thinks, ‘holy shit! has she seen me somewhere and this is her way of reproaching me?’ A gorgeous complicated moment.
Ana was livid, she had just been racked by a kind of anger-orgasm, her face mottled red-and-white, her chest blushing angrily, a blue vein throbbing in her neck, her lovely firm breasts heaving inside her pale blue top. A tiny jewel of perspiration showed on her upper lip as she looked at Mur. He had to grit his teeth and clench his fists, repressing his hot desire to take one stride across the room and lick it off with the tip of his tongue before thrusting it into her mouth. A wonderful sight, this beautiful, fully aroused woman. But why, he will always wonder, why did the subject annoy her so much? Is it possible that she…? …another idea to be driven straight underground.
During a five-second freeze, the guys looked dumbly at each other as if to complain, “What’s got into her?” Then Ana came down from her passion, hung her lovely head of hair, mumbled “disculp’-lá” – “sorry”, and turned round pretending to work, rising a minute later for a protracted visit to the bathroom. Later she and colleague could be seen exchanging friendly apologies. She made two transparent attempts to get Muri on his own, doubtless to apologise for including him in her ‘j’accuse’ tirade; but he avoided the occasion and left early. It was just too dangerous - alone with her, his British reserve would crack and he would kneel down on the floor sobbing, “Adorable Ana, if you have ever sold your body, I still respect you, in fact I love you, and I confess that I have indeed consorted with prostitutes once or twice in my humble life, but I have never abused or degraded them, and now please, I beg you, let me unfasten the straps of your sandals with my teeth.”
Off to the ‘Suiça’, where two cerveijas and a cigarette, the first smoke since England vs Portugal, were required to stabilise the system before moving on to Calçada do Garçia, 7, third floor. Here, €30 purchased the company of a very recommendable, firm young plumpish morena, Renata - prounounced ‘Hinata’, for the lady is an Amerindian-type from Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Slow strip with hands wandering everywhere, expert hand job with varied pace and motion, clever covered BJ and three positions, explosion in ‘doggie’ with that ample rear writhing on the end of the spurting rod. Great value for money, and Mur left a tip.
But it was not of Renata he thought as he walked home in the evening sun. Nor did his mind turn to Renata as he soaped his veteran equipment in the shower. Nor was he dreaming of Renata when he woke in the small hours with a familiar friend pushing up the duvet…
Cash Works
10-12-04, 18:45
Murilloa,
Very well written! I've often brought up "Ana's" argument here, so I'd have to say I agree with her.
Domino,
You start out talking about a "heroin smoking" prostitute friend and wind up quoting an Opium addicted author (laudnum, I think). You trying to tell us something about opiates?
The trust issue:
I know more than a couple of guys who are married to, or were once married to ex-prostitutes. None of these ex-prostitutes were American, most were South American (various countries) or Thai, a few from other parts of the world. I can't say that the divorce rate was any different for these guys than their counterparts who married non-pros. I've met a number of these women - both the ex-pros and the non-pros. Like the divorce rate, they're a mixed bunch - some nice, some not so nice. Their former occupations didn't seem to matter in this respect.
Of the divorced guys, I would have to say that at least half of them brought it on theirselves. One case I can think of was a guy who was married to an ex-prostitute who had a very good head on her shoulders when it came to business. She had invested in a number of small companies, she eventually bought out her partners and some of these companies became not-so-small. She was being invited to cocktail parties & "Socials" with the other business & community leaders (politicians) in town. Her husband resented the hell out of all this and eventually she gave him the boot because he was bad for business.
One of the guys I used to work with was married to a prostitute in Malta - she was still working after 10 years (might be wrong on the length of time) of marriage. This guy was one of the more colorful individuals I've ever worked with and was definitely not a "normal" person by any measure of the word "normal" but he thought it was great that she wanted to keep working after they got married - proved to him that she didn't want him just for his money.
Daddy Rulz,
I agree with you - I don't think I'd settle down with a woman who is currently working as a provider. As I said in a previous post, I don't play well with others (I guess the whole sharing thing just didn't sit well with me in kindergarten). If I were to settle down, I would TRY and stay with the women (please note, the plurality wasn't a mistake) I committed to & would expect the same from them in return.
20 years ago, when I was living in Brasil, one girlfriend I had (mentioned in previous posts as "the psycho") was a "semi-pro". When I was in Fortaleza, she didn't sleep with anyone but me, when I was at work, she would go to another city (Manaus or Belem usually) and work in a Brothel/massage parlor. I knew about this, but it really didn't bother me since I wasn't actually sharing her - when I'm not around, what she did was her business. I called her "the psycho" because she would get mad at me for NOT fooling around - she wanted me to fool around so she would have a reason to get mad at me, when I didn't, she'd get mad at me for not giving her a reason to get mad, etc. You get the idea? PSYCHO! I really don't think this had anything to do with her part-time profession, rather, I believe it was due to the "Novellas" or Brasillian Soap-Operas to which she was addicted. She didn't do drugs (despised them, actually) and she rarely drank alcohol - she didn't even smoke cigarettes.
Rolly Polly,
"I'd be willing to put a wager on the fact that a nice size portion of sex workers around the world (maybe even a majority) in all aspects of the industry have been involved in some form of scam, theft, or hustler type deal at least once."
I used to work in the Oil Industry. Some of my co-workers were ex-Halliburton employees. Some of these guys knew Dick Cheney (currently, the US Vice President, formerly CEO of Halliburton, for those of you who don't follow American Politics). Most of the guys who had met Mr. Cheney said that if he showed up on their front doorstep, they wouldn't let him in the house - if they did, they'd search him before letting him leave. I'll just leave this one alone for now, don't want to get involved in a political debate, just used him as an example, since he'd be "familiar" to a lot of people.
BlackJack Cheat:
One of the guys I used to work with was allegedly quite a poker player (played blackjack to relax). He said he was generally comped for everything when he went to Vegas & was even flown up there a couple of times for tournaments (commercial flights, since he wasn't a "Whale").
We were talking about cheaters one time & he mentioned a "black-list" or something that the Nevada Gaming Commission kept on proven cheats. If you ever made it on this list, you were apparently barred from ALL Nevada Casinos for life. He didn't know if there was any sort of appeal process, just said that you'd have to be an idiot to cheat in a Vegas Casino.
CW
PsyberZombie
10-12-04, 20:10
RN has a complaint about Yours Truly =
Every other nasty comment you've made about working girls indirectly insults me, and you know it.
My Posts here have been about AMERICAN Working Girls , RN
... but if the Shoe fits = Wear It !!
PsyberZombie
10-12-04, 20:15
BTW =
That 'Complaint' by RN was posted on the 'Letters to the Editor' Board
IMHO , that Board should be Reserved for Actual , Real LETTERS to JACKSON
... like MY Letter was
Heck , the Poor Guy has Enough to do around here with·out his 'Letters' Board being Cluttered Up with Reponses to Posts made on Boards like , say , *This One* !!
PsyberZombie
10-12-04, 20:49
To : Murilloa
You're Quite the Poet
... but What's your Point ??
RN,
"I come from a country with 8 States and Territories, three of which currently have some form of legalised prostitution (basically brothels only)"
It seems that a very important part of the sentence was left out for some reason: which three currently have some form of legalized prostitution?
I'd hate to end up in the wrong fukken state or territory!
"IMHO , that Board should be Reserved for Actual , Real LETTERS to JACKSON"
Such as your pathetic little whine about someone parodying your writing style? As if that wasn't an utter waste of Jackson's time but RN's somehow was? ROTFLOL!
Daddy Rulz
10-13-04, 06:01
RN wrote:
I don't want to get into a pissing war with you, PsyberZombie. I was angry last night - but now I've lost interest.Please piss all over him, I can't speak for the rest of the board but personally I dig it when you make him your b****.
RN,
'In SA and WA, sex work is criminalised.'
You, RN, native of Perth, are a criminal:(!?!?
I am deeply disappointed!
Well, RN, the whole age age thing has never been a real big one with me, but I've never mentally added a couple of years onto what someone tells me unless I can see by looking at someone in front of me that it's clearly warranted. There are any number of women in the business who have a truly exaggerated sense of how old/young they look -- I've had women who later admitted they were in their late thirties try adamantly to tell me they were in their early twenties, and even when reality was admitted they would try to get me to agree that's what they looked like. (Why would I say otherwise in the first place if I felt it were true? It's not because I'm being a boor.)
And I do get very pissed when an agency tells me someone is arriving who looks like X or Y and someone completely different arrives without explanation or, as often happens, someone arrives who is very clearly ten years older than was described. I find this especially galling because I don't usually say, "I want someone like this," but instead ask them to describe who's available and then make my choice from the descriptions. If I'm being told someone is twenty-one, I want them to be twenty-one, and if I'm told they're thirty I want them to be thirty. It's not up to an agency or receptionist to try to read my mind, it's up to them to let me know as truthfully as possible, what my options are. If I say I want someone who's going to suck my dick, I don't want the receptionist to decide what I really want is someone who'll give me a good wank. And if I say I want someone who's blonde and twenty, I'd rather be told, well, we've got a 23-year old blonde and an eighteen-year-old blonde as opposed to being told one of them is twenty.
To me, that is bait and switch. While I certainly hold nothing against the woman involved (unless she is an independent and thus the one involved in the deception) it is usually also an indicator that more of the same is coming -- some sort of hidden "fees" than don't get mentioned until she's in the door, a series of rules that conflict with what had been indicated, olympic-style clockwatching ("the hour actually started when I pulled up in front of your hotel" -- I actually had someone tell me that) and so on. I usually simply decline and never use such an agency or person again. And I make a clear point of saying why.
I understand the prejudice many mongers have against older sex workers, but if I'm asking for someone who is, say, nineteen, it's not because I want someone who, in the opinion of some receptionist who clearly has a prejudice and a sale to make, looks nineteen, it's more likely because I want to live out the fantasy of fucking an actual nineteen-year-old. Reality does matter when it infringes on fantasy, and fantasy only works when there's trust in an illusion. I sure as hell don't want to be sent someone who "looks latin" or "looks black" if I decide for whatever reasons I want to screw someone of a certain ethnicity.
PsyberZombie
10-13-04, 17:45
Daddy Rulz writes =
Please piss all over [PZ] , I can't speak for the rest of the board but personally I dig it when you make him your b****.
Well , Count me OUT of That Fight !!
As Papa Psyber always says =
" Don't ever get in·to a Pissing Contest with a Skunk "
But what if the client had to advertise himself to the girl? "I'm an old fat bald needle dick lame fuck who's half shit faced right now" comes to mind.
And there's even worse guys than me out there.
"...my boss would have said straight out 'We don't have anyone here like that right now, BUT we do have a busty 20 year old brunette...etc'."
Yes, but of course that busty 20 year old might in fact have been a 26-year old...
I understand "creative advertising" but from my perspective that means I've basically been snookered into walking through the door with the expectation I'm going to see such and such, and you're saying, well, you can always contain your disappointment and settle for someone else. I don't like it when it happens with regular businesses, nor in this instance. Treat me like an adult, already, not a fucking idiot! I've walked from brothels a couple of times in such instances -- if I can't trust what I'm told when I can verify it with my eyes then I don't see how I can trust anything else.
As I said, I certainly never blame the worker in this instance, and I agree such tactics put her at higher risk. If such an occasion arises I generally call the agency and tell them specifically what I am doing and why. If I asked for someone and wasn't specific and simply decided that this wasn't going to work then I'll generally pay a reasonable transportation fee, but that's also an area where scams get tried -- send someone who is completely different from what I'm told and then tell me I need to pay half or all the agreed-upon fee and it's time for hotel security to come into the equation.
It's great that you worked with someone you can trust to behave properly, but as many have attested here, that's decidedly not always the case. Frankly, one of the positive aspects of decrimalization is that it would make it possible to have a kind of "Monger Better Business Bureau" -- which is what something like WSG could be if posting such info wouldn't result in the police knocking on doors.
PsyberZombie
10-14-04, 06:13
Ahhh!! Enlightenment !!
It's a *Beautiful* Thing !!
I see where my Warnings to Joe Zop are finally 'getting through' ==>
It's great that you worked with someone you can trust to behave properly, but as many have attested here, that's decidedly not always the case
Always Remember PZ's Law , Peeps :
" Never trvst a Hooker further than she can spit your Load !! "
Ci-Traveler
10-14-04, 10:01
Lotsa quotes going on by PZ that he attributes to himself.
Psyber Zombie wrote:
"As Papa Psyber always says =
" Don't ever get in·to a Pissing Contest with a Skunk "
I beg to correct you - I said it in several posts on the Milwaukee board.....perhaps long before you.......during a flame war regarding the idiot Lefty.
But then - I didn't make it up (like you didn't) - I just use it (like you do).
ci-traveler
PS - this post is designed purposefully to create mass confusion so as to create further discussion of such.
Geez, I feel more like I did when I came in than I do now!
Cash Works
10-14-04, 10:10
RN & JZ,
Dishonest sales people are not restricted to the sex industry, used car dealerships or realestate. I used to have problems with clients (major oil companies) on a regular basis because sales people, would make promises that were, often times, physically or technologically impossible to achieve.
The problem was that these promises tended to make their way into a contract which was signed by people higher up the food chain in my company than me - the client would complain that we weren't delivering, the guy that signed the contract would be in it pretty deep & as the saying goes, it rolls downhill & somehow always ended up in my lap. I'd have to scramble to negotiate some alternative or we'd lose potential revenues with a helluva lot more zeros than are involved in the typical mongering session.
I was lucky for quite a few years, in that I was always successful in coming up with some alternative that made the client happy, others in my position, unfortunately were not and some of them actually lost their job as a result. Rumor has it that the sales guy and the guy who signed the contract, the guys who caused the problem, usually wound up with a bonus for my (or someone elses) effort in fixing their sloppy work.
From the clients point of view, I suspect they had some of these problems added to the contract intentionally so that they would later have an edge in negotiating something that my company didn't want to provide.
CW
PsychoZombie, I'd not pay attention to any warning you'd offer at this point if I were paid to do so. If you think you're the first or only one to mention here that there are unscrupulous people in the business, and if you think it's some kind of blindingly awesome point, well, you're even more full of yourself than you appear to be. It's quite a different issue from your blanket absolutist character assassination crapola. Saying there are unscrupulous car dealers, lawyers, politicians, whatever is very different from labeling all of them as damaged goods.
But then such distinctions appear lost on you, as you seem to have been one of those kids who only got two colors of crayon for coloring.
PsyberZombie
10-14-04, 17:11
" I know where *I'd* spit your load.... "
Do tell , RN !!
My guess would be right back in your face.
PsyberZombie
10-14-04, 17:16
I really *Love* this Board !!
It's like dropping Hand•Grenades in a Koi Pond !!!
PsyberZombie
10-14-04, 17:42
To : Dick·Head
Ya know = your Style of Writing leaves a Lot to be desired
[ We're EVEN Now !! ]
PsyberZ . . .
Have you just recently lost your mind? Seems like during the last several weeks you pop up on numerous boards only to start a fight or insult someone. 50 posts in just the last week and all are just BS! Some are merely symbols. Another to congratulate yourself for 300 posts. WTF! A problem at home or has your medication run out? Please . . . push away from the keyboard and give everyone a break. We will all feel better.
Thanks, -P
Ci-Traveler
10-14-04, 23:50
Prokofiev,
Hey cmon man.....leave PZ alone. He's a WSG Benefactor man! You have to respect the fact that he has donated something - cash, time, or whatnot to the running of this board. You don't want to piss him or Jackson off. Believe me, anyone who donates gets the special treatment man.
On the other hand - you do have a pretty good point.
Fuck the benefactor status.
PZ - you need to get some help bud. Really - all this negative flow........geez man - you could have some serious physical or mental issues occur if you keep it up. I'm worried for you bud! Get that Prozac or Zoloft back into your body. Yeah - I know - you would have trouble reaching orgasm - but at least you might get back to being the lovable, fun, positive person we all know.
ci-traveler
PsyberZombie
10-15-04, 06:10
To : Prokofiev and Ci-Traveler
Thanks for the 'wake·up call' , my friends !!
I hereby Resolve to be a Kinder , Gentler Zombie
And I'll especially try to be nicer to RN , who has taken personal offense at some of my opinions here , even though no offense was intended
Please let me know if any more Self·Flagellation is required
Sincerely & Remorsefully ,
»» PZ ««
Ci-Traveler
10-15-04, 10:02
I have been set straight on the benefactor status. Apparently, this is support that all goes to Argentine charity soup kitchens - Jackson passes all the money on.
I was misinformed and posted wrongly about it.
My regrets and apologies to Jackson for suggesting otherwise.
ci-traveler
Pokey stated (09-04-04) that "Prostitution is such a dirty filthy business". It is, but let's look at what makes it filthy and dirty.
(a) The unfair distribution of wealth and income. Many people, particularly in so-called Third World Countries, do not have the resources to earn a decent living by conventional means and are hence driven to prostitution through economic necessity. If someone becomes a prostitute because it is the only alternative to starvation, that is dirty.
Contrast this scenario with what happens at German FKK Clubs. There are women from Eastern Europe working there who are probably not as well off as native Germans, but these women could, without too much difficulty, earn a decent living doing a conventional job. They become prostitutes so that they can earn money to purchase luxuries without a lot of effort. Many of them appear to enjoy being prostitutes because they have chosen to be that. This is good, clean, morally acceptable prostitution.
(b) The criminalization of prostitution, which is foisted on many societies by the unholy alliance of powerful men in positions of power and sex-hating twisted women who want to maintain a tight grip on the genitals of their husbands. The powerful men who want to keep these laws include politicians who seek the votes of the afore-mentioned women, LE officers who enjoy the free services of prostitutes as a pay-off to avoid arrest, and clergymen who may belong to the 1% of the population who are reputedly "asexual". Regarding the last group, it would seem that there are a small number of people who are turned off by the messiness of sex. That's fine as long as it remains a personal choice, but some of these asexual people are apparently even disgusted by the knowledge that other people are doing it.
Once again it is useful to look at the German FKK's where prostitution is completely legal, and <i>clean</i>.
PsyberZombie
10-15-04, 18:25
Hi , Ci-Traveler !!
It's the Kinder , Gentler PsyberZombie here :) !!
I see that you're having some of Your own "Inter·Personal Issues" over on the Milwaukee , Wisconsin Board
Well , Nobody's Perfect !!
I've already Admitted that I'm just a Flawed Human Being ; and I've Apologized for Same
May·be YOU owe an Apology to LEFTY ???
»»» Just a Thought !!! :)
Cash Works
10-17-04, 10:50
This may be a little off topic, I just thought it was rather humorous.
I recorded a couple of shows on "the history channel" last night about sex during the (american) civil war. Anyway, I just watched them this morning & thought they were quite interesting. Apparently during the Civil War, (early to mid 1860's, for those of you who are unfamiliar with American History) there were quite a few brothels in American cities. This was not just a result of the war, they had apparently always been around and were tolerated if not actually legal.
A couple of comments really made me take notice:
One was about how the clergy, particularly the tele-evangelist types are always calling our current era "wicked & depraved", primarily due to sexuality issues. According to these historians, during the Victorian era, there was a lot more fucking going on than there is now.
The other comment was about all the brothels in Washington, DC during the Civil War. They were mostly scattered in an area between the White House and the Capitol. General Hooker (I mentioned him in a previous post) apparently had some of the brothels moved so that they were in a more concentrated area, for better policing & easier access. Anyway, one of the historians was in modern day Washington, pointing out where a lot of these brothels had been located in the past. All, it seems have been replaced by various museums and government buildings, there was one comment that really made me laugh though. When he showed the IRS building (Internal Revenue Service - our federal tax collectors), he said something like "I find it rather facinating that they're doing the same thing to people at that location now as they were 150 years ago". Whether he meant they're still fucking people, or they're still taking peoples money, I'll never know, whichever he meant, I'm sure that it was a far more pleasurable experience 150 years ago!
CW
Ci-Traveler
10-17-04, 11:22
PsyberZombie wrote:
"May·be YOU owe an Apology to LEFTY ???
»»» Just a Thought !!! "
My reaction? You love Lefty! You always jump on the bandwagon when he is posting.
Me? I think what Lefty does for the board is silly, stupid, and demeaning - and he writes lies and fiction that gets no one nowhere (is that imploring a double negative???).
Otherwise he's an okay, standup kind of guy.
Apolgize for what? Everything I've posted has been truthful and accurate. We only apologize when we have clearly done something that was wrong. I would enjoy seeing him leave the board permanently (although that will never happen), and I have no problem saying that. I don't WANT a cozy, fuzzy online relationship with him.
But thanks for thinking of me.
ci-traveler
Tea boy, you took me a little out of context, but I guess I did say that on 9/3/04. I was responding to how bad prostitution was if my daughter ever got involved in it. I was also responing to RN's agenda of promoting sex work as a noble profession/trade like nursing, teaching, or ballet dancing.
If someone becomes a prostitutes because it's the only choice over starvation I would not believe it would damage her as she is only surviving. But, when your only thinking about where your next meal is coming from, you don't think of such things as" I'm I happy". Is this the life for me".
There are a few people on this board who say, its bullshit that she has to sell her ass to survive, that other people learn to get by on little money. ( I don't make those judgements)
German, FKK clubs, those sound hot and interesting. I must try them one day. If they enjoy it so much, and there is no stigma and no law against it. I just wonder why all the local German girls, and housewifes don't do it too.
So the unholy alliance of powerful men and sex-hating twisted women are the reason of laws against prostitution. Well, I could go along with this, but there are others like me, who think prostitution is better off being illegal for a number of reasons.
Pokey,
Thanks for your response, and sorry I misquoted you. I was interested in your remark about a number of reasons why it is better for prostitution to be illegal. I came across one of your posts about Freud and the Id. I agree that some sort of regulation of prostitution is desirable, similar to the licensing laws for the sale of alcohol. When I moved to Sri Lanka I chose to live in an area where prostitutes are NOT freely available (due to social attitudes and harsher policing), so that I have to make a two-hour journey to indulge my hobby. I am aware that I have a propensity to addiction. However, I would not agree that that prostitution should be any more illegal than alcohol, which does a lot more harm to individual health and to society.
I guess the reasons more German girls don't become prostitutes are: (a) Although prostitution is legal there is still a social stigma attached to it. (b) The cost/benefit ratio for the girl is too high in view of the risk of disease etc. (c) It appears to be only a small minority of women who enjoy sex with multiple partners in contrast to the much larger minority of men who do so. Whether this is purely due to biology or whether social conditioning has a part to play I am not sure.
I would not agree that prostitution is as noble a profession as nursing or teaching. However, I think a great prostitute deserves the same sort of love and respect that is accorded to a great chef or musician. Yes, Anne-Sophie Mutter playing the Beethoven Violin Concerto.
Tea Boy
This is in response to two remarks made by RN and Joe Zop respectively.
One of the things I found the strangest was the number of guys who wanted to DATY. Women all over the world - including me in my private life! - were complaining that not enough men will do it. And yet here they were, coming in and PAYING me for it! It was quite bizarre.
Again, sex is also about smell and taste, so why would I possibly draw a line where those were outside of the equation? As far as guys paying to DATY, hmm, well, is that somehow more off the wall than paying to be dominated, etc.? If I remember correctly you related any number of far stranger things guys have paid for than eating out.
But I've gotta confess I've never understood the whole DATY thing, anyway, in terms of it being tough to come by. I can't think of a single relationship I've had where it hasn't been an integral and regular part of coupling. Maybe that's just me, but from reading this board I don't think so.
I have never had the good fortune to be in a relationship where DATY was "an integral and regular part of coupling", so that may be why I seek it with working girls, and it becomes a peak experience for me when the girl has an orgasm during DATY. I imagine that those women who complain to RN about not getting enough of it <i>also</i> want to be romanced by charming personable men who treat them to a wonderful dinner, take them home, and then go down on them. It would seem that many of these charming personable men, who are in a minority anyway, can't be bothered spending their time and money in this way or, if they do splash out it will be in expectation of a nice BBBJ followed by intercourse. If there were more women who would just go up to an ordinary bloke, perhaps a work colleague, and say "Let's go for dinner and then you can come home and lick me out", they would be happier and less men would need to pay for sex. But that's in a place called Utopia.
I'm sorry; did you say "look down" or "lick down"? I get those two confused.
RN,
I am afraid that if sex workers regard what they are doing as merely a job they are not going to get a lot of respect. This has already happened in professions like Medicine when doctors have become mere technicians.
Those engaging in a sex act, whether as provider or as customer, can never be emotionally neutral about it. In my experience as a monger the woman always either loves what she is doing or she hates it, although there are obviously degrees of love and hate. If I have been with someone who hates what she is doing I feel degraded during and after the session, feeling that I have done something immoral. Fortunately, in the two countries that I have mongered in there are a small number of women who love what they are doing. If you read the posts of Murilloa in the London and Lisbon sections you will see that this has been his experience too. It's not just me being a hopeless romantic - I came across a description of a girl named Kim2 in Amsterdam as " a healer of men". These lovely women make the world a better place to live in.
While the transfer of money is an essential part of the interaction, the sex worker who gets the most respect is the one who is <i>not</> doing it just for money. Although no woman is going to expose herself to the risk of disease etc. without adequate recompense, the sexual act could still be a mutually rewarding one.
My thanks to Jackson for making this forum available to us, and I hope that it will help weed out those sex workers whose heart is not in what they do.
Tea Boy
Tea Boy
I am afraid that if sex workers regard what they are doing as merely a job they are not going to get a lot of respect. This has already happened in professions like Medicine when doctors have become mere technicians. I think your analogy here may be a little anachronistic. The diefication (or damnification) of certain professions has always been a crutch. Clergymen, even repairmen are seen by some as performing "magic."
I would not want to offend anyone in any profession but it seems childish to paint people as one-dimensional objects. Mary and Bob are not a Doctor and a Lawyer, they are Mary and Bob, who may hold those credentials and practice that profession, but they continue to be just plain old human beings.
You do not need to be Mother Theresa to be a nun.
I have no doubt that persons exist in this world who are the proverbial square peg in the square hole, but I suggest that the vast majority cannot be so easily and neatly classified.
Just my .02
Cheers,
Sporadic
Well said, Sporadic. And I must say that I while I agree with Tea Boy that some sort of emotional aspect must be involved in the sex act, simply because of the endorphins that get released, that's very different from some sort of true or important emotion being involved. Yes, someone may see someone as a "healer of men" and another may see her as simply a "sperm receptacle" but that doesn't mean it's necessary to feel either way, or for the sex worker to have some sort of emotional quotient either. I don't buy the whole idea of a "necessary" emotional quotient, positive or negative with the sex act -- at least not going any further than endorphins or speaking about the kind of emotional aspect that's involved in liking or not liking to do anything else. Sometimes people are just getting off or getting someone else off.
And personally, I think most sex workers would be thrilled to be given as "little" respect as doctors, and to be marginialized in such a way.
Tea Boy, if you've not had a relationship where DATY was an integral part, is that due to the lack of relationships or because the women you were involved with weren't into it? I've met a couple of the latter, but they are generally pretty quick converts... :)
Sporadic,
Thanks for your response. I agree that my analogy with Medicine is controversial, but if I went into further discussion of that we would be going off topic. Are you saying that prostitution is simply a job? From the point of view of the customer, is his interaction with a prostitute merely a convenient way to discharge semen, or is it something more than that?
Best Regards,
Tea Boy
Joe Zop,
Thanks for your response. I'll start by answering your specific question. The answer is that it is the "lack of relationships" which is the main reason for my not being able to indulge in DATY outside of prostitution. Using a term which has been discussed in this forum a couple of years ago, I would say that I am differently attractive due to the lack of self-confidence. I have been in two "normal" sexual relationships. The first was a passionate one, but the woman declined DATY because she felt she was dirty down there. That ended after six months. The second was a much longer-term relationship but the woman's sexual interest in me was always of a very low intensity.
Regarding your other point about the emotional aspect of sex, it appears that I have been guilty of over-generalizing from my personal experience. I can see that there must many men who have satisfactory and perfectly morally acceptable encounters with prostitutes with very little emotion being involved, and conversely the women who cater to these men would not need to bring too much emotion either positive or negative into the act.
Tea Boy
Joe Zop
some sort of emotional aspect must be involved in the sex act, simply because of the endorphins that get released, that's very different from some sort of true or important emotion being involved.Your are hitting eerily close to home on this one, Joe.
While I think most of us understand the physiological bonding response to orgasm, there is also a risk (?) of more emotional attachment. I recently met a young lady who, it seems, owing to her unique circumstances has decided that she has feelings for me that go beyond the professional relationship.
I am not talking about a possible warm feeling or simple fondness here, and frankly I feel a very deep sense of responsibility. I have sought out advice from some people I trust and I think I know how to handle this situation, but having said that, it was a truly unexpected turn of events.
This lady is neither a "healer of men", nor a barracuda, just human. Certainly she deserves my respect as a human being, regardless of her profession. Everyone puts on their "game face" on the job, but human reactions can not simply be turned off. Ask any Paediatric Oncologist.
I will grant you that this whole issue is seriously complicated because of the circumstances under which we met, but I personally do not think payment absolves me of any and all responsibility towards this person.
It is ironic as one of the reasons I avail myself of professional services is to avoid relationship issues and consequent emotional betrayal of my S.O.
Cheers,
Sporadic
I agree that payment doesn't absolve one of responsibility -- the fact that you paid a fair price certainly doesn't absolve you in the case where you know there's coercion involved, for example, in having a sex worker service you. And I agree absolutely that such things are complicated because of physiological bonding in an instance where a sex worker sees you as something other than a particular client, since, among other things, the level of truth involved in such a situation is tough to measure.
To me it comes down to this -- if the woman was someone who you'd had a fair amount of contact with and who worked in a shop or was a waitress, receptionist, etc., would you have a clear set of emotional reactions and/or sense of your willingness to get entangled? The same considerations should apply here, though because of all our programming it's obviously tougher to separate things.
And, of course, irony is no help against anything other than an improper sense of ruefulness. :)
Joe Zop,
I understand what you are saying about "responsibilities" towards a lady in any other profession (shop attendant or secretary etc.) and I do not want to seem either very casual or overly harsh about this thing, but at least for me, I find it more difficult in an intimate (though professional) situation.
This has not happened to me in at least 15 years (at least that I am aware of, I was young and dashing once) and really took me by surprise. I am not sure, at this juncture if I can treat it just like a star-struck secretary (yes, that has happened before, but easily resolved, and of course, we were never intimate.)
would you have a clear set of emotional reactions and/or sense of your willingness to get entangled?I possibly did not make myself clear here. I have no doubt about my feelings, no entanglements for me, thank you very much. My concern was with these unilateral emotions on the part of the provider. Few people get their kicks pulling the wings off of butterflies (I hope.)
of course, irony is no help against anything other than an improper sense of ruefulness.Come on Mr. Z, you have been reliably reported as a nice guy. It is not nice to taunt poor helpless mongers like me. ;)
Cheers,
Sporadic
Sporadic,
My replies are of course delayed because of vetting by the Administrator. Your last post proves that I was very far off the mark when I asked whether "an encounter with a prostitute was merely a convenient method of discharging semen". Sorry about that, but perhaps you will understand that I was trying to enliven the discussion by putting forward an extreme viewpoint. Your feeling responsible for the young lady clearly shows that the prostitute/client encounter, especially if there have been several sessions between the same pair, is often charged with deep emotion. I for one am pretty sure that this is not all due to endorphins.
I don't know what S.O. stands for, but I would entirely agree with you that in 99% of cases our relationship with our lovely working ladies should be kept strictly within professional boundaries to minimize the risk of hurt on either side.
It is also very evident to me that the young lady you mention was not merely "doing a job", and probably loves her work, especially when it involves a caring individual like yourself!
Tea Boy
RN,
Thanks for your message, sweetheart! Of course all human beings deserve respect. I think if a sex worker hates her job she deserves compassion as well as respect.
However, what I am puzzled about is why your reluctance to regard sex work as a profession. So I looked up the definition of a profession in Merriam-Webster: "A calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation". It is obvious that the bit about academic preparation does not apply to sex work, but I think the first part does.
The other important feature of a profession which does not appear in the dictionary definition is that most professions have a trade body or organization which tries to maintain minimum standards of service. In occupations such as the building trade in some countries which do not maintain acceptable standards, these workers lose respect and are referred to as "cowboy builders". Not that being a cowgirl sex worker is necessarily a term of derision. But seriously, if sex work were to be legalized, the establishment of such a trade body would help a lot in making it a respected occupation.
Tea Boy
PsyberZombie
10-22-04, 19:35
What are the Principle Exports of Canada ??
"Cold air fronts , Hockey , and Annoying Singers" , according to Danae , a comic strip character in the syndicated Strip "NON SEQUITOR"
[ http://www.ucomics.com/nonsequitur/2004/10/20/ ]
And of All the Annoying Singers from Canada , AVRIL SEVIGNE tops the List
She's got this one 'Hit' Song from her latest Album that is played *Incessantly* on the Radio here called =
" MY HAPPY ENDING "
The last two lines of the chorus of this Song go =
" All this time you were pretending
... So much for my Happy Ending !! "
While deliciously Ironic that a *Female* would be complaining about her Lack of a Happy Ending ,
do you think Avril has Any Idea what the expression 'Happy Ending' means to us Mongers ??
I kinda doubt it =
This was the chick who introduced David Bowie at the MTV Music Awards Ceremony as "David Bauwie"
... she later admitted that she mis·pronounced his name because she had *never heard of him* !!!
She's Cute , but Dumber than a Box of Rocks
... Just the way we like 'em , am I right , Gentlemen ??
Daddy Rulz
10-23-04, 00:03
RN, Joe, Sporadic and Tea Boy.
Interesting conversation. Personally I feel if I'm paying for service I have no responsibility after. Without rancor, I think that if a provider knew that I was emotionally involved but not a danger I don't think She would hesitate to use that for repeat business.
I'm an attractive man, intelligent, have a decent job and am a pretty funny guy. Meeting women has never been a problem for me. One of the things I love most about mongering is that I can do it on MY terms. I have no shame about my activity, I also have no S.O. nor do I really desire one. (RN being the exception of course, I have a huge crush on Her)
If both me and the provider developed feelings for each other Her profession/occupation/trade/whatever we want to call it would not be a bar to a relationship for me. If only She was involved I would probably seek a graceful way out. I pay women to avoid just this very problem. I enjoy sex, I really enjoy sex with young attractive women, and I really, really enjoy sex with a lot of different young attractive women. Like Charlie Sheen said "Your Honor you don't pay them for "sex" I pay them to leave" personally I think of it as I pay them so I can leave. Now if I found a Woman that wanted to have sex with a lot of different attractive young women with me I would react differently I think.
I think among us having this conversation we can all agree that regardless of what "job" you do you can bring dignity to it by your willingness to do it well. Is sex with a provider better when you care and respect each other, yes for those that enjoy care and respect. Some guys are doing it for the opposite reason I think. And others I think just want a semen receptacle without prejudice. I kind of feel sorry for them I think they miss a lot of what the experience can be.
My concern was with these unilateral emotions on the part of the provider. Few people get their kicks pulling the wings off of butterflies (I hope.)
Ah, I understand, my mistake. Well, one certainly always does bear responsibility in those cases, regardless of circumstance. At the very least you must make clear as sincerely as possible that you are both extremely flattered and completely full of regret at the impossibility of the situation. Anyone who would not do so is precisely one of those torturers you describe -- the fact that we're here talking about tracking down sex doesn't mean we abrogate our responsibilities as gentlemen.
By very, very strange coincidence, on a run back to my hometown earlier this evening, I ran into just such a person who I'd not seen in years -- not a sex worker, but someone who at one time worked as a dancer and confessed having a crush on me and a desire to explore it. I must say I'm lucky to have handled things well in the past, because she's now someone who has become peripherally attached to my old social circle. You just never know what twists will come, and that's certainly not one I'd anticipated! If I'd have been a jerk I'm sure some version or other of it would have managed to come back to bite me.
Come on Mr. Z, you have been reliably reported as a nice guy. It is not nice to taunt poor helpless mongers like me. ;)
Rest assured, that shot first needed to pass repeatedly through me, since it was far more a comment on my own failings (being the irony-a-holic I am) than a taunt in your direction...:)
As the socio-economic aspect of prostitution is relevant to its morality I would like to share some information about a girl I have been seeing. (Although she is 32-34 years old, she is happy for me to refer to her as a girl) We both live in a Third World country, she was widowed about 6 years ago, and she has to support a 9-year-old daughter. She worked as a prostitute upto a year ago, then took a break and returned to her village where she owns a tiny farm growing rice and vegetables. She earns just about enough to feed the two of them.
They live in a partly-built house and now she has returned to prostitution to earn some money so that she can complete the building. There is no electricity in the house at moment, and the first step she is taking is install the wiring and some light fittings. Then she will need to buy some furniture. She sees five clients a day on average, getting about $ 6 from each after the brothel has taken its share. So if anyone thinks that what she is doing is immoral (obviously not a member of this forum), perhaps they would like to donate $1000 so that she can give up her sinful life.
Tea Boy
So I looked up the definition of a profession in Merriam-Webster: "A calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation". It is obvious that the bit about academic preparation does not apply to sex workYou and I obviously did not attend the same University ;) Field work in ethanol tolerance and sex work (well, it was not really work) were required and encouraged.
Actually, IMHO any "job" can be a profession, it just depends upon how well you do it. "Professional" Waiters, "Professional" Butlers and "Professional Nannies" certainly qualify. It really depends upon how you view your work, as RN pointed out.
Cheers,
Sporadic
RN,
Thanks for your appreciation. I wish I had met you in the days before your retirement!
When you wrote: "Many men out there don't WANT a 'professional' hooker", that really seems to me to be irrelevant to our discussion. It is up to a profession to decide what it wants to provide its clients. For instance, the legal profession operates on the principal that its members operate within the laws of the land, seeking to uphold those laws. There are plenty of criminals out there who would like to use the skills of a lawyer to help them with their illegal activities, and some lawyers will oblige them with the legal equivalent of a blow job in a dark corner, but if they get caught doing it they will be removed from the profession.
But perhaps we are at cross purposes because I haven't understood where you are coming from. Is it the case that you are a member of the Collective of Sex Workers or something like that in your country, and you wish your Collective to represent ALL sex workers? I can certainly see the need for such an organization.
Maybe we should try to move the discussion on to something like, "Can sex work be more than a job?", "Are sex workers providing a useful service to society?", "If sex work carries the risk of psychological damage to both workers and clients, can anything be done to minimize the risk?"
Best regards,
Tea Boy
Well, I think one can be a "professional" without being in a "profession." Similarly, one can certainly be in a profession without being a professional. The Merriam-Webster definition isn't the only one -- American Heritage, for example, has "An occupation or career" as an additional definition.
I've always rather liked the distinction someone once made about what makes something a profession: having clients instead of customers. That's wonderful in the context of this discussion, I think, because it clears up absolutely nothing! :D
Perhaps we could just acknowledge that prostitution has indeed been long referred to as "the oldest profession" and agree that phrase has such common usage that the waters have become considerably muddied.
Sporadic,
The girls at our University got two certificates when they finished - The Degree + a Certificate of Virginity. I was told, unofficially, that a few of them passed their 'O' Levels as well.
Do you do it well? In that case you are a Professional Monger.
Tea Boy
Psyber Zombie posted:
"She's Cute , but Dumber than a Box of Rocks
... Just the way we like 'em , am I right , Gentlemen ??"
Ummm, no, actually.
My experience has been the smarter the girl the better she is in bed.
Civ2000:
My experience has been the smarter the girl the better she is in bed.I have never noticed a direct correlation.
Some women who just ooze sexuality are rather dull in bed, somehow thinking that presence is sufficient. Others, who do not have the "bedroom eyes" or any particular outward trait ended up shaking my world.
Who knows? One thing I will say with absolute certainty, stupidity is not sexy.
Cheers,
Sporadic
BK Big Fish
10-25-04, 14:46
I thought this might be relevant to the topic at hand.
I don't know many guys, old or young, who are morally against prostitution. They're about as against it as they are against cocaine or gambling -- maybe I'm not into it personally, but I can't hold it against someone unless their obsessed with it, it's good in moderation, I hope no one in my family gets too involved, but otherwise, live and let live.
And yet, in virtually every country in the world, prostitution is illegal (although enforcement varies). Why?
I think it's the women. Women know they are competing with prostitutes. And it's not just about sex. If the way to a man's heart is through his stomach, then the way to a man's wallet is through sex. If the sex is cheap, then the wallet stays closed. And who needs marriage if inexpensive prostitutes are also willing to give you the hallowed GFE?
We are trained to believe that prostitution is immoral because women, and through them the mass of society who doesn't really think or care about it one way or another, don't want the competition. Sure, we can talk about all the moral arguments for and against prostitution, but I'm saying that moral arguments are just a smokescreen for the real reason society teaches us prostitution is illegal: It makes women work harder.
What do you think?
Tea Boy:
Do you do it well? In that case you are a Professional Monger.Do it well? At least I think so. ;)
About being a pro, I am still searching for that elusive research grant that would allow me to monger on a professional basis. Failing that, I will continue as a hobbyist.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Did everyone read this article in the San Diego paper about the evolution of the sex trade? The link, http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20041018/news_lz1n18adult.html
BK Big Fish:
And who needs marriage if inexpensive prostitutes are also willing to give you the hallowed GFE? I think I understand what you are saying, but personally the "who need’s marriage?" premise is just a tad too simple.
I cannot speak for anyone else, but I did not choose my spouse on the basis of the sexual availability of providers. I doubt any decent LTR could be based upon such a foundation.
I sense that you are a little ticked off at the fairer sex, if not openly misogynistic. My belief is that many people, who in polite company would deride the sex trade, actually participate on the side. There is no sex work without customers.
What "society" says and what society does are two very different things. I do not buy the worldwide female conspiracy theory.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Cash Works
10-27-04, 09:42
I have to agree somewhat with BK Big Fish. I think married women & women who want to get married, play a big part in having laws passed to make prostitution illegal, but I don't think the institution of marriage would disappear if prostitution were legal - there are plenty of men out there who are offended by paying directly for sex & ultimately prefer paying more by being in a marriage with one woman. Even if our culture appreciated prostitutes, I believe you would find some men and women pairing up and getting married.
Married women, at least in America, have historically banded together (along with the clergy) to get laws passed that helped to keep their husbands at home. In the late 19th & early 20th centuries, the entire "temperance" movement was spearheaded by women (mostly disgruntled married women who were upset by their husbands staggering home from a night on the town & smelling like whiskey & women) this culminated in Prohibition, where the sale & consumption of alcoholic beverages of all types was made illegal in the USA. One side effect of Prohibition was the increased profits for organized crime (Al Capone, et al). There were others who profited, JFK's family for instance, made a bundle running rum & other spirits up from the carribean before he was born - they obviously never got busted for their (then) illegal activities.
While Prohibition, on paper, seems to be all about stopping the consumption of alcoholic beverages, I believe it was mostly about stopping Prostitution. Prostitution, historically has gone hand in hand with drinking - anyone for a little drunken debauchery? To this day, most of the prostitutes around the world can be found in or near bars.
I think the idea behind the temperance movement was basically "men go to bars to get drunk, once they get drunk, they are easily seduced by the prostitutes who are there, if we stop the sale of booze, then men won't use the services of prostitutes because they'll be sober. Since the men won't be drunk, prostitutes won't have any clients, so they'll find more suitable work."
I personally think there's a major flaw in that logic - I've never had to be drunk in order to have sex with a prostitute. I beleive these Victorian era women were a bit naive to think that the booze was the main reason their husbands went out - my personal opinion is that they went out to get a little strange & had a few drinks while they were making their selection.
CW
BK Big Fish, I think perhaps you are wrong. I believe that even if women were not allowed to vote that an initiative legalizing prostitution would easily be defeated in the U.S. First you have the religious right which believes anything sexual is immoral and wrong, and they seem to be the 48% or so that will be voting for Bush. Next you have the liberals who believe that prostitution or lap dancing is demeaning and victimizing to females and they are "victims" who need to be protected. Heck, here in Seattle, it seems most people I talk to support the cops going into strip clubs and busting dancers for touching during lap dances. Ridiculous.
Also, I'm not sure who you hang out with but nearly everyone I know is vehemently opposed to cocaine. If they feel about prostitution the same way they do about cocaine then it would lose by 90% or more.
I don't think legalized prostitution would have much effect on marriage. Even though prostitution is illegal, there is still plently of easily available SW's, escorts, AMP's, etc where a guy can get all the spare nookie he can handle. Guys get married because they want companionship and all kinds of other things. Even if a hooker always gives you a GFE, you still know that she's just faking it. Most guys I know (at least the marrying type) want the real deal.
Also, I hear a lot on this and the American women thread about how men are just pre-programmed to not be monogomous and how it's just natural to cheat on your spouse. I disagree. I think that's an insult to the 50% or more of guys and gals (100's of millions) who are able to remain faithful to their mates. I do realize it provides an easy excuse or cop out for cheating. Very simple: if you want to sleep with hookers: don't get married. Sure I was tempted when I was married and every gal on two legs looked good, but I took my vows seriously. How many of us guys would think it was okay for our wifes to be giving strangers bbbj just because she said it was not natural for her to be faithful to us? We'd kick her to the curb faster than she could say gigalo.
Just my two cents worth.
Civ2000
Cash works:
I think married women & women who want to get married, play a big part in having laws passed to make prostitution illegal Come on, CW, women did not even have the right to vote until rather recent history, I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
Civ2000:
I think that's an insult to the 50% or more of guys and gals (100's of millions) who are able to remain faithful to their mates. I do realize it provides an easy excuse or cop out for cheating. Very simple: if you want to sleep with hookers: don't get married. Sure I was tempted when I was married and every gal on two legs looked good, but I took my vows seriously.Sorry Civ2000, while I appreciate your moral stand on "taking your vows seriously" I think that your position is a little bit Utopian. If you think that the contrary position is offensive to 50% of the population, then obviously, your position is offensive to the other 50%.
If you were honestly "tempted when I was married and every gal on two legs looked good" then you are pulling a Jimmy Carter (adultery in my heart.) There is no real distinction here in a purely moral sense IMHO.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Sporadic, You said: " If you think that the contrary position is offensive to 50% of the population, then obviously, your position is offensive to the other 50%."
I'm not sure that's completely true. I'm just tired of hearing guys say that cheating is analagous to being male and I just don't believe that is true. I tend to believe that even in the percentage of the male population that does have sex outside their marriage most feel some if not a lot of guilt over their activity. Unless they are sexually addicted, I believe they have a choice whether or not they have sex with hookers, and even then they can stop if they desire. To say that polygamy is natural to the male of the species is not true. IMHO, of course.
Jimmy Carter was a self described born-again Christian who believed in a literal translation of the bible. To paraphrase that passage it says: one who lusts after a woman with his eyes is guilty of adultery. I don't think I'd agree, otherwise we'd be in a heap of trouble. In a society such as that it would be just as illegal to want to rob a bank as it would be to actually rob that bank. Fortunately thoughts (even the most immoral ones) aren't yet illegal. I do realize you were talking about in a strict moral sense however, and do recognize you make the distinction.
And I think my last question could pose an interesting discussion for this board. If polygamy were the norm for married females, how would you guys feel about your wife or girlfriend going out and giving male sex workers bbbj, etc, without your knowledge or consent? Would it be okay,because that's just the way women are or would it bother you?
I'm not asking this because I'm some kind of ultra-moral guy. I've been called a hypocrite and probably am one. I've had sex with hookers while being involved in a steady relationship and I was okay with it. Yet if she did the same thing -- I'd be furious. Anybody else here as fucked up as I am?
Civ2000
Cash Works, while it's true that married women did band together and were one of the important voices of the temperance movement, your description vastly oversimplifies things. This was not simply women against men having fun.
Keep in mind that the temperance movement really gained because it was a campaign against saloons, (the Anti-Saloon League was the one that originally announced the drive for a constitutional amendment) which proliferated so much that in many places there was one saloon for every hundred or so people, regardless of whether those people drank or not, and lots of them were pretty dismal places. It was not simply women who were against such places, as there were plenty of issues around kids getting caught up in the life, a lot of control of workers via drink and debt, (not only the company store but the company saloon existed) etc. Regulation was basically non-existent, and the brewing industry was unbelieveably aggressive, as it basically overbuilt and was desperately trying to move more and more product to survive. Most saloons were controlled by breweries, and because profits were hard to come by the most successful saloons were the ones that had gambling, cock fighting, prostitution, drugs, etc. This also fed into lots of robbery and violence, which was another argument against them. A lot of the drive against them was about that oversaturation and how that affected the overall growth and stability of a community. Families are what generally make a community stable, as opposed to big communities of working men who are essentially rootless and will move to another place if there is better work there. So the development and flourishing of stable cities was part of the overall goal, and that was driven as much by politicians and businessmen as it was women. Keep in mind that the country had just spent the past half-century not only in a civil war but in a mad expansionist dash westward, which saw people packing up and leaving for new places regularly, town growing quickly and then becoming ghosts, and abandoned or orphaned kids who were rounded up and sent on trains to the praries by the boxcar.
The overly religious nature of Americans also played a big part, of course, and that's hardly restricted to women. Good old John Wesley started yipping about prohibition before the American revolution. Heck, Plymouth Colony (not exactly noted for its inclusion of the desires of women into the mix) banned to sale of spirits other than a small amount to arriving strangers, the Colony of Georgia banned the sale of liquor back in the 1700, and ten states passed prohibition statutes starting in the 1840! But the whole movement was truly about a big-time longing for community stability after a long period of upheaval, expansion and wars.
Prostitution was a side issue to this, not a main one. It was already on the "bad" list.
I'm just tired of hearing guys say that cheating is analagous to being male and I just don't believe that is true.I agree with you, in fact many people think sociologists just peddle balloon juice and snake oil anyhow. Obviously, free will is germane here as well.
To say that polygamy is natural to the male of the species is not true. IMHO, of course. Did I miss something here? When did polygamy join us at the table?
how would you guys feel about your wife or girlfriend going out and giving male sex workers bbbj, etc, without your knowledge or consent? Well, I can think of alternative activities I would prefer for my wife... but I am just a little uncomfortable with your use of the word "consent" in this context as if a wife is nothing more than another posession. If I have misunderstood you, Civ2K, I apologize.
I've been called a hypocrite and probably am one. I've had sex with hookers while being involved in a steady relationship and I was okay with it. Yet if she did the same thing -- I'd be furious. Anybody else here as fucked up as I am? Take it easy on yourself there... welcome to the human race.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Always Lookin
10-28-04, 06:10
What's good for the Goose is NOT always good for the Gander!
Sporatic's comment was excellant, as well as much more tactful than mine.
AL
Cash Works
10-28-04, 09:47
Sporadic,
I originally included a comment about women not even having the vote at the time the temperance movement was really going, but it was poorly written and sounded awkward, so I deleted it. It's true they didn't have the vote, but they still had quite a bit of influence via clergy, husbands, sons & brothers who they could shame into doing their bidding, or in this case, their voting. I'm pretty sure that the temperance movement and the sufferage movement were extremely intertwined.
As for Prohibition, I don't recall exactly when women were granted the right to vote, but I'm pretty sure it was shortly before Prohibition was passed. Something that I don't think would have happenned with an only male vote.
Joe Zop,
I have to admit to oversimplifying things. It's one of my talents. Makes it easier to explain the "big picture" in a complex situation.
Your description of saloons per capita & brewery control of saloons sounds like modern London, England. They seem to be doing just fine, though most American companies (my former employer included) get a bit upset with the "pub on premises" concept. We were located in outer London, near Heathrow Airport, had a "social club" on the property, which didn't serve any alcohol until 5:30 pm, but there were 3 pubs within "spitting distance" where many of the employees would go for lunch (including at least one pint of beer & sometimes 2 or 3 pints). The "powers that were", sitting in the home office in Houston were constantly trying to get the social club shut down, but it was protected by the original land grant/land lease or something in British law. They tried to enforce a "no drinking at lunch" policy, but were again thwarted by British law and/or custom.
If my memory serves me correctly, prostitution is NOT illegal in the U.K., Brothels and Pimping, however are illegal. Maybe you can draw some parallels between Victorian era USA and modern England? I haven't been to London in a couple of years, but last time I was there, I didn't hear anything about a temperance movement, the women had the right to vote and no, they haven't recently undergone a huge expansion or decades of war. But there are certainly A LOT of pubs all over the UK - Aberdeen, Scotland has a pub on nearly every corner. Prostitution in the UK, does, however leave something to be desired from a mongers point of view - it's available and, as mentioned earlier, I don't think it's illegal, but you still have to go looking.
I agree that the clergy played a big part in temperance & anti-prostitution, I actually mentioned it in my post. But I believe that women were the driving force behind the preachers & as you mentioned, businessmen, pontificating agianst drinking & cavorting.
CW
Your underlying point, Civ2000, that the idea that men are not wired to be monogamous is an really excuse for misbehavior, is a good one, I think. Yes, men are rather hypocritical about that -- they're getting a little on the side if they're cheating, but they're wearing goat horns and being cuckholded if their wife is doing the same. A double-standard for men as opposed to women? Especially when it comes to sex? That should be no surprise -- it's hardly the first or only one.
A vast majority of those in prison have learning disabilities, but we don't accept the idea that because they're wired in a certain way it's a valid excuse for criminal behavior. A factor, perhaps, but it doesn't give them a pass, as we still expect them to behave within the rules of society. So even if it's true that humans are genetically not programmed toward monogamy it doesn't say men are incapable of living within marital norms. Some choose to, some do not.
Carter was ridiculed for his statement about being unable to control his thoughts, which truly was a rather monastic point of view that's far from specific to his religion, but the real issue of control isn't about your thoughts but your behavior. There's a big difference between angrily wishing someone were dead and actually making it so. Fantasy and reality are two different things, as are lust and actually having sex.
PsyberZombie
10-28-04, 18:27
Because Men like VARIETY
... and the Easiest Way to get Variety is to pay for it
Cash Works:
It's true they didn't have the vote, but they still had quite a bit of influence via clergy, husbands, sons & brothers who they could shame into doing their bidding, or in this case, their voting.This is a quote from a Texas Clergyman, circa 1911...
"The leaders of the Suffragette movement, as a rule, are divorced women, women who prefer pug dogs to children, and supernumerary spinsters, bankrupt in sentiment and possessors of worthless assets of faded charm, who, failing to capture a man, propose to remedy this misfortune by turning [into] men themselves."
It is interesting how many of those attitudes still persist in society. It sort of sounds like something from the "American Women" thread ;)
As for Prohibition, I don't recall exactly when women were granted the right to vote, but I'm pretty sure it was shortly before Prohibition was passed. Something that I don't think would have happenned with an only male vote. Prohibition dates back to the colonial days, a century before suffrage was taken even reasonably seriously by most states. Indeed by the time federal laws were passed granting "universal" suffrage 31 states had already enacted such legislation. The UK granted universal suffrage in 1928. In the US, universal suffrage was not firmly established until the Voting Rights Act in 1965.
As for the rest of the world, Spain only reinstated suffrage in 1976 (post Franco) and in Switzerland, 1971.
I still do not buy into the worldwide female conspiracy theory. Equal rights? Come on now, men still control government, media, banking, industry, wealth and education worldwide.
I am also failing to see the relevance to the morality of prostitution here, it could be just me though. ;) Morality, by definition is an intensely personal thing, it is up to you to decide exactly who can foist their version upon your thinking.
Cheers,
Sporadic
PsyberZombie
10-29-04, 06:09
On Exotic Dancers , in Las Vegas at least =
" You can throw out the stereotype of the stripper as a bubble-headed blonde taking the easy route to a quick buck in support of a drug habit. Oh , there are a few of those. And there are probably too many who are the chief bread-winner behind a lazy boyfriend . But also employed in these clubs are many well-educated and well-bred women who tried the corporate world and got tired of bumping their heads against the glass ceiling, and decided to take their natural beauty (albeit with a few cosmetic enhancements thrown in) and knock down the big bucks for five or six years. An attractive and clearly focused exotic dancer in Las Vegas will make anywhere from $200,000 to $350,000 a year , not all of it reported to Uncle Sam. With good advice from money managers (and there are no shortage of those visiting her place of business) she can be financially set by the age of 35. The allure of nice clothes and private schools for her children can go a long way toward rationalizing a career swinging around a pole and whispering sweet nothings in a stranger's ear. And, hey, dancing is good for the heart and lungs as well (as long as too much smoke isn't inhaled). "
source = Joe Sheehan , SKIN CITY
[ See = the Las Vegas Board for more on this new Book ]
I'll save Joe Zop and RN the trouble of responding by posting it for them =
" We TOLD you so !!! "
Cash Works
10-29-04, 09:50
Prohibition dates back to the colonial days, a century before suffrage was taken even reasonably seriously by most states. Indeed by the time federal laws were passed granting "universal" suffrage 31 states had already enacted such legislation. The UK granted universal suffrage in 1928. In the US, universal suffrage was not firmly established until the Voting Rights Act in 1965.
I think you may be getting your American History from a different source than me. My recollections from my school day's placed womens right to vote in the early 1900's & Prohibition (Federally enacted, encompassing the entire, USA) in the 1920's. So, I just did an "ask jeeves" & got the following:
"American women have had the right to vote since 1920"
www.wic.org/misc/history.htm
"In 1920, the national policy of Prohibition began. The 18th Amendment to the Constitution had been officially ratified:
It sought, by law, to make the whole Nation into enforced teetotalers and to put an end to all evils associated with drinking. It sought to eradicate a taste deeply rooted in the habits and customs of a large part of the population through outlawing the business that ministered to its satisfaction"
www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/nc/nc2a.htm...
I thought there were a couple of years separating the two, but it looks like they happenned at the same time. Just coincidence that two movements spearheaded by women (who you seem to think had little influence) were passed at the same time? Admittedly, this was just a quick search, but my point has been that women had a lot of influence on what was happenning in the USA even though they didn't have the right to vote. I also believe, as I posted earlier, that one reason for Prohibition was an attempt to eradicate Prostitution by closing down the Prostitutes places of business - both backfired.
CW
If my memory serves me correctly, prostitution is NOT illegal in the U.K., Brothels and Pimping, however are illegal. I can understand why pimping is illegal, as I think it is immoral for an individual to make money out of a prostitute who is risking her body, but does anyone know the rationale for lawmakers to make brothels illegal? It seems to me that a prostitute is safer working in a brothel rather than on the street or in an apartment on her own. Perhaps the existence of brothels is disturbing to the minds of prudish people who find their imaginations running riot over what goes on in these houses of pleasure. Or it could be that the pressure groups behind the legislation would prefer that prostitutes get hurt in unsafe situations in the hope that this would act as a deterrent. If the latter is true, the people responsible for the legislation are the immoral ones.
LOL, deftly done, PsyberZombie.
Cash Works, I'd have to say that the London pubs I've been in are definitely nothing like those I've seen pictured from the period in discussion. And London has been a stable city for a very long time, with a huge tourism industry, so it's a lot different than, say, Chicago during the 1880s (see, for example, the wonderful "Devil in the White City" which gives a lot of detail about the area in the 1890s) or a lot of the other youngish American cities where saloons were springing up like dandelions.
England also doesn't take religion nearly as seriously as does the US, nor is its influence as strong.There is also a far different history of prostitution there -- some estimates said that during Victorian England there were up to 150,000 women engaged in either full or part-time prostitution in London alone. I also don't believe that US society has tended to make prostitutes (other than the recent example of Heidi Fleiss) into celebrities, and that's happened on a number of occassions in England, so there's simply a different history here, one I agree with Sporadic can't simply be laid at the feet of the women's movement. For one thing, the suffragette movement was every bit as active in England and elsewhere as it was in the US (the first ever "spy photographs" ever taken were survellience photos of suffragettes in England) and arguably more successful. Women had the vote in the Netherlands before they did in the US, and that didn't result in either prohibition or outlawing prostitution. I think one has to look elsewhere -- and religion is the prime place.
Joe Zop:
I think one has to look elsewhere -- and religion is the prime place. Touchy subject, but IMHO BINGO.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Touchy subject, but IMHO BINGO.I don't think our quest for the forces behind the criminalization of prostitution can end with religion, because religion, as well as patriotism, can be the last refuge of a scoundrel. We have to look at the motivations of those who use religious arguments against prostitution.
Morality, by definition is an intensely personal thing, it is up to you to decide exactly who can foist their version upon your thinking.
I agree that in most matters morality OUGHT to be a personal thing, but the reality is that for many people morality involves following the herd. The extreme example of this is Nazi Germany where very few Germans felt they were doing anything immoral. In countries where there is heavy-handed policing of prostitution it is perceived that mongering is a minority activity and the usual prejudice against minorities comes into operation here, in contrast to countries such as Thailand and Brazil where probably the majority of men have indulged and are relatively open about what they do.
Cash Works
10-30-04, 11:58
JZ,
If you read my post, you should have noticed that I included the clergy (ministers, priests, etc.), but I still think that women play a large role in having laws passed to illegalize prostitution. During the Victorian era, when American women didn't have the right to vote, they could only get legislation passed by manipulating/influencing men (clergy included) into doing thier bidding.
CW
Not too often you see mainstream press taking on Protitution like this:
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3151258
Ci-Traveler
11-02-04, 11:31
Not too often you see mainstream press taking on Protitution like this:
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3151258
It's an interesting position for the media to take. I've read most of what you have all been writing about, and I have to admit that it is a complex issue when looking at it from many different perspectives. I tend to agree with the bottom line argument presented by the article:
"Which brings us back to that discreet transaction between two people in private. If there's no evidence that it harms others, then the state should let them get on with it. People should be allowed to buy and sell whatever they like, including their own bodies. Prostitution may be a grubby business, but it's not the government's."
It is unfortunate that prostitution is linked to crime and drugs - but so is politics and the seeking of political office and legalized forms of gambling.
In every profession there are abuses. Take the selling of alchohol for instance - it is allowed in stores, but you can't just stand on the street corner and sell it. Under controlled circumstances, the act of openly selling a consensual act is perfectly moral.
On the other hand - making oneself available subtely while walking from point A to point B might be difficult to prsecute if more controlled circumstances existed. Alas - they do not.
I tend to favor the arguments put forth by RN - it's a job. There is nothing wrong with the job itself.
ci-traveler
Prostitution takes on so many forms. It also occurs under such a wide variety of circumstances that one description can't cover it. You can't have one small set of laws to deal with it. This is like trying to have a "one-size-fits-all" solution to something that isn't even a problem for most of us.
I think the biggest problem is the perception of prostitution rather than the actual occupation itself. Most people don't have much familiarity with it. They only see (or hear about) the streetwalkers with drug addictions, pimps etc. Nobody wants to talk about the ones working at home or with an escort agency. Nobody wants to do a story on how they're ok with making thousands of dollars a week in (mostly) tax-free income. Nobody wants to do a report on that because it doesn't make a good story.
We as a society seem to like the idea that it's a hard and dirty way to try and survive. People feel safer thinking that all these girls have all kinds of problems, that they never find a way to get ahead. Why? Just imagine how the average working person (women in particular) would feel if they knew that there were a whole bunch of women out there making $100,000 a year by having sex for a few hours a week. The word jealousy comes to mind.
I make a pretty comfortable living myself and have learned not to go around telling people how much I make. I suspect this is the case with most of the more successful prostitutes. It would be interesting to know how many of them are out there.
Whatever. I think that what I do in the privacy of my bedroom is my own business. No place for the Gov't/Law Enforcement/Media.
Rock
I have to agree somewhat with BK Big Fish. I think married women & women who want to get married, play a big part in having laws passed to make prostitution illegal,
...
While Prohibition, on paper, seems to be all about stopping the consumption of alcoholic beverages, I believe it was mostly about stopping Prostitution. Prostitution, historically has gone hand in hand with drinking - anyone for a little drunken debauchery? To this day, most of the prostitutes around the world can be found in or near bars.
I think the idea behind the temperance movement was basically "men go to bars to get drunk, once they get drunk, they are easily seduced by the prostitutes who are there, if we stop the sale of booze, then men won't use the services of prostitutes because they'll be sober. Since the men won't be drunk, prostitutes won't have any clients, so they'll find more suitable work."
I personally think there's a major flaw in that logic - I've never had to be drunk in order to have sex with a prostitute. I beleive these Victorian era women were a bit naive to think that the booze was the main reason their husbands went out - my personal opinion is that they went out to get a little strange & had a few drinks while they were making their selection.
CWWell said. Prohibition was about stopping prositution more than drinking. I remember a history chanel program talking about this very point.
I also agree that religion played a role, but as a whole if women hadn't been given the right to vote prohibition would never have happened. Prositution would still be legal or like it is in other countries simply not prosecuted.
Nice to see Australia takes care of the horny old folks, http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11502543%5E13762,00.html
Cash Works
11-26-04, 21:23
I think they deserve a big round of applause!
Member #2976
11-29-04, 05:03
Sorry, as I was not able to start the new thread, regarding female orgasm, I have to give it in the reply format. But I wud request Jackson to help me in starting a new thread. This is a very important subject as in most of the Forums, what I have seen is that, mongers just concentrate on their own pleasure, they never think of giving a great pleasure to the participating ladies. Even if they are WGs, but I feel that they have a right to have satisfaction and pleasure while fulfilling their need for earning money. People always talk about GFE but without fulfilling the desires of a Lady, is it of any worth, I have doubts about it.
Through I am not as experienced, as the other fellow mongers may be but,
I am trying to give our fellow mongers certain hints on how one can assess whether the Girl is enjoying with you or not.
AROUSAL
To make out whether she is properly turned on, see if she shows all the classic symptoms of arousal. First check her lips, they would have darkened. Blood rushes to her face initially and then as the pleasure travels down to the area between the legs, she will flush. You can make that out by physical changes like an increase in heart rate. That will of course make her breathe harder, or shallower; you can see her pupils dilate; her face will flush, since all her blood rushes to the genitals. She will not want any hard touching as the clitoris swells and becomes more sensitive. The vagina becomes swollen and the lips of the vagina swell, gradually becoming wet. Those are the Bartolin's glands making lubrication for the penis easy to slip in. With some amount of lubrication, or wetness, you can tell if a woman is really aroused or not. Some women have little secretion and some more, but if there is a notable lack of wetness, you know she is doing the moves with you.
PLATEAU
During the plateau phase, you can see sexual and muscular tension intensifying. The muscles become harder, she might start looking directly at you, ask for more hard pressure, more violent rubbing. She might push against you, want more physical play. She will nibble at you, let her hands roam over you, squeeze, pinch; want more physical contact with your skin in any form. She will get more demanding and slowly your pleasure will slip away from her gaze.
Women most likely remain in the plateau phase after orgasm longer than men do, which allows them the benefit of the ability to have a second or more orgasms very shortly after the first.
During orgasm, she will stop looking at you. Her eyes will glaze over or close. Her muscles will shudder, her legs will writhe, her legs will clutch together as she will ask for indirect stimulation of the clitoris. Her nipples will form buds. Sexual pleasure peaks and sexual tension is released. Her lips might scrunch up in a rictus, as she will make noises. Her hands might flail, her body will become stiff at the moment of pleasure, and her mouth will remain open.
RESOLUTION
The fourth stage is resolution, during which there is a gradual return of the body to its baseline state accompanied by a sense of warmth, pleasure, and relaxation. AND here is the major way to make out if a woman's faking it: a woman will not stand being touched after the orgasm. Her body is very sensitive and wants to relax. If she does not forcibly push you away, she's surely faking it.
Women most likely remain in the plateau phase after orgasm longer than men do, which allows them the benefit of the ability to have a second or more orgasms very shortly after the first. The multiple orgasms happen one after the other and after that the body becomes limp, cold, smattered with sweat. If she is not sweating, there is no change in the way her body temperature feels, you can start suspecting that she's maybe having you on.
The length of time a person 'remains' in each phase will vary from person to person, of course. Some people have personal preferences about how long they enjoy being in a particular phase. With time and experience, you'll be able to find what feels good for you alone or as a couple.
I hope if we really want to enjoy with GFE, while mongering around, we should take care of our partner girls and the pleasure of intimacy, that she will be having with you, would compel her to give you better discounts in your repeated encounters with her.
If you are not sure whether she had an orgasm, she didn't.
What a good idea for a topic!
I've noticed differences in the way women act in bed. Personally, I think I can tell when a girl is faking an orgasm. It's actually kind of annoying when they do that. That reminds me of a pretty good joke that asks "why do women fake orgasms?" and the answer is "because they think we care".
Seriously, I much prefer a girl that just submits and lets me do my thing. Of course it's better if she really does get into it. The most arousing thing for me is a truly genuine reaction to what I'm doing. That may be the reason why some guys like anal. At least then, you know the moaning and groaning is for real.
My 2 cents for today.
Rock
Chick Luver:
I hope if we really want to enjoy with GFE, while mongering around, we should take care of our partner girls and the pleasure of intimacy, Interesting comment from someone who posted, IMHO too many details about a Dubai MP recently.
I vote with DH, if you have to ask, it did not happen.
Cheers,
Sporadic
PsyberZombie
11-30-04, 07:15
Hi , Peeps !! Let's go straight to the male sack =
Dear Dr. PsyberZombie :
How can I tell if my Hooker has had an Orgasm ??
[signed] Chick Luver
Dear CL :
Who cares ??
Ci-Traveler
12-01-04, 18:40
hi , peeps !! let's go straight to the male sack =
dear dr. psyberzombie :
how can i tell if my hooker has had an orgasm ??
[signed] chick luver
dear cl :
who cares ??
once again, pz has proven that he is probably an **** kid abusing his parents' internet connection.
ci-traveler
PsyberZombie
12-02-04, 07:25
ci·traveler writes =
once again, pz has proven that he is probably an **** kid abusing his parents' internet connection
oh , yeah ????!!!!????
well , i bet my dad can beat up your dad !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did anyone see this? In San Antonio, new regulations require strippers to wear their business license/permits while they dance. Here's the story link, http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apus_story.asp?category=1110&slug=Stripping%20Permits I noticed there's no topic for Strip Clubs, Jackson. How about starting one in the Special Interests section next to the Massages topic?
Speaking of trying to make things mutually enjoyable in a GFE session, on the rare times I've had the money to monger I've asked my partner to point out things that I could do for her, and if I'm not doing them right to guide me. I've only had one partner that really worked with me, most of the others wouldn't allow things like DATY or kissing, or they rushed you through it so fast you couldn't get her off if you tried. The last woman I saw, started showing me some things, then before I really had a chance to work on the skills she was rushing me to finish the session since she'd been late and she had another client scheduled to arrive. They have teaching pros in golf and tennis, how about for mongers?
If you're going to be doing either a teaching/learning or a serious exploring session then imho it's imperative that you schedule a reasonably long period of time so you can get into it.
I tend to break down my sessions into one of two categories -- either just needing to get off/wanting hard purposeful sex, or having an "encounter" where it's a more leisurely process of investigating the terrain. Both have their place, but while it's easy to make the former fill up a longer session, I find it's pretty hard to fit the latter into a brief time slot. Personally, I don't like to be rushed, and the overpowering sense that the clock's ticking is more likely to make it impossible for me to finish than almost anything else.
Joe Zop, on the session I mentioned, it was scheduled for two hours and she was 45 minutes late (I knew she was running late, but not that late before I arrived). She did extend the session to catch up on some of the missed time, but it was still a bit rushed at the end.
Guess that's one of the reasons I like mongering at times other places than in the US, as you can do an all-nighter sessions as a part of the package. But I do like your idea of "teaching pros" though I suspect there will be a long line of those lining up for practice times... :)
Cash Works
12-19-04, 12:18
A number of years ago I read an article about some psycho therapy using sexual surrogates. The therapist assigns a sexual surrogate to the patient, they go off and have sex (which is paid for, I assume, by the insurance company) and it's all legal - somehow this isn't prostitution since the surrogate has some sort of clinical training. Huh?
Anyway, as I said, I read the article years ago, don't remember the source of the article & don't think this sort of therapy is wide spread, but I may be wrong. I read only the one article, so that hardly qualifies me as an expert - for all I know the practice may be banned now.
My point is, if sexual surrogates are legally not considered to be prostitutes & therefore able to ply their trade without fear of being busted by Mr. LEO, why couldn't they expand their business to those of us who aren't yet under a therapists care? Think of it as preventive maintanence. They could even become Oosikman's "teaching pro's".
CW
Right back at ya, RN, and here's wishing you much joy and also at least a little bit of ecstacy in the upcoming year.
Cash Works, sexual surrogates are definitely still around and I believe there are also a couple of professional membership associations dedicated to them. Surrogates are usually highly educated and trained, and generally work in conjunction with a therapist or team of therapists. If I recall correctly, though, you'll generally only find very many in California, New York, and a couple of other places, and good luck getting your insurance company to cover their costs!
One reason surrogates would have a tough time expanding their services as you propose is that it's different from "sexual training" or coaching and is aimed instead at dysfunction, as defined by a psychiatrist or psychologist. That latter distinction makes the relationship fall under the legal umbrella for medical services and therapy, where training would not. (The therapists working with the client's mind and the surrogate with the mind and body.) Kind of the same distinction between doing weight or resistance work with a physical therapist after an accident and just doing those same things with an instructor at a gym.
Happy New Year to you too Rubbie. Your virtual kiss gave me a virtual woody.
Love,
DH
Happy Holidays to you RN. It's December 22nd and that was the best kiss I've had all year.
Civ2000
Especially to you RN,
That has to be the nicest thing that anyone here has ever posted! It was a joy to read something so genuinely kind. Good luck and much happiness to you in the new year and always.
Rock
PsyberZombie
12-23-04, 07:06
Civ2000 writes =
Happy Holidays to you RN. It's December 22nd and that was the best kiss I've had all year.
You need to get out more , dude
Cash Works
12-23-04, 10:10
RN, Thanks for the Holiday Cheer - same back at ya China.
(I suppose, if I were speaking proper Australian, I should have substituted Cobber for China, but I never quite figured that one out - China = Plate which rhymes with Mate - any explanation for the origins of Cobber?)
JZ,
I didn't really think that expansion of the roll would be possible, especially in the current political climate (conservative christian religious fervor). It's just that the notion of getting your insurance company to pay for your mongering sessions amused the hell out of me.
I suppose, if you were really intent on persuing this angle, you may be able to convince the therapist that your lack of knowledge in the sexual arena was causing you all sorts of anxiety, which is the basis for a host of other disorders.
Interesting notion - wouldn't persue it myself, I'd save my money by buying a ticket to Rio or Bangkok.
Happy Holidays everyone.
CW
CW, well, considering therapists definitely make Rio or Bangkok ladies look cheap on a per hour basis, I think it's cheaper to persuade the latter to give you an education, LOL. Not to mention the fact that surrogates don't usually even get down to intercourse until several sessions have passed. But as I mentioned, most insurance companies won't cover the costs of a surrogate in any event, which takes the irony out of your equation.
Here's kind of a parallel thought to yours -- since porn stars aren't classified by law as prostitutes because there's "acting" and freedom of expression issues involved, how far would one have to go to get one's P4P sexual activities under that umbrella? Signed contracts? Lights and cameras? Intent to distribute?
RN,
After reading your latest message my desire to visit you Down Under is stronger than ever!
Tea Boy
Cash Works
12-27-04, 17:06
JZ,
I try to avoid any legal system (American or otherwise) because they appear to be awfully murkey waters to me.
However, I suppose you could skip the lights & cameras by saying you're a "performing artist" and the sex is all part of your "happenning". I suppose you could tie the courts up for quite a while with all your appeals, since I reckon the judges in the lower courts would dismiss your arguments as fabrication.
On another note, I recently took a rather long road trip for business purposes. Along the way, I stopped off at two AMPs. While, I am pretty sure I can deduct the mileage from my taxes, do you think there may be some clever way to deduct the, er, um, stress relief? Unfortunately, I didn't get a receipt either time.
CW
Here's a question I'd like to pose for anyone who cares to offer up an opinion. It goes like this.
There's 2 guys. Both of them feel like they need some variety when it comes to sex. The first guy goes out and hooks up with another girl for a couple of months. He keeps it a secret from his girlfriend. The second guy goes out and picks up a prostitute once or twice a month and he keeps it a secret as well.
Obviously the first guy is cheating. But, would both of them be considered to be equally guilty? I've always thought that getting some on the side from prostitutes could be considered to be a different category but I won't say why because first I want to hear what other people think.
Rock
Rock Dog, I've heard of that scenario before and I think the general assumption is that the hooker would be the lesser of two evils because most guys don't form an emotional attachment with a pro.
On the other hand, a lot of women will grimace at the fact their boyfriend was with a sex worker, even if he wore protection.
Civ2K
Daddy Rulz
01-01-05, 23:49
Rock, for me both are equally guilty. IMHO it's about the violation of trust (yes I know chicks do it as well) if your in a relationship and you have made a commitment to monogamy then I think you should honor that commitment. If you decide that you need to alter yuor commitment I think the person you have made that to has a right to know before, not after. It's not about prostitution being moral or not but rather keeping your word.
Personally I think the whole idea of commitment is outdated but if it's made I think it should be honored.
Rock Dog,
Good question. I would have answered it differently 20 years ago. then, the pro would be a lesser evil, but since the spectre of AIDS, although distinct, the "evil" is the same.
As for the question of emotional assasination, that would depend on the girl. Most, IMHO, would be hurt more by the sneaky behind the back affair as opposed to a business transaction with a provider. Of course the affair also carries the risk of a fatal attraction scenario.
Of course, the "second girlfriend" would also be an AIDS risk in theory, so I guess I vote for the provider.
A weak .02, I know, but there you have it.
Cheers,
Sporadic
PsyberZombie
01-02-05, 10:11
My 2 ¢
From a Morality stand·point = Infidelity is Infidelity i.e. both men are Guilty of morally equivalent Acts
From the practical stand·point [ i.e. what will the response of their spouses / GFs be when they get caught ] = Both guys are in Deep Doo·Doo and are probably headed for divorce / break·up
BUT = the guy who got caught with the Pro has a slightly better shot of salvaging his relationship precisely because of the lack of emotional betrayal that sex with a 'Lover' entails
I find myself mostly in agreement with the others here (perhaps a first, eh, PZ? And very well-said Daddy Rulz!) in that the issue is betrayal of trust in both cases, but that there's at least some degree of difference in that going with a pro is more of a strictly physical betrayal whereas another love affair is also an emotional betrayal. You're not going to leave your girlfriend for a pro; you have at least the possibility of doing so with another girlfriend.
It's kind of like saying is it worse to steal $1000 dollars from a store cash register or $100 from a church collection plate. You can argue degree, but both are still stealing.
On the other hand, given the precise scenario Rock Dog laid out -- this is boyfriend/girlfriend and not husband/wife -- it obviously depends on the specifics of the situation, in terms of whether or not there's an agreement of exclusivity, how serious the relationship is, and so on. Someone who steps out on a girlfriend is in misdemeanor-land, as there's no lifetime committment to which both have agreed, and the general sense of "dating" is looking but not necessarily having found. Again, though, it depends on the situation -- stepping out on a live-in girlfriend is obviously different than doing so with someone you've been dating for six months.
Hey guys,
Thanks for all the responses on that question. There seems to be a bit of a consensus in that the key point here is one of emotional involvement. Men and women differ greatly on this point.
Here's my theory. Men have sex mainly for the purpose of pleasure, Women have sex for two reasons. One is to have pleasure and the other is to get something in exchange. That's why we, as men can fuck anything that walks on two legs... and it's also the reason why women tend to be fairly selective when choosing a partner. They're looking for someone who will give them "the best deal" for the privilege of a little poon.
That's why a guy who gets some on the side in in such deep crap if his woman ever finds out. From her perspective, whatever benefit she's getting from him is now cut in half because it's split between 2 different women.
I suspect that it's a little bit different when the other woman is a pro because of the lack of emotional committment and the temporary nature of the involvement. On the other hand, getting some on the side from a hooker wouldn't exactly make one a paragon of trustworthiness either :).
It's too bad there aren't any female members (in addition to RN) who could share their feelings on this subject.
Rock
I was going to say the same thing as exactly Civ200 said. I think it's a lot worst from a women's viewpoint if you cheated on her with a girlfriend, then a sex worker. Not only to you have the emotional attachment, but there is a real possibility that you might leave your wife for the girlfriend. This can cause major anxiety with the wife as she thinks of losing her husband, maybe her house, and monetary support for her and her kids depending on what kind of job and lawyer she has.
On the other hand sex with a prostitute usually doesn't involved any emotional attachments.( I might have to re- think this, because I know of many mongers falling in love with sex workers)
The wife it seems will usually just get pissed at her husband for being with a sex worker, and maybe make him sleep on the couch for a few days, but usually won't be as mad if it was a girlfriend, for example she won't ask him," do you love her" when referring to the sex worker. ( but with Aids, STDs etc, nowadays she just might be more pissed)
Danny Ruiz, you are so sweet!
Rock Dog, I've gotta admit I don't get your whole "something in exchange" concept, or at least I don't really buy it as you've described it.
To say that in general women are looking for relationships and men are looking for sex might have some truth to it, but that's a different thing.
And, as some of the women who married guys I know definitely prove, women will also fuck anything on two legs, even if it hasn't been washed or housebroken in a very long time...
And RN, I continue to find your position quite a highly ironic one, given that you've defined yourself as someone for whom monogamy is impossible :)
JZ,
When I used that term "something in exchange" I was taking a bit of a shortcut. I believe that (in general) women are more selective about who they will have sex with. An even better way of saying it would be to say "Who they would give sex to".
Like I said in my last post, men do it mainly for pleasure. Take a hot babe and get her to go up to a hundred guys and ask them if they want a quick fuck, no strings attached. Most of them will say yes (probably even a lot of married men). Try the same thing in reverse and you don't get the same result. A hot looking guy who's looking for a quick fuck with no strings attached will NOT get a lot of positive responses from women.
Why not you might ask? Because they don't think the same way we do. Because women WANT to have strings attached. Part of this is a female need for intimacy. But part of it is what I call "the better deal". They can easily get a sex partner anytime they want, so why should they give it out to someone who isn't offering anything but sex when there's so many others out there who'll give them more.
Most women operate on this principle. It's an attitude that they have here. They view sex as a valuable commodity not to be given away for free.
If they didn't have this view, there'd be no such thing as prostitution because there'd be no need for it. This forum wouldn't even exist because everybody would be out there getting laid for free.
Rock
RN:
Let's turn Rock Dog's question back on you guys...would it make a difference to YOU whether your girlfriend was having an emotional affair with another man or having regular sex with a male sex worker? Would you be more likely to forgive her if the other guy was a hooker? I mean, after all, who cares if he's a gorgeous young stud that's half your age - so long as she's not emotionally involved with him, right? Dear, sweet RN, as wise as you are, you seem to have forgotten some simple truths.
1. Every man knows that they alone are the maximum expression of the species, equipped with unique charm, appeal and the finest example of the male member since the origin of bipeds.
2. The rules are different for men, since all we are doing is allowing a wider cross-section of the female population to sample pure male perfection.
3. Cheating by a woman is an obvious expression of her mental instability, why on earth would she look for second best?
4. While it could be construed that we were less than perfect (perish the thought!), two rationalization techniques are sometimes used:
A. I will now go and spread my seed far and wide, to prove to the world that I am still King of the hill.
B. I may actually feel pity for the poor confused woman who has spurned perfection, and simply was conquered by a fellow male, who was just proving his studliness. Indeed, we can understand how the other guy wanted to have "our" woman, after all, we picked them FIRST.
If you just keep these sage truths in mind, you would realize what a silly question you posed.
Of course it is not the same.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Ps. those of you lacking the sarcasm gene, try reading the post again with tongue firmly in cheek. ;)
Dearest RN,
While I forgive you your transgression, you may consider the following link to assist you... http://www.absolution-online.com/confessional/
;)
Cheers,
Sporadic
Rock Dog, I'd agree that women are generally more selective about who they will have sex with, which makes sense given that they're the ones most at risk for things such as disease, social scorn, and of course pregnancy. There are tons of guys over in the American women thread who complain about having to pay child support, but the bottom line is that they're writing checks and the woman is feeding, dressing, and worrying, and that's a rather larger "burden" to shoulder if you're out randomly fucking. As RN notes, there are certainly those who do, but for men one orgasm doesn't necessarily mean a major change in life circumstance, since they're giving and not receiving.
I don't buy your better deal argument -- men do the same thing, they just define "better deal" differently. And I know plenty of women who aren't holding out for a "better deal" -- they're just hoping not to get treated like crap again. If there's a better deal women are seeking, it may well be the assurance that it's gonna be more than a ten-minute walk-in-unzip-fuck-and-head-out-the-door experience, since in most cases it's going to take more than that for them to cum.
To answer your question RN (and of course I was just yanking your chain) yes, an emotional affair is also a far greater issue if the shoe's on the other foot and it's the woman out and about, because the bottom line is that if you're out shagging a sex worker you're not necessarily strongly considering whether it's time to call a halt to the existing relationship and move into another, whereas an emotional affair very much does ask the question of who's staying with who. Yes, it's damaging to the ego if your partner feels the need to get some on the side because their physical needs aren't being met, particularly if it's from someone younger and more attractive, but that doesn't necessarily indicate a forthcoming call to the moving company or divorce lawyer by your partner.
Good to hear you had a wild New Year's eve, though!
Daddy Rulz
01-04-05, 12:29
Daddy's been sober a long time and was discussing the TERRIBLE SIN OF ADULTERY with his sponsor who happens to be a Catholic priest or Priest. (don't want to run afoul of the standard caps rule) His experience in the confessional is thus, Men and Woman seem to have affairs in pretty much the same proportion. Allowing for standard deviation the majority of men actually do seem to have your basic one night stand, either with loose floozies (God bless um, I do love easy woman so much more than your prim and proper types) or providers. Most are consumed by guilt and feel the need to confess to their spouses. There generally was a large amount of intoxicants involved and they don't plan on repeat engagements.
The majority of women on the other hand have affairs when they feel they are entitled to IE, their spouse has been unfaithful or not giving them the love and support they feel they deserve. Given that they feel justification for their decision they generally lack remorse and intend to continue. (I've never understood why they would be in confession if this were the case though)
I understand this is not a random cross sampling, but rather Catholics in one town that actually utilize confession.
RN I'm interested in your experience about married men you have seen professionally. Did the majority become repeat customers? Did many seem to feel remorse after the act?
RN says:"But how could I excuse my partner risking a long term relationship just for a bit of variety in the bedroom? It says a lot about how much respect he has for me, if an hour with a hooker is more important to him than our marriage."
Typically women thinking. The relationship with a hooker has nothing to do with the wife or girlfriend most of the time. Hugh Grant proved this, afterall he had that hot model girlfriend Elizabeth Hurley, yet he still wanted a BJ from the nasty streets of Hollywood.
If women want to use the threat of ending a relationship if caught cheating them with a girlfriend or hooker, that's fine. But, they need to get over the ego part and realize some men even if they have steak at home every night, will still at times want to grab that nice tasty juicy hamburger, especially if it's young and tender. Most of the time it has nothing to do at all with the current wife or girlfriend, in fact at the time they are not even thinking of the wife back home.
RN: Dear, sweet RN, as wise as you are, you seem to have forgotten some simple truths.
1. Every man knows that they alone are the maximum expression of the species, equipped with unique charm, appeal and the finest example of the male member since the origin of bipeds.
2. The rules are different for men, since all we are doing is allowing a wider cross-section of the female population to sample pure male perfection.
3. Cheating by a woman is an obvious expression of her mental instability, why on earth would she look for second best?
4. While it could be construed that we were less than perfect (perish the thought!), two rationalization techniques are sometimes used:
A. I will now go and spread my seed far and wide, to prove to the world that I am still King of the hill.
B. I may actually feel pity for the poor confused woman who has spurned perfection, and simply was conquered by a fellow male, who was just proving his studliness. Indeed, we can understand how the other guy wanted to have "our" woman, after all, we picked them FIRST.
If you just keep these sage truths in mind, you would realize what a silly question you posed.
Of course it is not the same.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Ps. those of you lacking the sarcasm gene, try reading the post again with tongue firmly in cheek. ;)
That is funny line towards the end because I thought that you were being serious, since to me, what you just said throughout your message is true. This would explain why I have not ever felt any sense of jealousy when a woman I am with falls for another man.
I just have a sense of feeling that it is her fault and who am I to stop her for making a major mistake. After that, I just drop her and look for another woman because there are just a ton of them out there to have me feel a sense of anger.
I follow the dictum of that great philosopher, Donald Kaufman in the movie "Adaptation". He said that it is more important in who you love than who loves you. This is just a philosophy that I have developed due to my own sense of self-worth, plus my sense of what I can control in life.
Anybody who would cheat on their wife and then confess is more of a dickhead than I could ever be. I've known a lot of guys who did it, though. I worked with a guy who cheated for the first time after about twenty years of marriage and not only felt compelled to confess but to confess all the prurient details such as how he removed her panties the first time, etc. What a yutz. His wife cut him off completely and forever. I was raised under the dogma of never admit anything. Deny, deny, deny, whether you have plausible deniability or not. Especially when women or cops are involved.
Me, I was faithful to my wife and now I am faithful to my prostitutes, all thirty of them that I have currently available. I don't fuck anyone who is not a prostitute as that would be cheating.
Pokey,
Well said! That example you gave about Hugh Grant is the perfect illustration of how men are. You can have the greatest woman in the world, but there's just something about the idea of fucking a strange woman that you just met.
Someone once said " Quality is quality, and quantity is quantity, but sometimes quantity has a special quality of it's own." This helps explain why some guys need to get some on the side, even when other women aren't as attractive as the one they've got at home. Women just don't undertand that getting a little extra something on the side is just that, it's on the side. We aren't going to leave them for another woman. We probably don't even like the other woman.
A lot of guys might even go nuts if they could only do it with the same woman all the time for the rest of their lives. Getting some on the side would help them feel like they're not "missing out" on anything. Otherwise, there might actually be a higher risk that they would leave to try and find someone new.
What's worse anyways, doing it with a pro once or twice every few months (with virtually zero emotional involvement). Or thinking about your wife's best friend all the time and fantasizing about her while you fuck your wife. How do you think most women would react if you told them something like that? Cheating is cheating, but when you get right down to it, it's what's going on in your heart that counts most.
Rock
LOL, Pokey, regarding the Hugh Grant situation. To my mind what that proves is that when guys want sex their brains can go waaaay out the window (as is proven by the number of weddings which should clearly never take place.)
OTOH, how well did the things work out with Grant and Hurley? She sure seems happier personally than he at this point, from what I've read. Or she's hired better publicists!
Dickhead: Most certainly you are correct. The chant is "Lie and Deny." It is the last refuge of the almost cornered, and if done with sufficient conviction, will leave that lingering "reasonable doubt" needed to salvage the relationship.
Daddy: Does this Priest usually chat about confessions with all and sundry? I do appreciate that he probably did not provide personal information, but I find it a little troubling, his discussions with you, even under the circumstances of twelve-stepping. Seems like psuedo-anonymous market research to me. Three guys go into a bar, a Priest, a drunk, and a child molestor, and that was just the first guy! ;)
Sun Devil: I must admit I am slightly surprised by your comment. I added the caveat in case some humor-impared person took my "maxims" as something other than satire. Then again, all satire (and humor for that matter) must have a base in fact.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Daddy Rulz
01-05-05, 05:23
1. The Parish is 100's of miles from where I live and I do not know a soul in it.
2. My question to him was very specific, "What are the differences you see between men and women when they have an affair and do they both seem to do it with about the same frequency?" He answered exactly as I said, I don't think it would be possible to extract any personal info from his answer. It was a very general over-view of 15 years in the confessional regarding that topic. So no, I don't believe He violated the seal of the confessional.
Now when He told me about the Bishop that was fucking chickens now THAT was pretty inappropriate and I told the reported I had to a deep cover source.
Those of us in the rooms are pretty good at mantaining anonimity even if I can't spell it.
PsyberZombie
01-05-05, 07:39
Pokey writes =
" The relationship with a hooker has nothing to do with the wife or girlfriend most of the time. Hugh Grant proved this, afterall he had that hot model girlfriend Elizabeth Hurley, yet he still wanted a BJ from the nasty streets of Hollywood. "
Reminds me of a Conversation I had with a Hooker not long ago , right after a .4 BBBJTCIM =
SW : " Are you married ?? "
PZ : " Yes "
SW : " That sucks "
PZ : " No... if it sucked , I wouldn't be here with You !! "
If you plan to monger, be safe. And to help you out, Consumer Reports recently tested and rated the performance of condoms. Here's a link to a story about the top performers, http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/01/04/best.condoms.reut/index.html
I thought my vocabulary was pretty good but I admit I had never heard of felching. At least there's one sin Rubbie didn't commit on New Year's Eve.
So if premarital sex is a sin and so is masturbation, aren't guys going to get a little bit "backed up"? Of course in Biblical times many people married shortly after puberty so it was less of an issue.
And as far as "using artificial birth control" is concerned, did felching develop as a method of birth control? Inquiring minds want to know.
Dickhead: Felching
A good friend (!) introduced me to this term (only the term, not the practice!) quite a few years ago, and to be honest, it almost sounded like an urban legend (indeed it may be, like the gerbil stories.) After our discovery of this term, we coined one of our own: "Scutch." This is defined as the mark left behind on the carpet after the dog scoots his arse, hind legs up, as they are want to do. ;)
I swear (har!) that the online confessional was a throw away, I really never expected you or anyone else to plumb it´s depths as it were.
You, Mr. Dickhead, obviously are in need of something better...
Try this link: http://www.ulc.org
Look for the "instant ordination" link. You could be Rev. Dickhead in no time!
They also offer "instant absolution" for those of you who require that particular service.
Daddy Rulz: Excuse my poor attempt at levity, no offense intended. I seriously doubt any clergyman, of any faith, would betray the trust of their office.
Cheers,
Sporadic
PsyberZombie
01-05-05, 19:50
Here's the Dictionary Definition =
1. Felch
(1) verb. The act of sucking or licking ejaculate (or other
substances mixed with ejaculate) out of the orifice in which they
were deposited. Most commonly used to refer to sucking out semen
after anal sex, but technically sucking the semen out of your
girlfriend's pussy is also felching
(2) Noun, referring to the substance ingested during the act of
felching--generally a mixture of semen and other bodliy fluids
(feces, sweat, vaginal fluid, etc.)
Usage:
I couldn't believe it. After Nigel packed my ass, he felched me!
Dude, you've got felch all over your face.
2. felch
(1) verb. to suck your own cum out of another persons ass.
Usage: i felched your mom.
If you wish to substitute a 'benign' Word in place of 'FELCH'
[ as in using the terms 'Frick' or 'Fork' for F**k ] , use the verb
'FLENSE'
Be careful, guys, that SW you pick up may be more than advertised, http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/features/aliens/61245
Broward County pro turns in a man after noticing child porn on his computer, http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/0107HookerTip07-ON.html.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000742061
This reporter posed as a SW as part of a sting...
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/15/1058035012641.html
Australia seems to be quite a place to live...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/spain/article/0,2763,1271301,00.html
Seems Spanish women are setting themselves up for this one...
Lady and gentlemen,
Anyone game for crafting a "Code of Ethics for mongering?" While it is rather difficult to truly apply morality to this question, certainly we can be ethical in our amorality?
We have had some cute suggestions in the past, but I would be interested in the collective opinion.
Suggestion 1: Pay the agreed price.
Suggestion 2: Respect Privacy.
Cheers,
Sporadic
Sporadic,
What amorality are you talking about? Why does P4P have to be immoral? That's the real question here. It's funny how "society" (as a whole) tries to impose it's values on certain issues when privately everyone (as an individual) tries to do the exact opposite.
Rock
Nice idea, Sporadic:
Suggestion 3: Respect Boundaries.
JoeZ: A question sir. Do you mean sexual, behavioral boundaries? or more in a privacy context?
While I think I know exactly what you intended to say, there are lots of folks here who speak English as a second language. I was going to expound upon my two suggestions (everyone has there own definitions,) Could I ask you to elaborate on yours?
Cheers,
Sporadic
Ps. Hopefully, when everyone has weighed in, we can post a compilation.
Pay the agreed price. Failing an early bailout, or complete non-performance (this does NOT include "not clicking") this point should be self evident.
Privacy: This includes respecting names (if they want to be called "Breezy" then so be it) Not prying, and above all, not posting personally identifiable material (text or photos) that could prejudice the provider. Included here would be not passing on the contact without permission from the provider. Any more to add here folks?
Obviously, a complete rip-off artist deserves a write up as fair warning to others, but I am talking about normal service here.
Ok, following your lead:
Boundaries. If a provider specifies a particular sexual act is off-limits (anal, kissing, whatever) then the option is either to call the encounter off or to respect the provider's limits. In addition, unless it's something directly agreed to by the provider, rough handling, striking, or verbal abuse is unacceptable. (Note that this is different from dirty talk or vigorous sex, but one should also be clear that the provider is ok with these.)
Daddy Rulz
01-12-05, 03:17
Pay after the act always:
I know in sex prison this is hardly the norm. However I will always believe that it is us, not the provider that holds the Aces. Ultimatly this market is driven by demand not supply. If nobody agreed to pay until after the act rip off's would become a thing of the past. If we "the johns" simply refused to pay until the service was given quickly the norm would change.
Rock Dog
What amorality are you talking about?
Well, without getting into sematics here, I think that most people and societies would describe prostitution as an immoral act. Compounded by the fact that many punters are also married.
I am not defending the hypocritical attitudes of society as a whole, and this is hardly the only example of stunning hypocriticality in modern society, but since our topic is prostitution, it is where I will hang my hat.
Cheers,
Sporadic
PsyberZombie
01-12-05, 06:56
In the Rock·Climbing World , there is frequent talk about Ethics , just like you guys are discussing here
... but Cynics in that little sub·culture wisely point out that 'Ethics' is just another word for Rules , but that rock climbers are way too cool and 'un·conventional' to ever agree to follow 'Rules' , so they call them 'Ethics' instead
As Sporadic notes = What , exactly , is Ethical about leading a Secret Double Life , which is what every Monger is basically doing ??
I'll bet you guys thought you were leading this Secret Double Life mainly because you were Horny or just wanted a little Variety in your life , right ??
**WRONG** !!!
Psychiatrists now know that , in fact , YOU are a much more Complex Person than you ever imagined !!
Just read this for furthur details =
http://*******.com/53jex
PZ: While I appreciate your concern for my psychosocial development, I was simply looking for collective wisdom. My, we have progressed greatly since the topic was felching!
I define the terms thus...
Ethics: A set of principles of right conduct.
In this case, how to be a decent John.
Morals: Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character.
In this case, to each their own.
Where is RN when we need her most? ;)
Cheers,
Sporadic
Hey, there have been plenty of discussions here about whether or not prostitution is moral or immoral, and while I'm certainly up for more, Sporadic's topic is something new, and seems worthy of considering.
Any mafia film (or the Sopranos) ends up focusing a lot on standards of ethical behavior within essentially immoral subcultures. Most professions have codes of ethics. It's at least interesting to look at, with either one of our secret lives. :)
All this talk about ethics!
It's funny because certain high-minded individuals would like to set up some kind of code by which we can operate and then evryone will live happily ever after.
Yeah right! That's like two guys getting ready to fight. One of them is gonna go by "gentlemans boxing" rules, and the other one is going to scratch, bite and kick balls. My point is, it's good to be ethical but that doesn't mean much if the person you're dealing with is a rat (female or otherwise).
I've run into all types. Some girls took my money and then tried to bugger off on me. Others gave me an excellent time and things worked out great for both of us. I'm sure there's a lot of Johns out there who are dirty fucking bastards to the women they meet but that doesn't mean I should become one to protect myself from getting ripped off.
RN has it right. A little respect goes a long way. The simplest thing to do is find a girl (or a few girls) that you like, trust, and have good dealings with. If someone tries to scam you, warn your friends, leave them in the dust and never look back.
Just my 2 centavos,
Rock
Owner of FKK Happy to donate part of proceeds to tsunami relief fund, http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3153869a4560,00.html#121
RN, I definately have to side with you on the issue of paying up front. I've heard from countless sex workers just how hard it is to get a guy to pay the agreed amount after the sex act is completed. One thing I often do to attempt to get good service, is to agree to a slightly lesser amount for service with the promise to tip if I recieve good service. That way the gal is taken care of up front and she usually tries hard to get the tip. I do believe in tipping. Its just like any other service industry (like waitressing), if you recieve good service you should reward it.
So that'll be my contribution to this discussion: REWARD GOOD SERVICE
Civ2000
Daddy Rulz
01-13-05, 02:12
RN,
I regret that my opinion gives you the shits. We of course look at this hobby from completely different sides. I understand, accept and am willing to defend your right to set your terms regarding what act's your willing to preform, what prices you demand and when you expect payment to be made. You have made some excellent points, please allow me to respond.
In a restaurant if I don't like the menu, price, preparation, presentation or taste of the meal at any point up to consuming the meal I have the right to refuse service and leave without paying. If I consume the meal and on the last bite find somebody's gold tooth in it I would refuse to pay at this point as well. However if I eat it I pay for it. There have been times when I didn't like it but ate it anyway because I was hungry. I paid but didn't patronize again.
Ordering by credit card, here in the States (it may be different in OZ) if something is delivered broken, wrong size, color etc I would return it, and then ask for a refund. If a refund was not given then I would take recourse through the credit card company, most of them would use their pressure to refund the charges.
I agree, that it is the providers provonse (I probably spelled that wrong) to set whatever conditions He or She desires. I would never argue with them to try and deny that right, just as I would never argue with a waiter about what a Restaurant charges for it's food. If I don't think the price, service or payment options are to MY liking I have several options, I can try a counter offer for price (I rarely do this because I'm not into cut rate service, if I'm strongly attracted to a woman I pay it or pass) I can offer a better price for extras (more money for anal, CIM etc. This must be done respectfully but I don't believe it's out of line to offer) I am adamant however in payment terms, I always pay after and never before. In BsAs when a bunch of us started doing this it was very unusual and most of the girls wouldn't go for it, now however it has become more common place and most do.
Why do I insist on this? Since I stopped paying in advance I no longer have clock watchers, I no longer have "Oh I didn't understand you, I never do that!" I don't get rushed, lackluster sessions because I still retain the only leverage I have, payment. If any provider declines to accept these terms (I tell them in advance, in the club or to the person setting the appointment on the phone, not the hotel) I respect them. I thank them for their time talking to me, kiss them on the cheek (I really am sweet to them) and tell them if they have a change of heart I would still be interested.
I understand your comments about lack of legal recourse because I have none as well. If some girl promises a BBBJ and then changes her mind after my money is in her purse what am I to do? A long time ago I picked up a SW and we agreed to a price for a CBJ, as soon as she started to do it she looked up at me and said "you have 5 minutes" Then she said "four" then "three" with the obvious result. What was I to do, call a cop?
I don't force anybody to accept my terms, I don't belittle them if they choose not to. What I do, is not use their service and that is the reason that I feel that we, not the providers ultimately hold the aces. They decide what and how they will offer what they may, but we decide to purchase or not. This is not about a lack of respect just market forces at work.
We may never agree on the issue, but I think we can agree that both parties have the same right to decide on what terms they will enter into this agreement. And both parties have the right to decline if any of the terms or conditions are not suitable to them.
RN Love if you take any of this as a flame please don't, as I said several times I respect your right to conduct your business how you see fit. I'm only asking for the same in return.
Besos, DR
RN, while in many ways I agree with you, the essence of supply and demand is that both sides have control -- the provider has the control of offering service in a specific manner, and the customer has control in accepting or declining such an offer. There is also equal pressure on what follows -- the customer can accept that what the provider offers is standard and change his/her requirements or can seek another provider to get specifically what is desired. In the latter instance, a provider has lost business based on the package offered, the provider can see they are getting lesser business than desired and then has the ability to adjust their services to the going rate or set of options. Both maintain control, which is the supply/demand dynamic.
As far as the payment process -- I've never ripped off a provider and always pay what is agreed upon, but the simple truth is that I've never had a bait and switch or rip-off experience in an instance where I pay later, and I have had them with alarmingly high frequency when I pay up front. If I pay up front then I am surrendering all control.
Suggestion 1: Pay the agreed price.
Suggestion 2: Respect Privacy.
Suggestion 3: Respect Boundaries.
Suggestion 4: Pay after the act always.
Suggestion 5: Reward good service.
It would appear everyone in on-board with numbers 1,2 and 3.
Number 4 seems to depend upon your point of view. Like Joe, I have never ripped off a provider, but I have been ripped off.
Where I do my hobbying, pay after is a well established policy, for me at least, but is actually a moot point unless this is a new (to me) provider. I appreciate that Dubai has a rather unique scene in that respect so my experiences are probably not an entirely valid contribution to this discussion.
Suggestion 5 has been a personal hobby-horse of mine for years. I try very hard to have a relaxed, enjoyable experience with sex workers. Better for them, and way better for me. A tip is an excellent way of expressing your pleasure, for any service.
May I suggest that numbers 4 and 5 are actually more of a "best practices" kind of thing vice ethical standards?
Keep those cards and letters coming in!
Cheers,
Sporadic
PsyberZombie
01-13-05, 07:23
Did you guys hear that it fricken Snowed in Las Vegas this week ??
So I guess Hell really has frozen over , which explains why I actually *agree* with RN for once !!
To wit : the girl should be paid first
I also do what Civ2000 does = offer less up front , but promise a good tip for excellent service . And if the price isn't outrageous , I pay the entire sum first and also offer a tip after·wards
[ a decent looking SW gets .4 for a BBBJ here where I live , Rhode Island , USA ]
A side benefit to this Tip Routine is that tossing a girl a Jackson tip will almost always get her to offer you her digits [ I don't even ask any more because if the girl doesn't offer them , that usually means she doesn't have any to offer ]
In my humble experience , if you follow this routine , the next time you pick up the same chick she will A.) Remember you , and B.) NOT ask for the money first . So those of you who don't like paying first should try it Civ's and my way , and then every·one will be :) Happy :) !!
RN, I agree that the provider has the right to set the rules and I have the right to refuse. At the same time, I, as a customer, have the right to state the terms of service I'm interested in and willing to accept. And if I were to go into a restaurant that asked me to pay before I received my meal I would simply go to another restaurant. And if I order a specific dish, it is not acceptable for me to be brought another one without my express agreement simply because that's what the restaurant decides to serve me. The same is true with most service providers in other fields -- I don't pay doctors, plumbers, gardeners, electricians, mechanics, or any other professionals before they do their job, and it's a process of mutual agreement about what is to be done as part of the contract.
Now, there are plenty of situations where I've no difficulty in paying up front. If I'm at a brothel, a massage parlor, or any establishment where I've got some degree of recourse or a clear location where I can find the provider if I'm scammed then it's no issue. If I've got some kind of report or testimonial that this specific person or service is reliable then I'm generally confident enough to pay first.
The times I've had problems and when I am hesitant about paying up-front are almost exclusively with outcall services or pickups or in third-world countries. In those situations it can be almost a programmed script that ten minutes after the money is handed over a "problem" arises and a) I need to go see my driver b) I need to leave to deal with my kids, c) I have a brand new set of rules that are completely different from the ones we discussed ten minutes ago before cash was handed over. And because my money is gone my avenues of response are limited. I have in fact three times called in hotel security because the "provider" decided she needed to leave immediately upon receiving my cash (with no services provided and less than ten minutes elapsed) and refused to return it or leave it there until her return, and I once had a knife pulled on me in that situtation. I have also called women's services several times when such a scenario arose, and in those situations it was generally much less than a toss-up as to whether anything positive would happen. And in places like Thailand or Kenya handing over the money up-front is tantamount to announcing that a) the session is over and it's time for the woman to leave or b) you're new at this and ripe for being scammed or ripped off -- and eight out of ten times that's exactly what will happen. I haven't dealt with streetwalkers for decades, so I have no comment on the scenarios there.
I appreciate that the provider also feels at risk in these situations, and generally go out of my way to demonstrate I understand that and am not going to be a problem. I generally show that the money is there and set aside and I've got no problem having it in plain sight. In most of these situations (other than the third-world ones where it's absolutely customary to discretely pay as the provider is leaving) I'm going to have it discreetly put aside in an envelope but clearly evident. But once it's put away I know there's a far, far higher percentage chance I'm gonna get screwed, and not in the fashion I'm counting on. I completely agree with making clear that I tip for superior service, and that can help, and obviously most of these issues are with first-time as opposed to return engagements since in the latter there's a degree of history and trust. But I would rather walk away horny (or, generally more accurately in these scenarios, send the woman away) and have done so, than risk being ripped off.
PZ, the first time I went to Vegas, it did nothing but snow. I had naturally packed nothing appropriate and froze my ass off most of my time there. I was forced to stay in casinos almost my entire trip, simply to make sure I had enough nickels to rub together to keep me warm! :D
RN,
Do you pay the man before you enter his shop? Do you pay the painter before he finishes the job on your house? Do you give the garage your car and your money?
I think not!
I make a point of paying after the deed. The money handover time is part of the talks. Any woman who changes her mind on that subject may change her mind on other things as well.
There is one place where I do pay in advance. Right here, at home in the Lowlands. Prostitution is a legitimate business here, so the ladies have to comply with certain simple rules. If the lady doesn't deliver, I can walk away and come back with the police.
Tho (female) coppers may find the situation awkward, their presence alone will fuck up business in the area for at least an hour.
PsyberZombie
02-27-05, 09:40
You guys keep using the analogies of Legitimate Businesses to justify why you shouldn't pay the girl until after the Act
BUT = Prostitution is ILLEGAL , and any·time an Illegal Act is performed for Money , the Customer pays *first*
Better analogies here would be hiring an Arsonist to burn down your business ; or a Hit Man to snuff your spouse ; or in the old days , arranging for a criminal Abortion
[ If your Hit Man agrees to paid from the Insurance Money after you collect , you can be sure that it's an Under·cover Cop you're dealing with ]
The reason seems fairly obvious = there's no legitimate recourse if the act is performed but then the customer refuses to pay
Do you risk getting ripped off ??
Of course , but because not every Monger has the gentle nature and excellent Impulse Control that we here have , these Con Artists Chicks are usually the ones that end up beat up or murdered , if it's any consolation
RN:
There are 2 places that I personally know, where payment afterwards is the established procedure, but for quite different reasons:
- German FKK's
Here, everybody has his / her peace of mind with it. On one side, it leaves the actual time spent together open (usually it is charged in 30 min. increments). Good for the girl, because if she makes me happy, I rather often like to enjoy this state of happiness for a longer time than the originally planned half hour.
The customer can refuse payment in case of a total denial of service, but will be politely but VERY effectively be reminded of his duties by the club's "security" staff if he should just try to run away. The girl is sure to get her money as long as she adhers to the standards the club considers appropriate. The rules here are neither set by the girl nor the client - they are established by the club.
- Buenos Aires
I don't know, if it was "us" (the WSG mongers) who in fact changed rules down there, but I agree with him that it is usually accepted if brought up during the initial negotiations. If this rulechange is the case, maybe "we" also established a reputation as reliable clients who usually keep their promises. It should not be forgot, that "we" usually consume in the high end of the market and often pay a premium compared with locals.
Interestingly, in both places, prostitution is NOT illegal.
What can happen in a different setting, can be read in my recent post in the Nexico City section, http://www.worldsexguide.info/forum/showthread.php?t=433 . I don't know any other business, where an offer, that has ben explicitely published (on a website) could be changed after payment is received. So much to business ethics.
Terms of any transaction are open to negotiation, and in a situation of high supply, the buyer's chances to set his terms grow, with high demand those of the seller. BA is a place of high supply.
I have never denied a girl payment afterwards, not even in situations where I was rather unsatisfied. I am always willing to concede that just the "chemistry" was not there which is necessary for something as intimate as sex, paid or not, even if I suspected that it was not lacking chemistry but just plain bad service, not even trying from the girls side to establisch that "chemistry". I did however throw girls out of my room, with taxi fare, when I got the impression that things would go sour after (advance) payment.
just 2 cents,
El Alemán
CBGBConnisur
03-01-05, 22:48
I don't see any crime in prostitution, there are worse things that human beings have done to one another in the past, and continue to do today in the 21st century. People will continue to have and enjoy sex in the next 1000 years. Human nature will never change. The best solution is to accomodate prostitution in the most humane manner possible, keeping out unsavory elements such as organized crime. Most of Western Europe, Canada, and Australia regulate the trade. The only developed nation that still keeps the trade underground is the US.
In the inimitable words of Mr. Carlin:
"Selling is legal; Sex is legal. So why isn´t selling sex legal?"
It seems to me that the only way to minimize the exploitation-slavery aspect (the real downside to prostitution IMHO) would be legalisation and regulation.
Sin taxes have been working wonders for decades.
Cheers,
Sporadic
If an unemployed woman doesn't report for a job interview at a brothel, she can lose her benefits. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/30/wgerm30.xml
The decline of Europe continues. My brother lives in Germany and told me something about this but I didnt believe him, thought he was joking. An unbelievable article. What if the girl was married or engaged? This is insanity gone amuck. I love working girls as much as the next guy, but I never want to fuck a girl who doesnt want it, or for that matter, a girl who is practically forced into it or face serious financial problems. Even more unbelievable in a first world country like Germany (for now). Im not a moralist or religious, but this breaks the common decency of a civilized country, if they are one anymore.
Milkster
That story ran through German media as well, a couple of weeks ago. It soon turned out to be complete nonsense. Although prostitution is perfectly legal, it's still considered to be an "immoral ocupation", and no one will be referred to this kind of employment by the state-run job agencies, let alone be "forced" to work in the trade.
Asswatcher
05-26-05, 19:46
In the inimitable words of Mr. Carlin:
"Selling is legal; Sex is legal. So why isn´t selling sex legal?"
It seems to me that the only way to minimize the exploitation-slavery aspect (the real downside to prostitution IMHO) would be legalisation and regulation.
Sin taxes have been working wonders for decades.
Cheers,
SporadicGood point.
Bill Bradsky
06-27-05, 00:52
An ordinary girl in the Midwest can become a massues, incorporate sex into her massage routine with her regular customers and make 50 to 100k per year if she works every day. Little if any of this ever gets taxed since it is paid in cash without receipt.
The idea put forth in our matriarcal society that these women are victims is laughable.
bluishballs
07-08-05, 14:47
These women are making a 100% profit with no operation margins, except for condoms. No operating costs, gross and net profits are equal, and infinite resources (unless the v is worn down beyond use). What business in the world can match that? There is no morality is business. It's nothing personal, it's just business.
Bill Bradsky
07-21-05, 20:29
How the college girl next door is getting rich.
http://www.wbai.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=6135&Itemid=2
Best Tx Monger
11-01-05, 10:12
I would have to agree with the rest and say these women are not victims. This is a victimless crime and the real victims is us John's, getting taken for our money.
In addition, perhaps someone here can help me clarify the following for me.
How is it that it is ok to do porn and not to be with a sw ?
1] They are both getting paid & laid.
2 ] Both have consenting adults.
So why is one legal and the other one isn't ?
I have yet to find an answer that I can walk away from it comfortablly. Can anyone please advise or enlighten me on the matter ?
-007
Bad Bad Boy
05-29-06, 07:03
Life is all about choices. You make some good ones. You make some bad ones. You hopefully learn from your bad experiences and not make the same ones again. So much for my homespun philosophy.
Some say prostitution is a choice that doesn't victimize women. Others don't agree. It's all in one's perspective, IMHO. It's almost like debating the chicken and egg theory of which came first.
I subscribe to the theory that prostitution is a victimless crime where each party uses the other. Men use women for sex. Women use men for money. So who is the real victim here? No one that I can see.
Let's get real here. Women have always used sex to get what they want in life (i.e., financial gain, security, marriage, etc.). While this may appear to be a jaded view of women, nevertheless, for the most part it's true.
Prostitution is a choice. For the most part, no one is holding a gun to your head forcing you into it (with the exception of human trafficking). Many women get into prostitution to pay for their drug habit. But isn't taking drugs a choice??? Of course it is, a very bad choice.
As said before, prostitution should be regulated and made legal since there are no victims, only consenting adults. American women should get off their soapbox and quit feeling sorry for themselves. Sorry no pity party here!
BBB
Bad Bad Boy
05-29-06, 09:21
This is a follow-up to my previous post, Life's Choices.
When you talk about morality, you are really entering into some pretty murky waters. So much depends upon society's definition of morality and your own views. It will vary from person to person.
Webster defines morality as a "moral quality or character; rightness or wrongness of an action". Boy, doesn't this open the floodgates to interpretation? Yes, it does.
In some countries, states, and societies, prostitution is legal. In most
societies it is not. Who is to say who is right or wrong?
Let's take a look at the United States and our roots from which our morality is defined. It's primarily based on old English law and preaching's from various religious institutions that dates back to our very beginning. That is about as relevant today as the horse and buggy.
Our societal norms today are changing. We are more tolerant (accepting) of other people's beliefs, culture, and values than we have ever been. We realize that the morality of prostitution and pornography widely varies in acceptance from society to society and from individual to individual.
When you examine an individual's view of morality, it will also vary pending on your beliefs, values, religious upbringing, etc. I see prostitution as a victimless crime between two consenting adults. If I choose to engage in it and no one is hurt by it, why should I attach a moral stigma to it? There is no need.
Because of our puritanical roots and religious convictions, our society has determined that prostitution is immoral and thus a crime. How backwards is that? The key here is an act between two consenting adults in which no one else is involved nor hurt. Why should that be wrong?
BBB
Bull Balls
10-26-06, 18:54
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061026/ap_on_re_eu/italy_ancient_brothel
The Romans certainly new how to live. We can't we figure it out?
Bill Bradsky
03-01-07, 20:19
From the news:
Sex workers as happy as other working women: survey
Sydney - Prostitutes working legally in Australian brothels are just as happy as women with regular day jobs, a survey showed Thursday.
But women who sell sex illegally in their homes or on the streets are far less happy, according to the survey by Queensland University of Technology researcher Charlotte Seib.
The study compared the mental and physical health of nearly 250 prostitutes, aged 18 to 57.
Legal workers reported similar job satisfaction to women in the general community, the national AAP news agency quoted the survey as showing.
"The general picture is that those women whose families know about their work reported greater job satisfaction than those who kept their work secret," said Seib.
Eighty-two per cent of the women said they took up prostitution for the money, while 52 per cent pointed to the flexible working hours.
"And 39 per cent said they had a particular goal in mind such as a new car, a house or a holiday," said Seib.
From the news:
One in four of the women surveyed had a university degree, contrary to the stereotype that sex workers came from socially disadvantaged backgrounds.
Legal prostitutes were psychologically on a par with other women but street workers were far less stable, said Seib.
About half said they had been raped or assaulted by a client in the past year, compared to just three per cent of brothel workers, she noted, indicating that legalisation of the industry had been effective.
Agence France Presse
Bad Bad Boy
03-25-07, 10:00
While we have hashed and rehashed the morality of prostitution, there are other reasons why some consider it undesirable or a crime.
While many of us view prostitution as a victimless crime, others see it as a gateway leading to other criminal activities (e.g., drugs) coming into their neighborhoods. They see these other criminal activities as much worse than prostitution itself.
The criminal cycle or equation goes something like this: prostitution = drugs = burglary/robbery = shootings = murder. This in turn lowers property values and quickly destroys a neighborhood. Therefore, to stop this vicious cycle or to nip it in the bud, people want to crack down and rid their neighborhoods of prostitution before the other criminal activities emerge.
We have already discussed the religious, moral and puritanical roots which affect our views of prostitution so I won't reiterate them here.
BBB
PsyberZombie
06-29-07, 09:07
" Grown men should not be having sex with prostitutes
unless they're married to them "
The Rev Jerry Falwell
1933 — 2007
Benchseats Rock
07-03-07, 03:01
The term "common prostitute" will be banished from English law under legal changes announced in the UK, with street workers to be referred to now as "persons".
The Daily Mail newspaper has reported that, In a dramatic softening of the law on prostitution, only 'persistent' street workers who are caught selling sex will face any police action.
And the term 'common prostitute' will be banished from English law. Instead, sex workers must be referred to as 'persons'.
Outlining the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, Justice Minister David Hanson said it was no longer acceptable for women or rent boys to carry the 'label' of prostitution, which dates back to the 1824 Vagrancy Act.
He said that, in future, to receive any punishment at all, their offending must be classed as 'persistent'. This means they must be caught selling sex twice in any three month period.
Even 'persistent' offenders will escape the current fine for a first offence. Instead, they will be ordered to attend three meetings with a supervisor or counsellor, and will be given help to kick addictions to alcohol or drugs.
Only those who fail to turn up will face punishment, of up to 72 hours in custody.
Sexybldbbwfl
07-03-07, 11:10
I felt compelled to respond. I love what I do and I am educated and I do not have any habits. My morals are my problem. I am not asking to be saved. I am independent and when I do not enjoy it, I will quit. I love the variety, hours, regular money. I got into this by accident and I am staying. Life is good. If you ever come to Florida, say hello. If one brothel makes $1. 5 million in a month in 2004 what are the taxes on that the state gets?
Debbie
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=47208
Ian Dokkaebi
08-01-07, 10:24
There are many aspects of this hobby that I believe, as hobbyists, we should explore. Some often argue that, as hobbyists, we should pay regards only to the provider’s name and location. I would disagree largely because we, as true hobbyists, must attempt to understand the framework and factors that shape this subculture, at least factors that have the potential to affect it. Well, that‘s true in my case, as I strive to analyze factors pertinent to any of my interests. Maybe, I just have a lot of free time.
If we were to view the prostitution issue through historical lenses, we can easily conclude that this "crime" has been largely outlawed by the Christian principles that swept throughout the USA In the early 1900s.
Prostitution was legal for the better part of USA History. According to Wikipedia, prostitution was prevalent during the American Revolution as some of the women in the American Revolution, who followed the Continental Army, served the soldiers and officers as sexual partners. The term "red-light district" was derived from the practice of placing a red light in the window to indicating to customers the available services. (A couple of "fun facts", you are free to use them at your next social gathering.)
On January 25, 1917, the anti-prostitution drive in San Francisco attracts huge crowds, upward 30,000 individuals, to public meetings. In a conference with Rev. Paul Smith, an outspoken foe of prostitution, 300 workers make a plea for toleration citing poor economic conditions as the primary motivation. When Smith asked if they would take other work at $8 to $10 a week, the ladies laughed sarcastically, which lost them public sympathy. The police close about 200 houses of prostitution immediately thereafter.
In general, I welcome the views and accept many positive benefits that developed from organize religion. However, there exist a few selected extremists hell-bent on infecting the remaining population with their rhetoric and idealism. It’s absolutely deplorable for them to use their influence to shape the world through their conservative eyes. Religious leaders must realize that forcing a person to conform to their rhetoric does not mean that they will accept it, as demonstrated by the recent sexual scandals involving many religious figures.
Like many of you, I often question why Government does not regulate this occupational group, instead of wasting our money and their efforts in enforcing this ridiculous law, while allowing other crimes to freely flow throughout our streets and all branches of Government.
Government regulation will change our hobby in many respects. On the positive side, we will have better selection, safety and peace of mind is ensured for the workers, and the potential income generated by taxation, among other things. However, the cost of regulation will be passed to the customers. That means we will need to pay more for services. How much more will require some study based on the 10 out of 17 counties in Nevada that have chosen to legalize prostitution.
In that respect, I often wonder why the workers of this industry do not form a lobbying group to represent their interests and defend themselves against deformation. They should start with the representatives and senators recently unveiled as patrons. For the entrepreneurs out there, this is a new market waiting to be exploited.
Many of you are absolutely correct regarding the often stricter sentences of public opinions. Nonetheless, that is exactly the prosecution’s intent, driven by religious idealization. They think the act of humiliating and destroying some lives will discourage the remaining from participating in this hobby.
This is the modern day version of being tarred and feathered. It did not work then, and I am certain it will not work now. In general, these deterrents have little effects in curtailing our habits, much like capital punishment. In Texas, they instituted an "express lane" for people on death row.
Nonetheless, prosecution may be successful in discouraging patronage to a particular location by destroying many lives in the process. Customers simply move their business elsewhere, as the rampant availability in our region continues to grow.
Much like the war on drugs, the Government and the extremists cannot win this war on prostitution. As long as there is a strong demand and available supply, it will take an act of God to keep the two segments from intersecting. We must make some effort to regulate this industry to protect the interests of both the workers and customers. While I am not a psychologist, I would think sexual gratification contributes greatly to our overall psychological health.
By restricting access to this industry, these religious devotees are depriving a portion of the population from their psychological well being. If one were to be born with or have accidents where our physical appearance limits our ability to meet our sexual needs, at least for an hour or so, we can have such needs satisfied. The confidence, however, often lasts much longer thus improving our ability to live our lives better and perform our job better.
Incidentally, by maintaining the illegal nature of drugs and prostitution, these religious zealots further promote its notoriety. By keeping it in a locked box, it stimulates the sense of curiosity inherent in some of us and one may experience greater pleasure not only from perform the act, but the realization that they are breaking the law. That realization, by itself, is a separate high for some.
Why should we spend our limited resources educating the negative effects of a certain product while keeping it from our grasp? As I recall from Sunday school, God attempted something similar with Adam and Eve, but results were not too overwhelmingly positive. I pray every day that these religious "revolutionaries" apply, or at least learn from, what they preach.
We live in a technological world with countless feats of scientific advancements, while the laws that govern such advancement, rather the people that make the laws, have yet to advanced from the dark ages.
America was founded on many revolutionary ideas, and among them liberty (the condition in which an individual has the ability to act according to his or her own will, as long as it does not intrude on others’ rights). The time has long since passed for us to move beyond the religious fallacies and shape the national policy based on the dynamics of society, rather than conforming our society to the views of a few religious fanatics.
Ian
Bill Bradsky
08-04-07, 16:22
What girls want. 92% said "the good money". All along, I thought it was love.
http://www.sexwork.com/coalition/AustraliaStudy.html
When In Vegas
08-04-07, 18:15
Interesting that for some their self esteem is enhanced. Amazing what effect legalizing something has.
Good report
What girls want. 92% said "the good money". All along, I thought it was love.
http://www.sexwork.com/coalition/AustraliaStudy.html
Hey, I'm one of those spa workers. I just started. And I loooove it. And it IS making me feel more "hot". I wish that America would legalize these things. I don't see the harm. And it's great money! LOL
Dawna
I think prostitution should be legal. Look at the religious conservatives. There are thousands of cases of church workers molesting kids for years. Have you seen any of them going to jail? I haven't. The church pays people off. If we are so religious, we should have a law that says there is no deal for child molesters. The only deal is life in prison or the death penalty.
We spend so much energy to catch escorts, hookers etc but we are letting religious child molesters go. What a screw up country we are living in.
Let's buy an island some place. Everybody living in it must be tested for STD before any is allowed on the island. Prostitution, gambling, strip bars, streetwalkers etc should be all legal. No violence is allowed. All these should be part of the constitution. Women should be respected. No pimping or sex slaves. No strong drugs. Weeds and cigarettes should be allowed. Alcohol should be allowed. People are allowed to stay together as a couple if they want, but there is no marriage required. People are allowed to come and go in a relationship. Can you imagine how popular this island will be? Tax on gambling and sex will be used to provide universal health care and social security for the whole population. There will be no other taxes.
Station emmm essss ennnn beee seee just did a spiel on the sex trafficking and slavery of many women who work in AMPs, strip clubs, etc.. Pretty bad stuff. Some of the ladies were lured to the US from the Ukraine to go to school and then told they had to pay back some 25k, kept as prostitutes for years under fear of their family at home being harmed or worse. AMPs with fake walls and girls kept in tiny illegal living areas. It was sad to see and I expect increased to see increased outrage about it.
Like organized pimping on a huge scale.
I wonder if legalizing and "regulating" prostitution wouldn't help the situation by adding health checkups, inspections, etc.?
Station emmm essss ennnn beee seee just did a spiel on the sex trafficking and slavery of many women who work in AMPs, strip clubs, etc.. Pretty bad stuff. Some of the ladies were lured to the US from the Ukraine to go to school and then told they had to pay back some 25k, kept as prostitutes for years under fear of their family at home being harmed or worse. AMPs with fake walls and girls kept in tiny illegal living areas. It was sad to see and I expect increased to see increased outrage about it.
I wonder if legalizing and "regulating" prostitution wouldn't help the situation by adding health checkups, inspections, etc.?
This issue has been covered before in various places here. Most AMPs are manned by Koreans although there are some other countries that have some. Some of us have been involved with these ladies, including managers and owners and we can tell you with no hesitation that at least insofar as the majority of AMPs owned and operated by Koreans there are no forced workers. The workers come and go as they please once they no longer want to work, and others leave because of conflicts with management/owner/other workers. They are there for one reason only - quick, fast, easy money. Most, unfortunately, have habits to feed. I've never met one in my many years with a drug problem but almost all are addicted to nicotine. A great many others are addicted to alcohol, gambling, or both. Some just have expensive tastes and like to buy top shelf merchandise from clothes to accessories to autos. The sad part of this is that most will go back to this quick easy money over and over again to feed their material desires until they are too old to do it anymore. Then, if they have been unsuccessful in finding a man to support them you will see them as managers, kitchen mamas, or custodians in the AMPs.
This is not to say there are no forced workers anywhere. Recently in Florida, a house with workers was busted with hispanic women and one man. The man ran it. The women were pretty much in servitude and it was located in a minority community with a large number of migrant workers. It does happen, and it should not happen.
The AMP business is difficult for newbies to understand because it is so different from the work ethic here but is accepted by the K girls. The house fee goes in almost every instance 100% to the house. The girls work only for tips. They must pay the owner a weekly amount for food. I know of one amp where the girls have to pay $350 per every week for food. Most single persons could survive on that amount for the greater part of the month, let alone a week. If there is a manager/kitchen mama, they girls must also pony up a certain amount every week for that person. It's usually in excess of $100 per girl per week. So the first 4 to 5 customers each week earn nothing for the girls.
This is the way it works and this is the way they all accept it. In the right locations, the girls can still knock down a thousand and more a week.
Most of us would agree that this is a business that is safe, discreet, and as clean as it can be with a few exceptions, and would benefit those working in the business as well as the participants to have some regulation. It would even benefit the state and local governments because they would get their cut too. However, there is an element that thinks that sex anyplace other than in the bedroom or in any other way than missionary, and in a not so frequent time period is the only acceptable way to have sex. Those who believe this are vocal and active so it's doubtful that any regulated AMPS will exist anywhere now or in the future.
An added plus for everyone is that in the places I've been, and there've been many, I've never seen a bad element in the neighborhood, I've never seen a drug problem related to or around the AMPs, and they do not interfere with the surrounding businesses or neighborhoods.
Thanks for the background Irish. Always at least 2 sides to the story.
Bill Bradsky
03-03-08, 21:31
Who knew? You go girls!
Wow, thats way out of my league. But, of course, I'm only a "regular" member.
I have a theory. EACH ONE of these preachy, better than thou politicians who go after others for victimless crimes have a little boy locked up in their closet. (BOTH dems AND repugs!)
BTW, I can understand that he may have broken local laws but why are los federales involved in this?
KV
This issue has been covered before in various places here. Most AMPs are manned by Koreans although there are some other countries that have some. Some of us have been involved with these ladies, including managers and owners and we can tell you with no hesitation that at least insofar as the majority of AMPs owned and operated by Koreans there are no forced workers. The workers come and go as they please once they no longer want to work, and others leave because of conflicts with management/owner/other workers. They are there for one reason only - quick, fast, easy money. Most, unfortunately, have habits to feed. I've never met one in my many years with a drug problem but almost all are addicted to nicotine. A great many others are addicted to alcohol, gambling, or both. Some just have expensive tastes and like to buy top shelf merchandise from clothes to accessories to autos. The sad part of this is that most will go back to this quick easy money over and over again to feed their material desires until they are too old to do it anymore. Then, if they have been unsuccessful in finding a man to support them you will see them as managers, kitchen mamas, or custodians in the AMPs.
This is not to say there are no forced workers anywhere. Recently in Florida, a house with workers was busted with hispanic women and one man. The man ran it. The women were pretty much in servitude and it was located in a minority community with a large number of migrant workers. It does happen, and it should not happen.
The AMP business is difficult for newbies to understand because it is so different from the work ethic here but is accepted by the K girls. The house fee goes in almost every instance 100% to the house. The girls work only for tips. They must pay the owner a weekly amount for food. I know of one amp where the girls have to pay $350 per every week for food. Most single persons could survive on that amount for the greater part of the month, let alone a week. If there is a manager/kitchen mama, they girls must also pony up a certain amount every week for that person. It's usually in excess of $100 per girl per week. So the first 4 to 5 customers each week earn nothing for the girls.
This is the way it works and this is the way they all accept it. In the right locations, the girls can still knock down a thousand and more a week.
Most of us would agree that this is a business that is safe, discreet, and as clean as it can be with a few exceptions, and would benefit those working in the business as well as the participants to have some regulation. It would even benefit the state and local governments because they would get their cut too. However, there is an element that thinks that sex anyplace other than in the bedroom or in any other way than missionary, and in a not so frequent time period is the only acceptable way to have sex. Those who believe this are vocal and active so it's doubtful that any regulated AMPS will exist anywhere now or in the future.
An added plus for everyone is that in the places I've been, and there've been many, I've never seen a bad element in the neighborhood, I've never seen a drug problem related to or around the AMPs, and they do not interfere with the surrounding businesses or neighborhoods.Excellent post. I think the reason it will always be illegal along with drugs is that it gives the politicians and law enforcement something to keep them busy on instead of trying to actually fix the real problems that are wrong with the country.
I just finished watching a show on CNBC called "Dirty Money - High End Prostitution". It made a big distinction between women who market theirselves for thousands of dollars instead of the $200 or $300 requested by callgirls say on Eros.
The very last segment of the show discussed legalization. It talked about the young educated girls who are kidnapped or recruited/exploited on the street level, arguing that legalizing prostitution would make these people more at risk. But then they focused on the wealthier, educated women who feel that a distinction should be made so that high-end prostitution could be made legal.
This was a woah!! moment for me. I can imagine if they had their way this would be just fine for all illustrious Congressman. This way they wouldn't have to fear exposure while they went ahead and created laws that enforced a double standard within the entire society. The basic lesson: If you have money anything at all is just fine. But if you don't have money then you are essentially a second class citizen.
Did anyone else see this and feel the same way?
Just had to say...
The Chinese seem to have taken over in many cities, and their operation is decidedly different that what the Koreans do/did. The Chinese providers are illegal, uneducated, and for the most part debt indentured. They are constantly moved from city to city. Drugs, alcohol and other bad habits are not tolerated. They live in an apartment with the rest of the providers, and there is no outside life…or hope of one.
But oh yes, they are quite happy w/ the money they make during their “tour.”
This issue has been covered before in various places here. Most AMPs are manned by Koreans although there are some other countries that have some. Some of us have been involved with these ladies, including managers and owners and we can tell you with no hesitation that at least insofar as the majority of AMPs owned and operated by Koreans there are no forced workers. The workers come and go as they please once they no longer want to work, and others leave because of conflicts with management/owner/other workers. They are there for one reason only - quick, fast, easy money. Most, unfortunately, have habits to feed. I've never met one in my many years with a drug problem but almost all are addicted to nicotine. A great many others are addicted to alcohol, gambling, or both. Some just have expensive tastes and like to buy top shelf merchandise from clothes to accessories to autos. The sad part of this is that most will go back to this quick easy money over and over again to feed their material desires until they are too old to do it anymore. Then, if they have been unsuccessful in finding a man to support them you will see them as managers, kitchen mamas, or custodians in the AMPs.
This is not to say there are no forced workers anywhere. Recently in Florida, a house with workers was busted with hispanic women and one man. The man ran it. The women were pretty much in servitude and it was located in a minority community with a large number of migrant workers. It does happen, and it should not happen.
The AMP business is difficult for newbies to understand because it is so different from the work ethic here but is accepted by the K girls. The house fee goes in almost every instance 100% to the house. The girls work only for tips. They must pay the owner a weekly amount for food. I know of one amp where the girls have to pay $350 per every week for food. Most single persons could survive on that amount for the greater part of the month, let alone a week. If there is a manager/kitchen mama, they girls must also pony up a certain amount every week for that person. It's usually in excess of $100 per girl per week. So the first 4 to 5 customers each week earn nothing for the girls.
This is the way it works and this is the way they all accept it. In the right locations, the girls can still knock down a thousand and more a week.
Most of us would agree that this is a business that is safe, discreet, and as clean as it can be with a few exceptions, and would benefit those working in the business as well as the participants to have some regulation. It would even benefit the state and local governments because they would get their cut too. However, there is an element that thinks that sex anyplace other than in the bedroom or in any other way than missionary, and in a not so frequent time period is the only acceptable way to have sex. Those who believe this are vocal and active so it's doubtful that any regulated AMPS will exist anywhere now or in the future.
An added plus for everyone is that in the places I've been, and there've been many, I've never seen a bad element in the neighborhood, I've never seen a drug problem related to or around the AMPs, and they do not interfere with the surrounding businesses or neighborhoods.
Is prostitution a greater sin than adultery....?
Personally I have always believed that paying for sex and adultery are the same. The difference is that we get type of girl we want regardless of our age.
Member #4064
08-24-10, 23:51
What's the difference between the US and other countries? I see the other countries all have the "erotic" section in craigslist but this country forced a change to the "adult section" and now is looking to ban it. I know I am just the average guy and probably don't have a clue but are all these things they claim really that bad in our country? Or it is better here because of the moral majority?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5h8aAAWLDmzuuxQMeYWcEESBSJM_w
Member #4064
08-25-10, 00:37
Is prostitution a greater sin than adultery....?
Personally I have always believed that paying for sex and adultery are the same. The difference is that we get type of girl we want regardless of our age.
No, I don't think so although if it were me and I had a choice of a very good looking married women or an average hooker I would pick the hooker every time. I don't mess with married women no matter how good looking they are. If I know she is married it is "hi and bye". Yes, hooker will leave you broke but I feel less guilty..if there is such a thing, than I would if I knowing hooked up with a married women.
I meant having sex outside of marriage or with a unmarried girl. Personally I don't believe it's right to have sex with a married woman as well.
Technicalone
11-01-10, 17:34
No, I don't think so although if it were me and I had a choice of a very good looking married women or an average hooker I would pick the hooker every time. I don't mess with married women no matter how good looking they are. If I know she is married it is "hi and bye". Yes, hooker will leave you broke but I feel less guilty..if there is such a thing, than I would if I knowing hooked up with a married women.I once heard a Pastor say that the greater sin is when both people are married and fornicate. His logic for this is you are affecting more than just yourselves. The other spouses and potentially any children we be adversely affected. Therefore, you are distroying several lives by the act.
I am not perfect and I do not judge because it is not my battle. Just my 2 cents.
I once heard a Pastor say that the greater sin is when both people are married and fornicate. His logic for this is you are affecting more than just yourselves. The other spouses and potentially any children we be adversely affected. Therefore, you are distroying several lives by the act.
I am not perfect and I do not judge because it is not my battle. Just my 2 cents. Obvious answer: don't get married!
I was with my ex-wife for 15 years, and frankly, at this point in my life, the whole idea of being shackled to some one till death do us part just doesn't seem very appealing.
My 2 cents.
Gigabyte40
12-22-10, 13:43
Does this story sound familiar?
Fred, a 50 yr old bald headed fat guy meets a stripper, Cassie, in a strip club. She is 21, hot, thin, and the best dancer in the club. He buys dances from her and asks if she does private parties. She says yes and goes to his house. And the fun begins.
That was 7 months ago and he is still seeing her, sometimes twice a week. She dances, poses for photos, and provides full service GFE, bareback, wide open anything, anytime, any way he wants it. She has incredible oral skills which has him completely addicted.
Fred seems to have it made with Cassie, a women less than half his age. He buys her clothes, shoes, panties, dinner, and anything else she wants. He gives her money which she uses to buy pills for herself and her boyfriend. (Who is a convicted felon and out of prison now.) Of course she says the money is not for pills, it's for food and bills. Whatever.
Well Fred starts thinking the Cassie actually likes him. He thinks there might be something more than just a business transaction. He has become attached to her and cares for her. But she is just in it for the money. Fred thinks he can save her from her life of trailer trash friends and family. He thinks he can persuade her to stop doing pain pills and clean up her life. He shows her the "good" life. But he is getting frustrated when she keeps saying one thing and doing another.
Fred should just enjoy what he has, and that is great sex with a hot 21 year old stripper. Nothing more.
Is there any hope for Fred?
Does this story sound familiar?
Fred, a 50 yr old bald headed fat guy meets a stripper, Cassie, in a strip club. She is 21, hot, thin, and the best dancer in the club. He buys dances from her and asks if she does private parties. She says yes and goes to his house. And the fun begins.
That was 7 months ago and he is still seeing her, sometimes twice a week. She dances, poses for photos, and provides full service GFE, bareback, wide open anything, anytime, any way he wants it. She has incredible oral skills which has him completely addicted.
Fred seems to have it made with Cassie, a women less than half his age. He buys her clothes, shoes, panties, dinner, and anything else she wants. He gives her money which she uses to buy pills for herself and her boyfriend. (Who is a convicted felon and out of prison now.) Of course she says the money is not for pills, it's for food and bills. Whatever.
Well Fred starts thinking the Cassie actually likes him. He thinks there might be something more than just a business transaction. He has become attached to her and cares for her. But she is just in it for the money. Fred thinks he can save her from her life of trailer trash friends and family. He thinks he can persuade her to stop doing pain pills and clean up her life. He shows her the "good" life. But he is getting frustrated when she keeps saying one thing and doing another.
Fred should just enjoy what he has, and that is great sex with a hot 21 year old stripper. Nothing more.
Is there any hope for Fred? I met my wife when she was a provider and I a monger. We had 15 wonderful years together bringing 2 great kids into the world until she sadly died nearly 7 years ago of the big C. I monger again now. I have no wish for another partner but do have regulars who mostly know my circumstances and we have a great 'relationship' which is rewarding for both of us.
If you don't try, you don't get. Just be prepared for the worst and you can't be dissappointed.
Best of luck Fred, enjoy it whilst it lasts.
Beady. A 63 year old bald headed fat guy.
It sounds like Fred is engaging in ethically impermissable conduct. He is attempting to 'buy' his emotional and sexual pleasure from someone who just wants his money. The BBFSCIP is another problem that may give rise to a gift that keeps on giving.
Fred's real problem is the endulging pervasive lust that infiltrates a healthy life that involves a prohibition of erotic transactions with any female who wants money.
Obvious answer: don't get married!
I was with my ex-wife for 15 years, and frankly, at this point in my life, the whole idea of being shackled to some one till death do us part just doesn't seem very appealing.
My 2 cents.It may be a cliche, but it doesn't make it any less true: It's cheaper to keep her.
The Good Doctor
03-24-11, 14:41
Many people sell their bodies in a variety of different ways. Sex sells, so it is everywhere. Men do the physical jobs from construction to being drafted for war. I don't see prostitution as any different.
Savvyguy08
03-31-11, 19:26
Many people sell their bodies in a variety of different ways. Sex sells, so it is everywhere. Men do the physical jobs from construction to being drafted for war. I don't see prostitution as any different.I don't see the issue as long as it's consentual and no one gets hurt. What is the difference between paying for sex vs. Paying for an expensive meal, drinks, dancing etc. And hoping she puts out.
Pimps are the issue in my mind.
SoCalMonger
10-05-11, 12:39
Can one be a christian and see SW's?
Even though I see a lot of SW's I still consider myself to be a christian. I don't attend church on regular basis, but I still believe in god. But I still find myself torn about my hobby. I don't feel guilty about the SW's, because in end it is their choice as I have always maintained. How they spend the money that we pay them is again their choice.
SausageMeet
04-12-12, 08:26
Is prostitution a greater sin than adultery?
Personally I have always believed that paying for sex and adultery are the same. The difference is that we get type of girl we want regardless of our age.One is in the Ten Commandments. The other is not.
SmileyScout
08-12-12, 17:56
Can one be a christian and see SW's?
Even though I see a lot of SW's I still consider myself to be a christian. I don't attend church on regular basis, but I still believe in god. But I still find myself torn about my hobby. I don't feel guilty about the SW's, because in end it is their choice as I have always maintained. How they spend the money that we pay them is again their choice.Short answer: Yes.
Long answer: Although both the Old Testament and New Testament repeatedly condemn prostitutes, they don't really have much to say about the men who solicit them. What makes this somewhat confusing is that the Bible tends to equate prostitution with adultery (the most common word used in the Hebrew Bible to describe this is "znh", which refers to anyone who has sex outside of marriage). So it could be argued that it's no more sinful to solicit a SW than to have sex with your girlfriend before marriage.
Realistically though, you have already sinned many, many times. You sin on a regular basis without even realizing it. You sin if you eat shellfish or pork (Leviticus 11:7-10) , if you wear any kind of gold jewelry or expensive clothes (1 Peter 3:3-4) , if you argue with anyone (2 Timothy 2:23-24) , if you gamble (Proverbs 13:11) , if you gossip (Proverbs 16:28) , if you get drunk (Ephesians 5:18) , if you pray in public (Matthew 6:5) , if you get divorced (Luke 16:18) , if you have long hair (1 Corinthians 11:14) , if you read horoscopes (Leviticus 19:31) , if you don't exercise (1 Corinthians 6:19-20) , if you get piercings or tattoos (Leviticus 19:28) , if you cross-dress (Deuteronomy 22:5) , if you tell crude jokes (Ephesians 5:4) , and so on. So long as you acknowledge your sins and pray for forgiveness, I don't see any reason why someone can't continue to be a Christian while seeing SW's. Human beings are not meant to be perfect, even by Biblical standards.
Selena Bebtley
08-16-12, 19:22
Many people sell their bodies in a variety of different ways. Sex sells, so it is everywhere. Men do the physical jobs from construction to being drafted for war. I don't see prostitution as any different.I 100 percent agree with you. There are so many examples of 'legal' acts world-wide that I can literally RANT about that involve 'prostitution', which has numerous similar definitions as this one:
Pros·ti·tu·tion/&716; präst&601; &712; t (why) o&862; oSH&601; and/
Noun:
The practice or occupation of engaging in sex with someone for payment.
The corrupt use of one's talents for personal or financial gain.
I won't bother you with all my ideas but this is one particularly good and quite obvious example (and in my opinion a well-debated argument) : Porn. Read the link below.
http://articles.cnn.com/2005-08-12/justice/colb.pornography_1_prostitution-ring-sexual-services-pornography?_s=PM:LAW
Trust Lust
09-02-12, 09:43
Women work at all kinds of different jobs and don't sell their bodies being nurses, truck drivers or combat soldiers in wet paper sack wars. Most women hate sex, including prostitutes, and just about every man or woman, I discuss sex with, end up bringing this to my attention. Women sell pussie to support their drug addictions. That's all their is to it. I've never P4P'd with a single SW, since December 1990, who was doing it for any other reason. The ones, who best conceal their drug addictions, more than likely hate their drug addictions as much as they hate sex. The ones, who clean up, become completely frigid and impossible to fuck.
To stay on point about the morality of prostitution, one must rate that morality along with sound money management. For me to miss spend my money pangs my conscience far worse, than fucking a prostitute, and forgetting the pleasure, the moment, the deed is done. I find it much more frugal to hire prostitutes; support their drug habits, and face the loss my car, heavy fines, and jail time, than I do getting financially cleaned out with a divorce. Marriage, because of its ultimately being more expensive than prostitution, is far more immoral from a Luciferian perspective. After all, from that same perspective, the girl married the guy with that being her plan all along. The guy ended up being highly dishonest with himself, as of all of the pussie he ended up missing out on, for not relying solely on prostitutes for his inspiration.
Because of this commodity of sorts, our leaders become very jealous of anyone, who is free, because of it. Without the marriage institution, they lose the main link in the chain of their governing control over the otherwise, delineated individual. Prostitution, freeing man from marriage, is probably, as abominable to Prince Fedgov, as his chattel property being debt free. When one considers, how many more rules and regulations have to be followed, after getting married or going into debt, one must quickly realize how silly the whole morality question is. Sooner or later one has to become dishonest with themselves in order to fit the morality bill of somebody else. In other words, they may be forced to adhere to some morality standard and proclaim it, as the best way to live, when they really hate having to follow it.
JohnnyTheWad
09-15-12, 14:43
I 100 percent agree with you. There are so many examples of 'legal' acts world-wide that I can literally RANT about that involve 'prostitution', which has numerous similar definitions as this one:
Pros·ti·tu·tion/&716; präst&601; &712; t (why) o&862; oSH&601; and/
Noun:
The practice or occupation of engaging in sex with someone for payment.
The corrupt use of one's talents for personal or financial gain.
I won't bother you with all my ideas but this is one particularly good and quite obvious example (and in my opinion a well-debated argument) : Porn. Read the link below.
http://articles.cnn.com/2005-08-12/justice/colb.pornography_1_prostitution-ring-sexual-services-pornography?_s=PM:LAWConjurs up some points I never thought of
JohnnyTheWad
09-15-12, 14:46
Short answer: Yes.
Long answer: Although both the Old Testament and New Testament repeatedly condemn prostitutes, they don't really have much to say about the men who solicit them. What makes this somewhat confusing is that the Bible tends to equate prostitution with adultery (the most common word used in the Hebrew Bible to describe this is "znh", which refers to anyone who has sex outside of marriage). So it could be argued that it's no more sinful to solicit a SW than to have sex with your girlfriend before marriage.
Realistically though, you have already sinned many, many times. You sin on a regular basis without even realizing it. You sin if you eat shellfish or pork (Leviticus 11:7-10) , if you wear any kind of gold jewelry or expensive clothes (1 Peter 3:3-4) , if you argue with anyone (2 Timothy 2:23-24) , if you gamble (Proverbs 13:11) , if you gossip (Proverbs 16:28) , if you get drunk (Ephesians 5:18) , if you pray in public (Matthew 6:5) , if you get divorced (Luke 16:18) , if you have long hair (1 Corinthians 11:14) , if you read horoscopes (Leviticus 19:31) , if you don't exercise (1 Corinthians 6:19-20) , if you get piercings or tattoos (Leviticus 19:28) , if you cross-dress (Deuteronomy 22:5) , if you tell crude jokes (Ephesians 5:4) , and so on. So long as you acknowledge your sins and pray for forgiveness, I don't see any reason why someone can't continue to be a Christian while seeing SW's. Human beings are not meant to be perfect, even by Biblical standards.Good point. I had the same question. Wonder if that is why I had to stand in line so long for confession today? LOL
JohnnyTheWad
09-15-12, 14:50
Women work at all kinds of different jobs and don't sell their bodies being nurses, truck drivers or combat soldiers in wet paper sack wars. Most women hate sex, including prostitutes, and just about every man or woman, I discuss sex with, end up bringing this to my attention. Women sell pussie to support their drug addictions. That's all their is to it. I've never P4P'd with a single SW, since December 1990, who was doing it for any other reason. The ones, who best conceal their drug addictions, more than likely hate their drug addictions as much as they hate sex. The ones, who clean up, become completely frigid and impossible to fuck.
To stay on point about the morality of prostitution, one must rate that morality along with sound money management. For me to miss spend my money pangs my conscience far worse, than fucking a prostitute, and forgetting the pleasure, the moment, the deed is done. I find it much more frugal to hire prostitutes; support their drug habits, and face the loss my car, heavy fines, and jail time, than I do getting financially cleaned out with a divorce. Marriage, because of its ultimately being more expensive than prostitution, is far more immoral from a Luciferian perspective. After all, from that same perspective, the girl married the guy with that being her plan all along. The guy ended up being highly dishonest with himself, as of all of the pussie he ended up missing out on, for not relying solely on prostitutes for his inspiration.
Because of this commodity of sorts, our leaders become very jealous of anyone, who is free, because of it. Without the marriage institution, they lose the main link in the chain of their governing control over the otherwise, delineated individual. Prostitution, freeing man from marriage, is probably, as abominable to Prince Fedgov, as his chattel property being debt free. When one considers, how many more rules and regulations have to be followed, after getting married or going into debt, one must quickly realize how silly the whole morality question is. Sooner or later one has to become dishonest with themselves in order to fit the morality bill of somebody else. In other words, they may be forced to adhere to some morality standard and proclaim it, as the best way to live, when they really hate having to follow it.Wow, very well said. I have always felt it was easier to pay someone 150, for example, and KNOW I was going to get pussy at the end of the date, than to wine, dine, dance, talk nicey nice to her, etc etc. Not to mention. I will call you in the morning LOL. My next wife will definitely be the slew of escorts out there making an HONEST living. Screw our leaders.
http://amzn.com/B006R7FTR4
I thought this was the appropriate place to post this link to a book on Amazon. Only digital, but it looks very interesting.
http://extragoodshit.phlap.net/index.php/how-common-is-the-john-next-door/#more-211351.
I thought this was interesting.
The Chinese seem to have taken over in many cities, and their operation is decidedly different that what the Koreans do / did. The Chinese providers are illegal, uneducated, and for the most part debt indentured. They are constantly moved from city to city. Drugs, alcohol and other bad habits are not tolerated. They live in an apartment with the rest of the providers, and there is no outside life. Or hope of one.
But oh yes, they are quite happy w / the money they make during their 'tour. 'Here the Korean mafia is ultimately in charge. One of the girls got raped and murdered, then he got hunted down before the cops could catch him. I suspect the Korean mafia is really a CIA front for importing heroin since back in the Nam War, with payoffs to the local cops who often deal dope too.
The ChiComs will eventually swamp USA with their trillion-dollar trade deficits and 500% higher population. All part of the evil plan in DC apparently, where the Pentagon, CIA and FBI run large sex traffic operations. The pedophiles are in charge. Google Bohemian Grove and Franklin Coverup. Congressman Barney Frank ran a gay pedophile prostitution service out of his home, and his pimp lover was murdered before his day testifying in court, all to blackmail select politicians.
That's why its illegal. Morality has nothing to do with it. We are all their slaves in DC. 99% of what government does is illegal but they just bought 10-billion bullets, and don't forget the nukes.
I think prostitution should be legal. Look at the religious conservatives. There are thousands of cases of church workers molesting kids for years. Have you seen any of them going to jail? I haven't. The church pays people off. If we are so religious, we should have a law that says there is no deal for child molesters. The only deal is life in prison or the death penalty.
We spend so much energy to catch escorts, hookers etc but we are letting religious child molesters go. What a screw up country we are living in.Http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzs-09Of99I
http://nytimes.com/2005/08/26/nyregion/26circumcise.html
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/09/03/rabbis-will-defy-law-on-circumcision-ritual/
Trust Lust
05-28-13, 20:24
All one has to do is go to a farm and observe a flock of hens with their rooster. The hens stay bunched up and constantly cackle the way housewives do at bridge parties or together in their sewing room. Notice how the rooster constantly guards their perimeter much the way a hubby does during work or happy hour at the bar. At some point in time that rooster ends up dropping a tail feather down and one of the hens will find it necessary to pick at it for no good reason. The slight bleeding, that ensues, is all it takes for the rest of the hens to madly pick at the doomed roosters tail feathers until they kill him. Following this, the low riding hens no longer have any protection from their own predators.
Although none of this is any more premeditated than beavers going to civil engineering school, the discipline, GENETICS, explains how the push pull forces of our solar system work together with the sun's gravity to provide the physical forces that has made those farm birds go. An example of this are gears in a watch or transmission etc. Were not the earth where it was, exactly, none of the forces, that make our automation a reality, could be harnessed. As a matter of fact, the helicopter invention came about from the microscopic study of dragonflies etc. With the chickens, beavers, and every single other animal on this earth, including even whales, their every movement is nothing more than light and phosphate juices pushing every bone and sinew in their bodies. Each one of these movements in every single wild or domesticated animal is done for the sole purpose of that animals nourishment and resultant creation of fertilizer to maintain the earth's ecological balance. Any study of this reveals how absolutely profoundly efficient animals are at accomplishing their purpose. In the first place, they don't have to ponder upon matters and have that much more time to move more quickly and efficiently than their human contemporaries. The animals hides or shells provide for a system of genetic inequalities that even further enhance this efficiency.
In that I think it a close tie between rather or not this report was a morality one or one pertaining to hang ups of western world women, I couldn't help but choose this thread. No matter, what the situation, the female seems to be bent on controlling males, and in many instances in nature, they have the greater physical prowess to do so. Whether it's a good lovable girl with a wonderful personality or not, our effeminate male judges and feminist female ones are here to hand the eighty / twenty divorce settlement against any male. About all they have to stand on is the nano second it takes for the female sperm cell to reach the ovum, first, during the fuck. Brainless, as these bolshevik lawyerisques are, they would have no comprehension of the CHEMISTRY, involved, where there can be no such thing as time. At the same time, PROSTITUTION IS THE SOLUTION but remains illegal, as if one were a domestic terrorist etc, for not accepting the stand of our bolshevik courts.
Taken in stride, one could get busted for prostitution, go to jail and loose his car to the court's hooligan network and come out ahead of the cost of being married and divorced. I've yet to stoop to paying a criminal attorney, so that might even the score up somewhat. I'm well aware of all of the dishonor involved in having to rely on the provider's drug addiction etc, but in general terms didn't all of that come about as a result of all of the belligerence of our police state in the first place and our taking steps to at least feel from it? To get laid by the heroin addict is far better cry than being married to woman, who never fucks you, and sits around on her porked out ass fantasizing about being in the arms of another man.
[Anti-Prostitution Proselytizing Deleted by Admin]
EDITOR's NOTE: This report was edited or deleted to remove Anti-Prostitution messages. Please do not use this Forum to espouse anti-prostitution, anti-commercial sex, or other similar sociological, political or religious beliefs. If you're against the idea of contractual sex, then get the fuck off my forum. Thanks!
Anyone who says they haven't paid for it is being untrue to themselves. How many times have you gone out with a woman, dinner, drinks etc and finally, maybe, a halfassed BJ or lousy FS at the end of the night? Would you have gotten that halfassed BJ or lousy FS from her without dinner, drinks. Etc? In other words you paid for it.
I prefer to cut out the middleman and go for a sure thing by seeing a pro who delivers as promised.
Trust Lust
07-27-13, 16:05
What really amazes me are the number of folks, who don't even try that puss out, before they marry some gal. Here that enamored idiot marries someone, who wouldn't let him fuck her, before they get married. After getting married, he finds himself caught up with someone who hates sex, can't lubricate, and doesn't even know how to even fuck. Whenever I advise one of these college boys that every rabbit needs two holes to run to and that two romances for him at the same time may save him from future divorce woes, he becomes all confused and points the Krazzee finger at me. I try to explain, that most of these college girls, he's around, don't even know how to fuck, and nothing registers with him other than a fantasy that she does. Instead he pushes the crazy button on me. When I finally settle him down enough to admit to the fact, that the puss is indeed the most important part, I admit that there are a few young girls who are really good in bed. This fact that she enjoys sex makes her a hoe and rules out any chance of a faithful marriage and predisposes him for the need for a back up piece of ass on the other hand.
This is about as close to being married, that I have ever been, but it is very costly to kind women too. Sooner or later I had to come to terms with the fact that it was all pink inside, and the heroin addicted SW became the most viable option. I've never been busted or caught anything fucking them, as if I were married to them, and I do mean BBCIP. I live in an influential neighborhood, and my credentials outweigh or are at least on par with all of my neighbors. Because of this, constant rumors go on about me, amongst my neighbors, but no one has ever approached me on the matter. Instead it's okay for them to divorce and remarry and come out heavily in debt instead of completely solvent as I. Outside of my mongering, I drive a new car, live in a very nice home, and am reserved to a very professional manner. Were any of my neighbors to go to the police about me, I'm sure they be asked whether or not they were on any sort of psychiatric medication. I know, also, that my deadbeat cab driver brother is a monger as well as one of my neighbors. Nevertheless, I remain strictly private towards them as to either of our lifestyles.
A2 has bagged lots of free (the most expensive kind) pussy in his younger days and my experience can be summed up in one sentence "No chick that wanted to wait was ever any good in bed, not one single time."
When I call a woman a sl** it's WITHOUT EXCEPTION a term of endearment, the girl next door can fucking stay there.
Mis dos centavos,
A2
Outside of the student union at URI is are 2 carved granite statues of their mascot, the Ram. It is said when the first virgin graduates those Rams will walk off the campus in disgust. Close to 4 decades since I left and they're still standing as they were back then.
I seriously doubt there are many virgins graduating high school today, forget college. I also doubt many are getting married today without a lengthy test drive. BTW the marriage rate is way down and those that are marrying are older.
Women will tell you some guys are a lousy fuk same as we say about some women. Fukking for most women is a aquired "skill", learning to relax and enjoy it and throw out their uptight inhibitions. Other women come by it naturally. Women are like snow flakes, no two are the same. It's OUR responsibilty to listen and learn what our non-pro partners like, need, require for a satistying experience. Pros are another story, my donation is intended for me to cum and for them to go. If they join me great, if not oh well. I'm happy seeya.
Trust Lust
07-29-13, 17:27
From time to time, although it automatically makes me horny, I can smell it when a girl's on the rag. Like it or not, the girl can't ever tell anything is going on down there, unless someone tells her, she needs to cork it. On the other hand, the medical establishment constantly guesses into some sort of fact that women enjoy sex three times more than men. Anybody with any sense can only realize, that prostitutes like it more than regular women, or they wouldn't be doing it. Nevertheless, on and on the media goes about how much prostitutes hate sex or can't feel anything at all. The monger has to beat her up to get any, whereas the pimp, because of what his great great whatever had to go through, is sacred and exempt from any blame for doing so.
From my own drinking experience, I came to a point with drinking, that I was sick and tired of it, only I couldn't stop trying to get it to work. Always, the media has left out the part, that the heroin addicted prostitute has a $200. 00 per day addiction to maintain. More than likely heroin probably ain't no different, only far worse, than my bonded liquor store stuff. Only the feminist media, sob sister whining about that monger, who needs to be emasculated and incarcerated for the rest of his life, has no concept, whatsoever, about the unmanageable drug addictions prostitutes often have. Whatever happened to their coverage of college girls who get their tubes tied and sell their puss to get through eg, law school.
We never hear about it, because the feminists won't own up to it. Be that, as it may, we don't know, whether or not the to be attorney liked how it felt enough, while she was becoming an attorney, to keep on doing it after she became one. For all intents and purposes, it's generally agreed that most women hate sex. My dead beat cab driving younger brother hauls college kids from the bar scene all of the time. Almost always the buck is hitting up on the doe for some puss, only she ain't in the mood whether it's only some sort of game or not. I guess I'd be the same way, were some nano second to have made me a girl and not a boy, because all I'd be worrying about is getting pregnant whether I liked sex ten times more than the dick or not.
"Anybody with any sense can only realize, that prostitutes like it more than regular women, or they wouldn't be doing it."
Really? Where do you get this information?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/videos/2013/12/15/is-prostitution-wrong.html
The other anchors were fascinated...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/videos/2013/12/15/is-prostitution-wrong.html
The other anchors were fascinated...Very good video. Thanks for posting.
Param Ahmad
12-16-14, 16:36
"When Rhode Island accidentally legalized prostitution, rape decreased sharply".
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/07/17/when-rhode-island-accidentally-legalized-prostitution-rape-and-stis-decreased-sharply/
". . . . Removing criminal penalties for prostitutes can reduce violence against women and curtail sexually transmitted infections in society generally -- and dramatically so. ".
Short answer: Yes.
Long answer: Although both the Old Testament and New Testament repeatedly condemn prostitutes, they don't really have much to say about the men who solicit them. What makes this somewhat confusing is that the Bible tends to equate prostitution with adultery (the most common word used in the Hebrew Bible to describe this is "znh", which refers to anyone who has sex outside of marriage). So it could be argued that it's no more sinful to solicit a SW than to have sex with your girlfriend before marriage.
Realistically though, you have already sinned many, many times. You sin on a regular basis without even realizing it. You sin if you eat shellfish or pork (Leviticus 11:7-10) , if you wear any kind of gold jewelry or expensive clothes (1 Peter 3:3-4) , if you argue with anyone (2 Timothy 2:23-24) , if you gamble (Proverbs 13:11) , if you gossip (Proverbs 16:28) , if you get drunk (Ephesians 5:18) , if you pray in public (Matthew 6:5) , if you get divorced (Luke 16:18) , if you have long hair (1 Corinthians 11:14) , if you read horoscopes (Leviticus 19:31) , if you don't exercise (1 Corinthians 6:19-20) , if you get piercings or tattoos (Leviticus 19:28) , if you cross-dress (Deuteronomy 22:5) , if you tell crude jokes (Ephesians 5:4) , and so on. So long as you acknowledge your sins and pray for forgiveness, I don't see any reason why someone can't continue to be a Christian while seeing SW's. Human beings are not meant to be perfect, even by Biblical standards.Sorry guys this is a few years late, but I didn't see this forum posting until today. Also one of you guys better schooled in the bible can point out the book and verse, but to quote (I never forgot it) "Better to put your seed in the belly of a ***** than spilling it on the ground" This should make us all happy.
Stepping outside of my usual 'lane'. Figured I'd try to rekindle this thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwHkIVzAvsY
I'm wondering, is there a way to discourage people like that from existing? People who play moral police are irritating. Any of you vets experience this in your years of 'hobbying'?
Visitor1980
07-02-17, 23:06
Do you get the sense that the US is on a downward slope of sexual prohibition?
When I started visiting massage parlors in the early 2000's, they were commonplace, and fairly good-quality, despite not being entirely legal. A single county in a given city contained 4-5 massage parlors, and they were rarely bothered by the police. Ads were openly placed in newspapers. The ladies were not only Asian but also white and black. I don't know what the situation was like in the 80's and 90's but I assume even more liberal or tolerated, with an even greater choice.
Then in the late 2000's things started changing and aggressive crackdowns began taking place. Ads disappeared from newspapers and even from online sites like Craigslist and Backpage. White and black masseuses completely disappeared. The majority of Asian places were also shut down. The entire state where I live currently barely has 2-3 functioning massage parlors, and the quality is awful.
Has US culture changed for the worse? Is prostitution less tolerated than before?
Yunghung12
09-08-17, 13:24
Do you get the sense that the US is on a downward slope of sexual prohibition?
When I started visiting massage parlors in the early 2000's, they were commonplace, and fairly good-quality, despite not being entirely legal. A single county in a given city contained 4-5 massage parlors, and they were rarely bothered by the police. Ads were openly placed in newspapers. The ladies were not only Asian but also white and black. I don't know what the situation was like in the 80's and 90's but I assume even more liberal or tolerated, with an even greater choice.
Then in the late 2000's things started changing and aggressive crackdowns began taking place. Ads disappeared from newspapers and even from online sites like Craigslist and Backpage. White and black masseuses completely disappeared. The majority of Asian places were also shut down. The entire state where I live currently barely has 2-3 functioning massage parlors, and the quality is awful.
Has US culture changed for the worse? Is prostitution less tolerated than before?Of course broh, what do you think? Have you not seen the disappearance of the erotic section on CL or how the feds completely shut down the escort section on BP? I'm too young to know about the 80's or 90's.
Banger Hard
09-20-17, 10:05
Do you get the sense that the US is on a downward slope of sexual prohibition?Over the last 20 years I have found it is easier and cheaper to monger in the USA Than before. Cell phones and internet have taken the girls off the street in many cases, but it has also opened up a whole world of cheating wives, married couples looking for a guy to service the wife, exc. Now, if you are talking about just staying in one area and getting to know the scene, I suppose its pretty much the same once you learn the local spots. But if you travel its so much easier now. I can arrange multiple hookups in several cities all within the same week just by keeping a minimal presence on two or three sites like this one, or friendfinder, exc. Worst case scenario, whatever city you are in, is hand out a cell number to the girl at sonic or anyone in the mall that smiles the right way. Something simple like "I know your time is valuable. Call me at xxx-xxxx. Calls will be coming in within the hour.
AngleOfRepose
04-09-18, 12:22
But given the recent legislative achievements, I can't help but wonder how many people on this forum voted Republican.
But given the recent legislative achievements, I can't help but wonder how many people on this forum voted Republican.If you are referring to FOSTA, I wouldn't be too quick to point my finger at those who voted Republican in the last election as being responsible for its passage. In the House, 14 Republicans opposed passage of the act, only 11 Democrats did. In the Senate, there were only two Senators who opposed passage--one Republican, one Democrat. As is clear, support for its enactment was overwhelming and bipartisan.
RustyMuffler
06-04-18, 18:42
Not trying to be argumentative, but I just want to share a little different perspective on the legislative process. (This won't be as entertaining as Schoolhouse Rock, but try to bear with me).
First, Jf Faster's totals of who opposed passage of FOSTA may be correct. I have not bothered to look it up because it's really not important when considering the OP's viewpoint. Other than to say that yes, both sides overwhelmingly voted for the measure. There certainly were not enough against the bill to filibuster in the Senate.
However, what is most important based on how things actually work up on The Hill is: 1) who is the House Speaker?; 2) who is the Senate Majoirity Leader?; and 3) who is the President?
About 99.9999% of the time, the leader of the majority party in the House and Senate decide what legislation they are going to move through their chamber.
When FOSTA was passed, Republicans controlled both the House and Senate. So, in reality the Rs in Congress decided to put it on the calendar and move it forward by scheduling a vote on it. (And Rs control the Rules Committees).
Therefore, if you voted for a Republican in your House District, you played a role in who was the House Speaker. And if you voted for a Republican in your state for the Senate, well, you get the idea.
And of course the President also plays a role when a bill clears both chambers. And that part could have been a little more complicated. But in this case Trump signed it. So that makes it straightforward. If you voted for Donald Trump, Republican, you played a role in helping get it enacted.
I believe that is what AngleOfRepose was alluding to when they wondered how many people on this forum voted Republican.
We could speculate all day as to whether a Democratic Congress would have prioritized it and passed it. Or would they have used the limited time they have for legislative business to focus on other things? Who knows? And who cares because we will never know?
What we have is Republicans controlling all three levers required to enact legislation; and they chose to make it the law of the land.
That is the reality of the situation. And that concludes today's Civics lesson. You are now free to go back to mongering.
If you are referring to FOSTA, I wouldn't be too quick to point my finger at those who voted Republican in the last election as being responsible for its passage. In the House, 14 Republicans opposed passage of the act, only 11 Democrats did. In the Senate, there were only two Senators who opposed passage--one Republican, one Democrat. As is clear, support for its enactment was overwhelming and bipartisan.
AllTheTime
06-04-18, 21:47
Not trying to be argumentative, but I just want to share a little different perspective on the legislative process. (This won't be as entertaining as Schoolhouse Rock, but try to bear with me).
First, Jf Faster's totals of who opposed passage of FOSTA may be correct. I have not bothered to look it up because it's really not important when considering the OP's viewpoint. Other than to say that yes, both sides overwhelmingly voted for the measure. There certainly were not enough against the bill to filibuster in the Senate.
However, what is most important based on how things actually work up on The Hill is: 1) who is the House Speaker?; 2) who is the Senate Majoirity Leader?; and 3) who is the President?
About 99.9999% of the time, the leader of the majority party in the House and Senate decide what legislation they are going to move through their chamber.
When FOSTA was passed, Republicans controlled both the House and Senate. So, in reality the Rs in Congress decided to put it on the calendar and move it forward by scheduling a vote on it. (And Rs control the Rules Committees).
Therefore, if you voted for a Republican in your House District, you played a role in who was the House Speaker. And if you voted for a Republican in your state for the Senate, well, you get the idea.
And of course the President also plays a role when a bill clears both chambers. And that part could have been a little more complicated. But in this case Trump signed it. So that makes it straightforward. If you voted for Donald Trump, Republican, you played a role in helping get it enacted.
I believe that is what AngleOfRepose was alluding to when they wondered how many people on this forum voted Republican.
We could speculate all day as to whether a Democratic Congress would have prioritized it and passed it. Or would they have used the limited time they have for legislative business to focus on other things? Who knows? And who cares because we will never know?
What we have is Republicans controlling all three levers required to enact legislation; and they chose to make it the law of the land.
That is the reality of the situation. And that concludes today's Civics lesson. You are now free to go back to mongering.As a former House staffer, this is 100 percent right. Look, there are obviously a variety of reasons to vote for or against someone, but the party that is the driving push on everything from FOSTA to crackdowns on strip clues is GOP. Yes, Dems do it to, but it's not nearly as big thing. Why? One more civics reality -- Congress is elected and seeks to follow wishes of campaign contributors. And 99 percent of the Focus on the Family, 700 club, etc. Money.
Goes only to one party. Bottom line -- that stuff about Republicans wanting GOV out of our lives is nonsense -- they want government as much as the most liberal: they just want it for different things.
AngleOfRepose
06-05-18, 08:09
My word, who'd a-thunk a horndog could be so thoughtful, informed, measured, and articulate? Chapeau, sir, chapeau.
Not trying to be argumentative, but I just want to share a little different perspective on the legislative process. (This won't be as entertaining as Schoolhouse Rock, but try to bear with me).
First, Jf Faster's totals of who opposed passage of FOSTA may be correct. I have not bothered to look it up because it's really not important when considering the OP's viewpoint. Other than to say that yes, both sides overwhelmingly voted for the measure. There certainly were not enough against the bill to filibuster in the Senate.
However, what is most important based on how things actually work up on The Hill is: 1) who is the House Speaker?; 2) who is the Senate Majoirity Leader?; and 3) who is the President?
About 99.9999% of the time, the leader of the majority party in the House and Senate decide what legislation they are going to move through their chamber.
When FOSTA was passed, Republicans controlled both the House and Senate. So, in reality the Rs in Congress decided to put it on the calendar and move it forward by scheduling a vote on it. (And Rs control the Rules Committees).
Therefore, if you voted for a Republican in your House District, you played a role in who was the House Speaker. And if you voted for a Republican in your state for the Senate, well, you get the idea.
And of course the President also plays a role when a bill clears both chambers. And that part could have been a little more complicated. But in this case Trump signed it. So that makes it straightforward. If you voted for Donald Trump, Republican, you played a role in helping get it enacted.
I believe that is what AngleOfRepose was alluding to when they wondered how many people on this forum voted Republican.
We could speculate all day as to whether a Democratic Congress would have prioritized it and passed it. Or would they have used the limited time they have for legislative business to focus on other things? Who knows? And who cares because we will never know?
What we have is Republicans controlling all three levers required to enact legislation; and they chose to make it the law of the land.
That is the reality of the situation. And that concludes today's Civics lesson. You are now free to go back to mongering.
SuperJimmyC
06-05-18, 09:38
True!!
IMHO, the dems would have never brought this legislation up. They only went along with it because they are afraid of GOPers painting them with the brush of not caring about human prostitution and human trafficking.
As a former House staffer, this is 100 percent right. Look, there are obviously a variety of reasons to vote for or against someone, but the party that is the driving push on everything from FOSTA to crackdowns on strip clues is GOP. Yes, Dems do it to, but it's not nearly as big thing. Why? One more civics reality -- Congress is elected and seeks to follow wishes of campaign contributors. And 99 percent of the Focus on the Family, 700 club, etc. Money.
Goes only to one party. Bottom line -- that stuff about Republicans wanting GOV out of our lives is nonsense -- they want government as much as the most liberal: they just want it for different things.
But how do you explain this: When George W. Bush was president (2000-2008), a Republican, sexual establishments were everywhere, and in excellent quality. No one was shutting them down. The presence of AMPs (and not only Asian but also Euro and Black) was an assured thing in every city. Even a sleepy Baltimore suburb like Owings Mills had no less than 5 MPs, all excellent-quality with cute women. The GOP agenda never interfered with the commercial scene. The Iraq war was raging, the economy was booming, it was a Republican in the White House, and AMPs were abundant everywhere you looked.
The scene actually deterioriated during the Obama years, around 2010-2013. That's when things really died down, and cops started enforcing anti-prostitution laws.
Keep in mind that the Dems (liberals) are responsible for introducing #MeToo, a pernicious new Puritan movement, that seeks to wipe out sex or sexual context from all daily life. Somehow radical leftist feminists are now succeeding in curbing men's sexual options. Men are no longer able to flirt with women at work; if you've been following the news there will soon be no cheerleaders or beauty pageants due to 'objectification of women,' and pretty soon strip clubs and porn may get banned or tightened, as well. Our life is about to change dramatically as the sexual behaviors that we took for granted will now be labelled harassment or worse. But this won't be done by conservative Republicans, it will be done by. Liberal Democrats. The liberal Democrats are now the new Puritans who want to purge all sexual activity. Every time I watch the news, or read the paper, it's about #MeToo, harassment lawsuits, objectification of women, etc. Pretty soon you'll have to sign a written contract before you even so much as touch a woman on the arm. Note that the people who brought us this devastating new trend are liberals / Dems.
How do you guys fit these mental gymnastics in your head. All three branches are controlled by one party. One and only one party. They passed a law. See that pronoun there THEY (the party in power) passed a law. You can talk all you want about how many of them voted against if you want to avoid talking about how many of them voted for it but THEY passed this law. You are quick to claim tax cuts because you like them but anything you don't like is somebody else's fault. Though to be honest libertards do the same thing that republiturds do.
If the polite fiction is that the USA is a representative democracy, then if not the people who voted them in who is responsible? I avoid liberal feminists as much as the next monger but who is responsible for fosta / sesta is all the politicos that rely on the lunatic religious fringe (they same people who called Donald J Trump the "righteous" candidate) for re-election. If you're a Republican than your guys did this end of story. It's going to be interesting if the supreme court majority that your guys forced on the nation by refusing to consider any nominated by the previous administration upholds the first Ex Post Facto law the US has ever had and which are specifically prohibited in the constitution.
I guess if that happens you guys will find a way to blame that on Nancy Pelosi as well. What I find funny is the argument where you guys think one of these groups of assholes represent your interests in any way. They don't. It's not a representative democracy, it's an oligarchy. Neither side of the aisle gives a fuck about you and they use issues like this to keep you guys fighting with each other while they literally steal your rights away in front of your eyes.
If you are referring to FOSTA, I wouldn't be too quick to point my finger at those who voted Republican in the last election as being responsible for its passage. In the House, 14 Republicans opposed passage of the act, only 11 Democrats did. In the Senate, there were only two Senators who opposed passage--one Republican, one Democrat. As is clear, support for its enactment was overwhelming and bipartisan.
But how do you explain this: When George W. Bush was president (2000-2008), a Republican, sexual establishments were everywhere, and in excellent quality. No one was shutting them down. The presence of AMPs (and not only Asian but also Euro and Black) was an assured thing in every city. Even a sleepy Baltimore suburb like Owings Mills had no less than 5 MPs, all excellent-quality with cute women. The GOP agenda never interfered with the commercial scene. The Iraq war was raging, the economy was booming, it was a Republican in the White House, and AMPs were abundant everywhere you looked.
The scene actually deterioriated during the Obama years, around 2010-2013. That's when things really died down, and cops started enforcing anti-prostitution laws.
Keep in mind that the Dems (liberals) are responsible for introducing #MeToo, a pernicious new Puritan movement, that seeks to wipe out sex or sexual context from all daily life. Somehow radical leftist feminists are now succeeding in curbing men's sexual options. Men are no longer able to flirt with women at work; if you've been following the news there will soon be no cheerleaders or beauty pageants due to 'objectification of women,' and pretty soon strip clubs and porn may get banned or tightened, as well. Our life is about to change dramatically as the sexual behaviors that we took for granted will now be labelled harassment or worse. But this won't be done by conservative Republicans, it will be done by. Liberal Democrats. The liberal Democrats are now the new Puritans who want to purge all sexual activity. Every time I watch the news, or read the paper, it's about #MeToo, harassment lawsuits, objectification of women, etc. Pretty soon you'll have to sign a written contract before you even so much as touch a woman on the arm. Note that the people who brought us this devastating new trend are liberals / Dems.
Rebrobate218
06-06-18, 09:18
But how do you explain this: When George W. Bush was president (2000-2008), a Republican, sexual establishments were everywhere, and in excellent quality. No one was shutting them down. The presence of AMPs (and not only Asian but also Euro and Black) was an assured thing in every city. Even a sleepy Baltimore suburb like Owings Mills had no less than 5 MPs, all excellent-quality with cute women. The GOP agenda never interfered with the commercial scene. The Iraq war was raging, the economy was booming, it was a Republican in the White House, and AMPs were abundant everywhere you looked.
The scene actually deterioriated during the Obama years, around 2010-2013. That's when things really died down, and cops started enforcing anti-prostitution laws.
Keep in mind that the Dems (liberals) are responsible for introducing #MeToo, a pernicious new Puritan movement, that seeks to wipe out sex or sexual context from all daily life. Somehow radical leftist feminists are now succeeding in curbing men's sexual options. Men are no longer able to flirt with women at work; if you've been following the news there will soon be no cheerleaders or beauty pageants due to 'objectification of women,' and pretty soon strip clubs and porn may get banned or tightened, as well. Our life is about to change dramatically as the sexual behaviors that we took for granted will now be labelled harassment or worse. But this won't be done by conservative Republicans, it will be done by. Liberal Democrats. The liberal Democrats are now the new Puritans who want to purge all sexual activity. Every time I watch the news, or read the paper, it's about #MeToo, harassment lawsuits, objectification of women, etc. Pretty soon you'll have to sign a written contract before you even so much as touch a woman on the arm. Note that the people who brought us this devastating new trend are liberals / Dems.UKW, Democrats are not Liberals. Some have very liberal (progressive) leaning and some are very conservative. Both Republicans and Democrats sponsored and voted for this horrible law, and it was the smart move. If you vote against it you will have to deal with it in November. You voted against a law that was aimed at helping sex trafficking victims. Only Rand Paul could vote against it on Libertarian principals. This was one of the few times he was right about something. Democratic have never been pro-prostitution but are not so vehemently opposed to it in all forms. It was Republicans who use this as smoke screen to keep the masses from seeing what their agenda really is. The lying anti-sex trafficking activist got no where during the Clinton Administration but the Bush Administration took them in with open arms and implemented many of their policies. To get foreign aid for HIV prevention you have to have policies against prostitution and you could not support abortion. Republican embrace this Democrats don't. What they did with Sesta / Fosta was to conflate all prostitution with under aged forced prostitution on a federal level. This law may be over turned in the courts because on it's surface it seems to be clearly unconstitutional but that will take time.
I never understood how loyalty to a political party could cause people to vote against their own economic interest. If you are not a multi millionaire and you are a Republican then you are an idiot. The Republican party has been hostile to the New Deal since Roosevelt got it passed. It was amazing to me to see all of the rural Republican die hards who hated Obama Care but loved the ACA get up in arms when the Repubs got control of all branches of government and aimed to scrap it. I guess its tribalism. Also, the Democrats did not start the #Me Too movement. That too is a lie.
Firestorm31
06-11-18, 21:44
Interesting thread about the sosta / festa controversy.
It sucks it passed the way it did. I suspsect it was just a way to make them look good.
How do you guys fit these mental gymnastics in your head. All three branches are controlled by one party. One and only one party. They passed a law. See that pronoun there THEY (the party in power) passed a law. You can talk all you want about how many of them voted against if you want to avoid talking about how many of them voted for it but THEY passed this law. You are quick to claim tax cuts because you like them but anything you don't like is somebody else's fault. Though to be honest libertards do the same thing that republiturds do.
If the polite fiction is that the USA is a representative democracy, then if not the people who voted them in who is responsible? I avoid liberal feminists as much as the next monger but who is responsible for fosta / sesta is all the politicos that rely on the lunatic religious fringe (they same people who called Donald J Trump the "righteous" candidate) for re-election. If you're a Republican than your guys did this end of story. It's going to be interesting if the supreme court majority that your guys forced on the nation by refusing to consider any nominated by the previous administration upholds the first Ex Post Facto law the US has ever had and which are specifically prohibited in the constitution.
I guess if that happens you guys will find a way to blame that on Nancy Pelosi as well. What I find funny is the argument where you guys think one of these groups of assholes represent your interests in any way. They don't. It's not a representative democracy, it's an oligarchy. Neither side of the aisle gives a fuck about you and they use issues like this to keep you guys fighting with each other while they literally steal your rights away in front of your eyes.Divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book except for possibly "Tricks".
Unite.
Stay stong.
It's US vs. Them!
Enjoy the show.
I have to agree with Admin 2's comments about what is going on here. The united States, while being touted as the most free country, the best place to live, etc. , is not what it seems. Its like having 150 people standing on a field, (countries), all being beaten with bats, and the one who got a few less whacks with a bat claiming to be the least hurt, and proud of it. The USA is going to hell fast, you just have to be able to see the forest thru the trees and be willing to look for it. This country hasn't been free since the war of secession (commonly known as the civil war), in fact, freedom started to go down the tubes at the time of the Whiskey Rebellion, when George Washington used federal troops in Western Penn. to impose a tax on whiskey being made in that area by Scottish farmers who were making moonshine and not paying taxes on it. It is now at the point that no one in the USA actually owns property in the sense that ownership implies, except for churches, government bodies and government controlled institutions. If you don't agree, just try not paying property taxes and see what happens to "your property."
The government is run by people who run for office with campaigns which are paid for by their contributors, the campaigns brainwash the people, and the pols do the bidding of those who line their pockets. Look at the recent president Obama, check out his worth now and before he was elected president. Believe me, he doesn't have what he has thru his abilities as a lawyer. They become a tool of the military industrial complex and do the bidding of their masters. All this to-do over Trump? He was already wealthy and might, just might not have masters to report to, so he's getting smeared. In the end, though, it doesn't matter. The politically correct bullshit will continue. The government will manufacture more and more reasons to shrink freedom.
This is a lesson learned by looking at past governments attempts to repress the people's freedoms, and comparing them to the old story about the frog in the pot of water. The government slowly nibbles away freedom in the long run, tightening the screws as the people get used to it. Tends to prevent revolutions. Like slowly increasing the fire under the pot as the frog gets used to the heat and slowly cooks to death, instead of dropping the frog into boiling water, where he will struggle mightily to escape.
Cheech
MongerSeeker
12-25-18, 09:48
I was down in Tijuana last week and I saw this girl Olivia. Olivia told me that she was Brittany's step sister and Brittany had been arrested was going to be deported to the US since she has outstanding warrants. Olivia also told me that Brittany wore a wig since had cancer and was receiving treatment. Olivia tried blaming Brittany's customers for her drug habit. I have been with Brittany quite often over the years and don't feel guilty about her habit. In my mind it is ultimately the girls choice how she spends her money. Drug users support their habit from work or other ways so this is also why I don't feel guilty. Now I feel empathy that they do have a drug habit and try to give some words encouragement to stop or at least reduce their consumption. In the end I ultimately believe that the deportation is probably best for her and hope comes to the realization that she needs to get off the dope is able to get the help she needs.
UKW, Democrats are not Liberals. Some have very liberal (progressive) leaning and some are very conservative. Both Republicans and Democrats sponsored and voted for this horrible law, and it was the smart move. If you vote against it you will have to deal with it in November. You voted against a law that was aimed at helping sex trafficking victims. Only Rand Paul could vote against it on Libertarian principals. This was one of the few times he was right about something. Democratic have never been pro-prostitution but are not so vehemently opposed to it in all forms. It was Republicans who use this as smoke screen to keep the masses from seeing what their agenda really is. The lying anti-sex trafficking activist got no where during the Clinton Administration but the Bush Administration took them in with open arms and implemented many of their policies. To get foreign aid for HIV prevention you have to have policies against prostitution and you could not support abortion. Republican embrace this Democrats don't. What they did with Sesta / Fosta was to conflate all prostitution with under aged forced prostitution on a federal level. This law may be over turned in the courts because on it's surface it seems to be clearly unconstitutional but that will take time.
I never understood how loyalty to a political party could cause people to vote against their own economic interest. If you are not a multi millionaire and you are a Republican then you are an idiot. The Republican party has been hostile to the New Deal since Roosevelt got it passed. It was amazing to me to see all of the rural Republican die hards who hated Obama Care but loved the ACA get up in arms when the Repubs got control of all branches of government and aimed to scrap it. I guess its tribalism. Also, the Democrats did not start the #Me Too movement. That too is a lie."I never understood how loyalty to a political party could cause people to vote against their own economic interest. If you are not a multi millionaire and you are a Republican then you are an idiot".
Aint that the fucking truth!
WondererDude62
04-24-21, 18:22
Morally prostitution is a sin. That being said, prostitution has been committed by many people in the Bible. I don't believe they will ever make prostitution legal. It's a good thing, because I would probably spend more than I should on them.
I should have made reference to my post #21285 in the escort reports. But things went south as soon as I opened the door.Got it. Thanks for the review.
Ausse Salt
07-27-21, 23:40
Morally prostitution is a sin. That being said, prostitution has been committed by many people in the Bible. I don't believe they will ever make prostitution legal. It's a good thing, because I would probably spend more than I should on them.Hee Hee! Don't know how much "moralitys" there is with prostitutions and what-not, but I surely agree that prostitutions do go all the way back to Biblical times. That friend o' Jesus, a lovvy named Mary Magdelin was maybe the very first worker I ever read about in the Bible books. Though she surely got religion and retired from the hobby once she met Jesus and what-not.
Not quite sure if the hobby was legal way back in those days, since I wasn't around back then.
# Salty.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.4 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.