The Morality of Prostitution

[Adindas]

People have different views on spending money. Some people went to upscale, fine restaurants to look for gourmet type food, wine, champagne, etc. Some are particularity looking for exotic food, meat such the one from tiger, crocodile, elephant, etc.

Similarly, many people on this forum want to spend money on tasting various types of exotic meat (e. G. Pu*why).

Here's a little more of my perspective on the morality of prostitution, to add to what I said before.

There are two main moral problems: 1) bringing unwanted risk of disease to unsuspecting partners and to oneself; and 2) spending too much money.

[Snake27]

Here's a little more of my perspective on the morality of prostitution, to add to what I said before.

There are two main moral problems: 1) bringing unwanted risk of disease to unsuspecting partners and to oneself; and 2) spending too much money.

The first is not really a problem of prostitution per se, but generally a problem of promsicuity and / or cheating. If you are single, then you are taking a risk with our own health plus that of any future partner. I don't think this is a sufficient moral problem for people outside your family to be concerned with, because any future partner should assume the responsibility for knowing you well enough to judge your health. If you are married it is more of a problem because it's unfair to bring such risk to your spouse. As we all know, there are ways to mitigate the risks, but the risks are still significant. Cheating can also raise emotional and trust problems. Cheating with a prostitute is not nearly as bad, in my view, as cheating with a lover because there is no emotional investment with a prostitute, whereas one is more likely to develop divided loyalties with a secret lover.

The second issue (money) is akin to gambling. This can be mitigated with self-control and budgeting, but it's not easy for some guys.

I don't personally see those issues as sufficient to make prostitution illegal, but I can see good reasons to keep prostitution away from people who would be offended. For that reason I support making street prostitution illegal (misdemeanor) but would allow brothels in certain zones, as well as internet ads. But I'm probably preaching to the choir here.

I think that a lot of definitions about what is "right" and "wrong" (which is morality) come from a long history (thousands of years) of social experiment where we have found out what best resolves the conflict of desires among people. These moral teachings find their way into religious teachings as a way of wrapping them in easily digestible precepts. Since "God said thou shalt not", it must be right. So people accept it. I've never accepted religion because I see no proof that the ideas are true. But the majority of people accept it, so it's an effective way to spread moral teachings. However, a lot of morality is common sense, just knowing what is the best way to interact with society.

Well, that's about sums it up.

[Snake27]

Snake that's a really well thought out argument but I'm going to punch two major holes in it.

1) Sex is not just useful for procreation, nor is it the primary benefit. Sex is dealing with incredibly powerful energies which can be harnessed for almost anything by people who know how. If you don't believe me look up "sex magic" or "sex magic" on google, and TRY some of the stuff. It WORKS. (But be careful!)

2) If what you were saying is true, then women would be NATURALLY inclined to be monogamous and insisting on commitment from a man. The fact is, the desire to make a man commit on a woman's part is due 100% tu CULTURAL and SOCIAL pressure. The proof of this is when you get a woman drooling over a man just because he's so physically attractive to her, she will offer herself to him under ANY circumstances, without demands and without commitments. The problem is that modern cultures are designed to repress NATURAL human sexuality, that and the fact that most men are not attractive to the female of the species, and have to resort to cultural pressure and / or offering women material benefits for having a relationship with them. Once again, this is provable in any environment just by experimenting.

I agree with you somewhat, and appreciate the thoughtful reply. I still claim that life is a copying operation and sex is the favored mechanism. What is the "sex magic" of the flatworm, the amoeba, or the common cockroach? I believe the vast majority (99+ %?) of species use sex to procreate, and we normally don't ascribe magic to their actions. Leave it to humans to wrap a simple idea with mumbo jumbo (that was not meant as a put-down, but rather a general observation).

I think that cultural and social pressure arises in an arbitrary way but has to be consistent with instinct. You're right, a lot of women drool over attractive men; I was only arguing that there was a tendency for them to be, on the average, more circumspect because of the asymmetry in energy required. But it's just an idea to consider, and I should have admitted that it was not entirely original, though I have embellished it. And it's just another perspective on the problem of morality, which I didn't see considered here yet.

[Adindas]

For some people DATY (eating pussies) is already part of their diets.)

For instances, you have probably have come across serial of porn movies such as "Pussy Man","Pierre woodman"

Exotic eating habbits and expensive diets though.

Reading from various postings in this forum it seems that they are quite a few people also belongs to this category, me included.)

[Bango Cheito]

Snake that's a really well thought out argument but I'm going to punch two major holes in it.

1) Sex is not just useful for procreation, nor is it the primary benefit. Sex is dealing with incredibly powerful energies which can be harnessed for almost anything by people who know how. If you don't believe me look up "sex magic" or "sex magic" on google, and TRY some of the stuff. It WORKS. (But be careful!)

2) If what you were saying is true, then women would be NATURALLY inclined to be monogamous and insisting on commitment from a man. The fact is, the desire to make a man commit on a woman's part is due 100% tu CULTURAL and SOCIAL pressure. The proof of this is when you get a woman drooling over a man just because he's so physically attractive to her, she will offer herself to him under ANY circumstances, without demands and without commitments. The problem is that modern cultures are designed to repress NATURAL human sexuality, that and the fact that most men are not attractive to the female of the species, and have to resort to cultural pressure and / or offering women material benefits for having a relationship with them. Once again, this is provable in any environment just by experimenting.

[Bango Cheito]

If you don't think the info you got on the internet is credible, why would you think the information you would get here would be credible? This is the internet. You could stick with Costa Rica. The right to sell one's body is incorporated into the constitution there. Prostitution is illegal in Thailand but that is just a joke, for example. In The Netherlands, it's legal in certain areas under certain conditions. In many Latin countries it is legal in "zonas de tolerancia" or the "zona rosa." So the question is more complicated than legal vs. Illegal.

Here in Colombia it's also a constitutional right.

[Chocha Monger]

Here's my theory about the morality of prostitution. I may have said some of this before (can't remember, too lazy to look it up).

Life is a copying operation. It started some 4 billion years ago, probably as some primitive molecules (either DNA or more likely their precursors) copying themselves. Fast forward 4B years and we have this elaborate copying operation, layered in a bewildering complexity. The complexity gives the illusion of purpose and even "soul", but the complexity only arose (via evolution) because it led to a more efficient and robust copying operation, always evolving towards a form that can better withstand the ravages of the environment. There are other ways to harnass energy and copy molecules. For example the growing of crystalline structures. But "life" is one of the solutions to the copying problem, the key point being that it involves information (DNA) , which is the basis of evolution. The main point here is that life is basically simple, though this simplicity is obscured by an emergent complexity. Realizing that it's simple motivates us to look for simple patterns.

Let's try to find a simple reason for why sex exists. Evidentally, sexual reproduction (in contrast to asexual) confers some kind of advantage. I don't think it's fully agreed upon in scientific circles, but most likely the advantage of sex is that, over the long haul (millions of years) , it leads to a more robust population, because it mixes traits (genes) and generates a diversity, which makes living systems more likely to survive environmental change; some portion of the diverse population survives, owing to it being different.

Let's consider men and women. In what way are they different? Well, the copying operation requires energy, and that energy is captured from the environment. Women are different in that they require a much larger investment in energy to reproduce. There is a 9 month incubation of a fetus in a woman's body, plus the (cultural) behavior that women usually do the majority of care-giving to children. I think this is true for many larger mammals, though it's not universally true in life. Theoretically, men may require a comparitively tiny amount of energy, like a "hit-and-run" sexual act. Now, since women require a large investment in energy, they are usually more circumspect in their sexual behavior. Simply put, more is at stake with their choices. Expressed through social morality, this means they may demand more commitment from men. If a man commits to a woman for the length of time it takes to raise a child to adult, then the man has invested a similar amount of energy in the process, and it is a more fair outcome. The "cost" is energy, and the man and woman pay the same cost if they are similarly commited. However, at the same time, the man is instinctively motivated to "hit-and-run", but (except in rare cases) he usually cannot accomplish this. The rare cases would be "ladies man", who are a somewhat rare phenomena, I think. (Sadly, a high degree of intelligence is not a basis for being a ladies man, a fact which should curb the arrogance of highly intellingent men!)

This is the basis of prostitution: women engaged in prosititution exploit the asymmetry between men and women in the energy required to reproduce.

Morality is the resolution of the conflict of desires. Women tend to desire the equal investment of men in their copying operation. At the same time, men should realize the inherent waste of resources (money) in prostitution, because engaging in it leads to nothing of lasting value, only a fleeting and meaningless pleasure. And if you are trying to reproduce with prostitutes (not using condoms) there is the obvious problem of parasites, some of them fatal. When placed in the context of the larger purpose of life, prostitution is a waste of time. However, as one who has wasted my time plenty enough, I am not passing judgement on anyone. I am only passing along my ideas.

Well, based on your theory a monger could gain value for his investment by having his girls tested for disease and then barebacking them until they're knocked up. He could repeat this numerous times in various countries achieving an astounding degree of genetic diversity in his offspring. Since beauty (symmetry) is considered one of the main indicators of genetic fitness, the monger could improve his gene pool for pennies on the dollar by purchasing sexual access to women of a level of beauty otherwise impossible for him access otherwise. A fat elderly unattractive monger with a meager pension can pass himself off as 'rich' in impoverished Third World nations and impregnate young genetically superior women. In his home country women see this behavior as cheating the genetic status quo and seek measures to curtail sex travel. For example, in America it is an unwritten but widely accepted rule that only rich beautiful people fuck other rich beautiful people.

[Snake27]

Here's my theory about the morality of prostitution. I may have said some of this before (can't remember, too lazy to look it up).

Life is a copying operation. It started some 4 billion years ago, probably as some primitive molecules (either DNA or more likely their precursors) copying themselves. Fast forward 4B years and we have this elaborate copying operation, layered in a bewildering complexity. The complexity gives the illusion of purpose and even "soul", but the complexity only arose (via evolution) because it led to a more efficient and robust copying operation, always evolving towards a form that can better withstand the ravages of the environment. There are other ways to harnass energy and copy molecules. For example the growing of crystalline structures. But "life" is one of the solutions to the copying problem, the key point being that it involves information (DNA) , which is the basis of evolution. The main point here is that life is basically simple, though this simplicity is obscured by an emergent complexity. Realizing that it's simple motivates us to look for simple patterns.

Let's try to find a simple reason for why sex exists. Evidentally, sexual reproduction (in contrast to asexual) confers some kind of advantage. I don't think it's fully agreed upon in scientific circles, but most likely the advantage of sex is that, over the long haul (millions of years) , it leads to a more robust population, because it mixes traits (genes) and generates a diversity, which makes living systems more likely to survive environmental change; some portion of the diverse population survives, owing to it being different.

Let's consider men and women. In what way are they different? Well, the copying operation requires energy, and that energy is captured from the environment. Women are different in that they require a much larger investment in energy to reproduce. There is a 9 month incubation of a fetus in a woman's body, plus the (cultural) behavior that women usually do the majority of care-giving to children. I think this is true for many larger mammals, though it's not universally true in life. Theoretically, men may require a comparitively tiny amount of energy, like a "hit-and-run" sexual act. Now, since women require a large investment in energy, they are usually more circumspect in their sexual behavior. Simply put, more is at stake with their choices. Expressed through social morality, this means they may demand more commitment from men. If a man commits to a woman for the length of time it takes to raise a child to adult, then the man has invested a similar amount of energy in the process, and it is a more fair outcome. The "cost" is energy, and the man and woman pay the same cost if they are similarly commited. However, at the same time, the man is instinctively motivated to "hit-and-run", but (except in rare cases) he usually cannot accomplish this. The rare cases would be "ladies man", who are a somewhat rare phenomena, I think. (Sadly, a high degree of intelligence is not a basis for being a ladies man, a fact which should curb the arrogance of highly intellingent men!)

This is the basis of prostitution: women engaged in prosititution exploit the asymmetry between men and women in the energy required to reproduce.

Morality is the resolution of the conflict of desires. Women tend to desire the equal investment of men in their copying operation. At the same time, men should realize the inherent waste of resources (money) in prostitution, because engaging in it leads to nothing of lasting value, only a fleeting and meaningless pleasure. And if you are trying to reproduce with prostitutes (not using condoms) there is the obvious problem of parasites, some of them fatal. When placed in the context of the larger purpose of life, prostitution is a waste of time. However, as one who has wasted my time plenty enough, I am not passing judgement on anyone. I am only passing along my ideas.

[Dickhead]

If you don't think the info you got on the internet is credible, why would you think the information you would get here would be credible? This is the internet. You could stick with Costa Rica. The right to sell one's body is incorporated into the constitution there. Prostitution is illegal in Thailand but that is just a joke, for example. In The Netherlands, it's legal in certain areas under certain conditions. In many Latin countries it is legal in "zonas de tolerancia" or the "zona rosa." So the question is more complicated than legal vs. Illegal.

[Omeprazol]

Hello,

Don't know if this is the right forum to post my question in but I do it anyway. I am a Newbie, and have set up some rules for myself, one is never to P4P in a country where it is illegal. However, I find it hard to obtain the correct information regarding this issue for many countries. And for example, in the Phillies, which seem to be on the Top 5 P4P list, it is illegal. Therefore, I would like to adress anyone who knows or knows where I can find information regarding this topic. Would be very grateful for replies. And BTW, I have tried to search the net but I don't know if the information I have gathered is credible.

Take care,

Omeprazol

[Chocha Monger]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newswee...stitution.html

[Mr Enternational]

This is spot on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fucpr...eature=related

[Dickhead]

I dunno but it reminds me of when I saw Bill Cosby in Reno. He was talking about how the Chippendale Dancers had been there the night before. He asked all the ladies in the audience who had seen them to raise their hands. A bunch did. He then said, "You know those guys are all queer, right?" So then a bunch of the women were like "No, no, no." He paused for effect, took the cigar out of his mouth, and said, "Well, the one I fucked was."

[Suave Monger]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43582811...me_and_courts/

I was skeptical of the 100, 000 to 300, 000 as soon as I read that.

However, when a conversation such as this comes up, how do you challenge a bull*it statistic like this without making people wonder if you are a monger yourself. I tend to just not say much when anything touching on prostitution (like say, Thailand and Hangovr II) come up.

[Dickhead]

Well, work is what set me free. That and not having kids. I did not retire at 40 but I quit for a year or so to examine the overall situation. I don't know what this Neil did for a living but I got progressively more education and had a series of more lucrative and physically easier careers. A couple of things helped me achieve financial independence: I started working early, I never lived beyond my means, and I selectively took opportunities to make extra money. Hence I will not be drooling my gruel in a wheelchair with a pile of sticks or whatever. But the work ethic did serve me well, for a while. Really, education set me free but work got to me to where I could get the education. Probably I could have accomplished the same thing by being a good looking lazy mother fucker but, not being that good looking, I had to take the longer and harder road.