The Morality of Prostitution

[wolfcallsd]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dickhead
Prostitution is not rocket science, and I am thankful for that. Why do you want to get into a prostitute's head? Why do you want to get into all the emotional side trips? Isn't that what sucks about having a girlfriend? Trying to figure out what she means and wants all the fucking time?

Thank You... enough said

[David]

VT,

It's not that I've been gone, just that I've had nothing to say.


All (esp. Joe Zop),

In regards to prostitution/sexual-activity among the young (however you define that). I'm of two minds. In one sense we (as adults) are (in my mind) morally obligated to look out for their welfare, acknowledge that they might not be qualified to make the decision for themselves.

At the same time, however, it is dangerously easy to make decisions for the young (who often are qualified to make the decision for themselves). *Shrugs*. I just find it a pity that, in our society, the people with the least rights are the young (followed by prisoners).

*Shrugs*,
David

P.S. Yes, there is a large difference in power (which is quite important) but I think that this difference should be delt with much like any other. The "real" difference seems to be more one of information/understanding ... and I'm just not sure how much the rights of a teenager should be in collective adult hands.

[Anonymouse]

Joe-Z two items no. 1) Jackson has carried over the question of appropriate age. Its under editorials and 2) It appears that you believe no young girls willing enter into prostitution. I picked up a young lady in Spokane the other week. tThe way I did this was to quickly pull into a parking space near where she was walking. I really didn't expect her to be a SW however she came over got in the car and went through the standad "cop" routine. To make a long story short after taking her to my room and poping a nut she proudly annouces that she's only 15. So is this seduction on my part or is she just a budding entrepeneur. And yes I know that several laws were broken oh well.

[Joe Zop]

So let's see, Terry, you want it both ways, right? You want all of the opportunity and none of the responsibility in terms of dealing with young teens. Easy to see that you approach things simply from the perspective of teens as potential sexual partners for yourself as opposed to individuals in the process of becoming adults. I don't detect one iota of "unselfish love" in your posts -- quite the opposite, in fact -- it's abrogation of responsibility, and an inability to reconcile your needs and wants with potential damage to others.

Your characterization and distortion of my train of thought is simply idiotic, and I expected better from someone such as you based on the thoughtfulness and clarity of your past postings, but I've obviously pushed a hot button here for you. My power statement was clearly aimed specifically at this particular scenario of sexual relationships, and I've also just stated how much I agree with the reasoning from Nussbaum, whose theories deal with choices made based on practical needs. I've repeatedly stated my belief that education in personal relationships is pitiful and needs improvement, and that people (kids included) need to have the full spectrum available to them in order to make choices.

There are differences in understanding and the ability to make choices between children and adults (something you very pointedly and repeatedly choose not to address or respond to, other than to point out that there exceptions and some mature more quickly so the rules should be changed) and teens are in that nether area between to two camps, some falling in one camp, some in another, most in both at the same time. If you want to rail at me because you can't/won't make a distinction between adults and children, fine, but don't put words in my mouth. I've made quite clear repeatedly I've no absolutely problem with adults having relationships with anyone they choose -- anyone of legal age/ age of consent are fair game for each other.

If I had kids, which I don't, I'd say the gods save them from counter-priests such as yourself, who have only their own interests and demons at heart, and not those of my kids, and who make moral arguments that first and foremost serve their own purposes. Let's see -- your ability to convince a teenager they should have sex with you must mean that teen is obviously mature enough to choose and understand the consequences of that decision. And it's ok because the kind of "love" you want to share you define as "selfless"? Please. Who's the wolf here?

Regardless, all this really belongs in a "Sex with Young Girls" section, though I note that Jackson didn't carry that thread over. I'm happy to ask him to add it again, and am more than willing to continue discussing things there ad nauseum, but we should get back to the appropriate topic for this thread, which is prostitution.

[The Virgin Terr]

yes joe, if u have any kids u must leave them in the woods and let the wolves raise them, the same way we throw young people to the wolves when we fail to teach them about sex and relationships. every generation has to reinvent the wheel anew. each generation has to make the same exact mistakes the previous one did. this cycle can't be broken; it's written in holy writ, espoused by priests such as yourself.

[The Virgin Terr]

p.a., hope you're still reading us and will figure out a way 2 rejoin the discussion.

david, where have u been? haven't heard from u in months, and suddenly out of the blue u jump right back in. thanx for letting me know i'm not alone in some of my thoughts.

dh, (are u any relation 2 butthead of mtv fame?), i don't follow your reasoning. re. the other adult rights/responsibilities u mention, youth already enjoy the "right?" to be incarcerated by the state. i'm absolutely in favor of their right 2 earn money if they so wish and have the ability to do so. as for the "right" to be conscripted, that's not a "right" any more than incarceration is. that's something that the state, in it's infinite arrogance, deigns as it's own right over the individual. that's like asking me if i think someone should have the "right" to be a pawn of the state, which we all are unless we fight for our own rights, our own freedom. a better question to ask is do i think young people have the right to autonomy. i think everyone should have that right.

jz, your argument is too asinine 2 fully respond 2. it will have to suffice to say that if u are correct, the only sexual partners any of us should ever be able to have are those with equal amounts of experience, money, social status, attractiveness, etc., because obviously for example a rich man who dates a poor girl has more power and therefore can only have a predatory interest in her. likewise, to extend the analogy 2 different endeavors, someone who wants to learn a musical instrument can only do so by practicing with other novices and bumbling along 2gether; an expert teacher wouldn't be allowed because the imbalance of knowledge would mean they aren't equals and therefore may not have a relatiuonship. i don't even know how someone can make this argument and expect it to be swallowed whole. by the way, joe, if u have any kids u shouldn't have a relationship with them, because obviously as a much older and powerful individual any relationship u'd have could only be predatory in nature, there's no possibility for unselfish love to assert itself.

[Joe Zop]

Mmm, sounds right up my philosophical alley -- thanks, Carl.

[Carl LaFong]

Hi folks,

I've been away from the forum and on bus. trips (Amsterdam/Dusseldorf) and never did get back to you on Nussbaum's book "Sex and Social Justice".

I'll have to check myself on the section where she deals with prostitution specfically. She examines the issue without ranting histrionics....give me some time. She covers a wide range of issues including FGM (female genital mutilation) and economic empowerment...

In the meantime, here's an excerpt from Kirkus Reviews...FYI.

Cheers,
Carl LaFong

-
"I like thieves. Some of my best friends are thieves. Why, just last week we had the president of the bank over for dinner." W.C. Fields, The Barber Shop



University of Chicago law and ethics professor Nussbaum combines feminist theory and an internationalist perspective to fashion a stunning defense of justice. In a series of works (Poetic Justice, 1996; The Therapy of Desire, 1994; etc.), Nussbaum has tried to demonstrate the value of philosophy to the practical matters of everyday life; she continues that work here.

She begins with the assertion that justice consists of respecting the equal worth of all human beings, given the universal human capacities of choice and reasoning. An essential element of this respect is protecting the liberty of individuals to create lives of their own choosing. As women in general, as well as lesbian and gay men, have too often been denied such freedom, justice should be and is a central concern for feminism.

Yet Western feminism itself has too often neglected the needs and conditions of women of the non-Western world. A feminist theory of justice must concern itself both with abstract liberties, such as freedom of expression, and the practical needs of nutrition, health, education, shelter, and physical safety. Against charges that her vision of justice is a foreign idea being imposed upon other cultures, she argues that she is defending the creation of space in which free choice for all, including women, actually exists.

In another vein, against those who would impose a rigid cultural relativism, she argues that local tradition is not always an inviolable code that must remain unchallenged. Such traditions may simply reflect the most powerful voicesinvariably male. We must be suspicious of norms formed under conditions of injustice. All these themes are developed in a series of carefully crafted essays.

There are weaknesses here. Questions of sexuality are not particularly well integrated within her arguments, and as she admits, she does not deal with the question of global redistribution of wealth as an essential element of justice. Nevertheless, a brilliant book. -- Copyright ý1998, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.

[Joe Zop]

vt -- first, no offense taken, and i'm glad you feel free to speak your mind, just as i can in turn feel free to disagree when i do.

i think the whole aspect about paying for affection is why people talk so much about the gfe (girlfriend experience) and its attractiveness as opposed to simply and exclusively sexual gymnastics. sometimes this is simply an aspect of people paying not to be alone, and i'm sure most providers can tell stories of guys who paid them just to talk. not everyone wants this, of course, but many do, and providers often get criticized for being too businesslike.

i think, as well, that you miss my point regarding teenagers being sexually active. i've no problem with it whatsoever if the teen is mature enough to understand the physical and emotional consequences involved and can actually make a cogent choice. i've no problem, as well, if they're sharing their training wheels with their peers -- that's something that's happened throughout history. but you preaching that they should be active is the same as the other side preaching that they shouldn't. what they need is an ability to understand what both sides of the choice will do to them, and then make their minds up and go from there. yes, there are 14-year-olds mature enough to make this decision, but i don't know that they're the majority, and i rather doubt it in fact. whether you're sick of it or not, some teenagers are still children, whereas others are not. as you rightly note, people develop differently.

the problem with your analogy is that there are very clear developmental markers regarding the ability to reason, understand the consequences of your actions, and gain critical distance, and many of those markers occur during the teen years, whereas they don't in the 20s, 40s or later. we make distinctions about the ability to fully comprehend right from wrong in the courts and thesliding scale of "tried as an adult" is in place precisely because of those differences. while your historical basis regarding sex and marriage at an earlier ages may be true, there were also tons more women who died in childbirth, ended up as virtual slaves, etc.

and the point isn't whether or not you find teenage girls hot or not but what you do about that fact. and if you go after someone in their early teens the odds are that you comprehend the choices and consequences far more than they, so you have power over them and that makes you a predator. which is, of course, off topic in this thread in any event, as is this general discussion.

and dickhead, i think you're right about overanalyzing, but that's because men are involved, and we all know that if you're not doing it you tend to think or talk about doing it :-) one key difference in the equation here is that as opposed to a girfriend, figuring out what someone means or wants is something done on a highly short-term basis, as the meter is running. people pay for weirder things than emotional yoga.

[David]

Virgin terr,
(Post 11 -- 06-19-02 21:59)

"who of u would pay for affection? i mean, would u pay someone u like and are attracted 2 for a session of cuddling along with conversation, or while watching a show 2gether, or just to relax? how about for kissing? caressing?"

If I went to see a prostitute, that is exactly what I would be paying for (also for sex, but this both first and last). Let me note, however, that this is *not always* what happens on a date. The "selfish motive" is an approach to life, and I don't believe it would be possible to prove that dates are run tit-for-tat (I sincerely hope that this isn't always the case).


"My question is, why don't human beings routinely do such things? why must some of us go through life feeling destitute of love, of affection, of connection, in our lives? why is it taboo to express these needs openly and straightforwardly? does this seem crazy to anybody out there besides me?"

Some humans do, but not many. And yes, this does seem a little crazy to some other people. Still, I think that we are a rather small part of the population.

David

[Dickhead]

But VT, if we judge a given 14 or 13 or whatever year old to be worthy of the adult right to consent to sex, are we going to also give that youth or young adult all the responsibilities? Such as the right to go to prison, the right to work to support themselves, and the right to be conscripted? What do you think about that?

In my profession there are a lot of "bright line" type tests: If x is >=75.0% of y, do "a"; if x is < 75.0% of y, do "b" and don't think about it. They don't work well. So, I share your skepticism about a bright line age test for sexual consent. But the last thing we men need is a bunch of sexually active 14 year olds running around acting like hot shit without having to put up with any of the down side like working for a living. Think about it.

[The Virgin Terr]

b4 i get attacked 2 viciously, let me clarify what i said in my last post. people ahould be judged as individuals, not according to cultural stereotypes or myths based on age, gender, race, etc. if we were 2 somehow establish an objective standard of competency for adult responsibilities, and graph the percentage of people who meet the standard based upon age, the graph would look like a bell curve. for example, with the case of driving an automobile, the curve would remain at a fairly steady peak of close to 100% for ages 20-say50, and thereafter slowly downturn, until by age 75 say perhaps only 50% would meet the standard. likewise, with younger people the graph would downturn more abruptly as people get younger, so that at say 13 or so it intersects with the 50th percentile. my point is, i'm not saying all 14 year olds should be judged competent, any more than i'd say all 40 year olds should be. what i'm saying is, we don't say that because a majority of 80 year olds are incompetent to drive that means all 80 year olds should be banned from driving. so why should we treat young people differently? just because more 14 year olds than 40 year olds would fail a test for physical/emotional/intellectual maturity/competency, must we ban all 14 year olds from adult rights and resposibilities?

[Dickhead]

IMO, you guys are over-romanticizing and over-analyzing all of this stuff. Prostitution is not rocket science, and I am thankful for that. Why do you want to get into a prostitute's head? Why do you want to get into all the emotional side trips? Isn't that what sucks about having a girlfriend? Trying to figure out what she means and wants all the fucking time?

I think the morality of prostitution involves an unwritten compact NOT to try to get into each others' heads and NOT to get emotionally involved. To do so, to me, means you went into the "booking" (to use RN's term) under false pretenses.

Make sure you mutually agree in advance who gets to do what and with which and to whom and for how much. Then, enjoy the sex with no strings attached, bust an ungodly nut, and move on. That is the most moral way.

So I am more cynical than most recent posters, but I don't really think I am more cynical than the average practitioner of this hobby.

DH

[The Virgin Terr]

hey p.a., don't give up! i don't know what we have to do to fix this website, i'm essentially computer illiterate, but maybe we should consider going professional, paying some small yearly fee for access, to pay someone who knows what the fuck they're doing to get on the case and fix problems like these as they arise.

jz, you're full of shit, man. i don't mean to be rude, but i want to speak my mind freely, don't take it too personally, i like most of what you have to say, but here at least i'm going to be honest and stand up for what i believe. i'm tired as hell of people treating teenagers like children who can't handle resposibility and who don't have minds of their own yet or know what they want. when people set arbitrary age limits on behavior, my response is to satirize the paternalism inherit in that attitude by changing the age limit to include whatever age the person wanting to set the limit is. for example, perhaps we should make people wait until they're 50 before we decide they're mature enough to be in control of their own bodies. (this is in effect what we do when we criminalize prostitution, saying that at no age may a person control his or her own body under certain circumstances). and i'm tired of having to pretend i don't find teenage girls hot as hell because according to some people that makes me a ****. shit, we let senior citizens who can barely see or hear and whose reaction reflexes are shot to hell drive automobiles, but a 14 year old isn't old enough to drive or screw? give me a break. a couple centuries ago girls routinely wed around that age, and began bearing children in their mid teens. the idea that teens are too young for sex is a modern myth.

[The Virgin Terr]

goddamn my fucking computer/isp is slow. b4 i even read the past day's post, i have something 2 say.

who of u would pay for affection? i mean, would u pay someone u like and are attracted 2 for a session of cuddling along with conversation, or while watching a show 2gether, or just to relax? how about for kissing? caressing?

isn't that what happens when people date? only they are less explicit in their communication, playing things by ear so to speak rather than explicitly coming out and saying, "i want to do this and this and this with u, and i don't mind spending this much on you to get it?

anyhow, i would pay a date explicitly for affection, cuddling, kissing, a sense of intimacy. to me, there's not much difference between that and paying for sexual intercourse. it's all from the same well of physical yearning, a need programmed in our genes. my question is, why don't human beings routinely do such things? why must some of us go through life feeling destitute of love, of affection, of connection, in our lives? why is it taboo to express these needs openly and straightforwardly? does this seem crazy to anybody out there besides me?