The fatal flaw in Johns classes, Nordic model and brainwashing
Philosophy abounds with people who warn against following the flock of sheep and beware of brainwashing. Our entire society is built on myths / laws / mores that enables groups beyond about 150 to function. But is still a big church of differing religions, politics, wealth and income distribution. As to the Johns classes, it is not that long ago that Alan Turing was judicially tortured for being gay, and there are many recent examples of the tools of psychiatrists to "correct" proscribed behavior. Laying down little judgments, funny looks its how it starts and progresses to prisons, used for such things as not believing in religion or the wrong religion / creed / sexuality etc etc. It's doubtful there is much "normal" in sexual behavior because the data refuses to cooperate with bell curve nonsense. It becomes even more erratic because of the liar factor and second order effects.
Mongering was extremely common in the past and normalized. It still is in many places and will be around for the foreseeable future. Anyone who has been to Gambia or South Africa know that white women pay for young men, and same in ancient Rome.
As far as mongering goes, banging lots of young beauties is fine, just as sampling different restaurants, movies, etc is fine. The moral issues mask deeper power plays about reproduction of economic units that requires a stable support arrangement for women and kids and also the limited shelf life of womens fertility. Monogamous sex is thought to be the glue to this in Western culture, though other societies less so. P4 P undermines this. The John Classes claim to "cure" paying for sex, on the presumption men lack impulse control and that P4 P is rape and violence towards women (as a proxy for other frustrations) disguised by the exchange of cash, based on the notion women selling sex have no choice or agency in the matter and are all effectively trafficked and / or under age / insert buzz phrase. Also buried in their typical "training" materials is that the johns need the therapy to form "normal" relationships on the flawed assumption they are loners without friends and love and are dysfunctional. As you can see, some pretty huge assumptions exist. They are based of pure assertion without any serious empirical evidence.
The Nordic model goes even further, aiding one side of the equation and punishing the other that would not exist but for aiding the first half. The end result is criminalizing sexual desire, but practically only for men. But if I employ a woman to clean my toilets and scrub pots and pans or factory work in really shitty conditions and law pay, that's apparently OK, and not an addiction, no matter how much it affects the dignity, health or happiness of the worker.
Why is that when sex is involved in the exchange of labor for money, it suddenly needs "corrective" therapy?
The lurking issue seems to be unbundling of monogamy and financial / emotional support of women. Putting a price on youth, beauty and delaying the use of fertility to create new economic units. A secondary issue is womens' "shelf life" to snag a man. Women are extremely aware of fading looks and the window of opportunity. The population replacement rate is very carefully monitored by governments via census, vital statistics and the same with demographics of commerce and industry. The issue seems to be that men will not "settle down" and devote their time / money / energy to reproduction of economic units if they can conveniently buy sex as a service. The Nordic model, shorn of its emotive and other assumptions of men being dysfunctional beings, seems to boil down to a power play to hand back forced bundling and lack of price comparison to women and create a Faustian bargain with the reproduction of economic units.
The irony is the promoters of Nordic model fail to see the parallels with witch trials they also presumably condemn.
Instead of this unpersuasive position, it gets dressed up an pseudo medico speak to justify the restriction of freedom of half the populations sexual desires with consenting, adult women. The Johns classes have as much validity at political re-education camps (or gulags), what they did to Turing, heretics, blasphemy, and the other nonsense throughout history. That vast majority of folks here are perfectly healthy and have fully functional social bonds. Romantic sex is not a per-condition to a healthy person any more than marriage. Nor is romantic sex a necessary (or even sufficient) component of being functioning human. The divorce statistics explode the myth. This romance-for-sex narrative is as dysfunctional as the supposed cash-for-sex narrative and febrile claims of the Nordic model and "Johns Classes" proponents.
So, lets see our hobby as a choice based in biology, the normal range of social choices, and not some dark and sick secret of dysfunctional, loner men. I'm sick of this BS. I've met and slept with hundreds of workers and by and large they are quite content relative to the economic alternatives, if not a happily mystified about the power a pretty female holds over men. Many like that power and like the freedom, cash and so on. The feminists will be dismayed to know many working girls enjoy sex with some of their customers and do freebies.
May COVID end so we can again admire the bodies / brains and ravish some beautiful young women soon!