The Morality of Prostitution

[QUOTE]Originally posted by joe_zop
[i]DH -- if driving you out of the country is part of W's goal, then there's no doubt I've gotta be on his list as well. But the sucker's going to have to try harder, as I'm still someone who believes it's possible to make change happen, and he's only got a limited amount of time to keep screwing things up, another five years or so at worst, and this country can recover from that.[/i][/QUOTE]

If and when that happens perhaps I will reverse the steps I am now taking. To misquote Ted Kennedy, "we'll drive off that bridge when we come to it." But since the part of the year I have to be here is during elections (and football season, and the World Series) you can rest assured that I will VOTE. Right now I am voting with my feet.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by the virgin terr
[i]i'm not quite sure what i'll do if i ever encounter anyone who says to me "so you want to change the world; let's do it!" [/i][/QUOTE]

Reminds me of a quote from one of my favorite profs: "You know the difference between pioneers and settlers? Pioneers have arrows in them."

my heroes r wealthy entertainers and rich athletes. oh and i figured out what "ur" is. it goes between um and uh.

Just giving you shit, but your personal lazy shorthand does make your posts harder to read.

The true measure of any society is how it treats its weakest members.

last rant for today: another thing i hate about western civilization is that it treats nature with all of the subtlety of a bulldozer, pun intended. there, i'm done.

dickhead, activists are pioneers of social change. not all pioneers die violently, because if they did, there wouldn't be any settlers to follow them.

thanks for the warm welcomes. i would have posted sooner, but hadn't been watching this thread, and hadn't realized how active it was. so much was posted over the past day, that i'm not sure whether i'll even remember all the ideas i had while reading. and, still, this is gonna be a long one...

for those who asked... purple & gold are laker's colors. 4 more 40 pointers and kobe will break wilt's record!!! (hmmm... how can i relate that to morality of prostitution?)

[quote]virgin_terr: 02-21-03 10:08[i]
i tend to be pessimistic about sexual freedom because i perceive that my own totally positive view of sex is completely foreign to the mixed or negative views of the majority. it's true that much sexual behavior is irresponsible with negative consequences. to me, that indicates a need to promote thinking about how to get people to behave more responsibly, but i think for most people it leads to condemnation of the sex drive itself.
[/i][/quote]

i agree that most sexual behavior is irresponsible and causes a lot of bad in the world. just take a glance at teen pregnancy statistics and the spread of diseases like aids. i think the root cause are the very policies in place to prevent irresponsible behavior. rather than trying to do something to educate people and encourage responsible sex play, our governments, churches, schools, etc. pass 'decency' laws that forbid teaching children safe ways to express and explore their natural urges.

several years ago the first condoms were handed out in schools and children were given counseling concerning birth control. overboard conservative groups were up in arms. "we're promoting promiscuity! we're telling the kids that they should do this! we're all doomed!!"

well, the programs went ahead, and the u.s. saw a decrease in teen pregnancy as a result. now, in britain, where they have the highest rate of teen pregnancy in europe, they're is a furor over a program to teach young students about oral sex as an alternative to full intercourse. the same arguments are coming out. will we never learn?

[quote]dickhead: 02-21-03 17:43[i]
i disagree that puritanical attitudes in this country (the us) are merely a vocal minority.
[/i][/quote]

i suppose my statement was a bit too simplistic. it's not just that those who are so vocal are an actual minority. many of those who are so vocal against any sexual actvities outside of traditional marriages are in fact some of the biggest contributors to 'immorality'. not a season goes by that you don't read about how some big politician was caught with a prostitute, or in the arms of another woman (or man). how this self-righteous do-gooder got busted buying kiddie porn, etc. let's not even get into the proclivities of the clergy. so, all this fuss that is made in our media concerning how wrong all this is amounts to lip service. yet, it's powerful lip service because it creates this communal repression.

an example. two friends of mine were recently wed. the woman i've known since she was a wild child in high school. she was into my father's porno collection more often than myself. the man, i've known for a couple years, and have enjoyed the hospitality of tijuana with him on more than one occasion. now, during a dinner conversation the topic of pornography came up. the woman started talking about how they had rented a porno during their honeymoon, but how it was so disgusting that they had to turn it off. the man chimes in about how silly the acting and plot were. what the hell? they both know that i'm aware of their individual views. yet, here i was listening to them lie to each other concerning how they felt about a fuck film. if they cannot even admit the truth to one another, how could they possibly stand up in public and vote/defend their views.

btw, i found a reference to malthus on population ([url]http://www.socsci.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/malthus/popu.txt[/url]). it'll take me a while to read through it.

[quote]dickhead: 02-21-03 20:05[i]
therefore, no analysis of the morality of prostitution is complete without an analysis of population problems.
[/i][/quote]

there was a lot of posting concerning whether or not prostitution should be a valid choice for women in dire straights. i think most of that came from this kind of analysis. and, i'm thinking that the two issues are distinct. whether something is moral or not is not the same thing as whether one should do it in the face of starvation.

i totally believe that it's a valid choice for many of these women. they do what they have to for survival. does that make it moral? what if they have another choice? does that change the morality? i don't think so.

if someone kills another human being in order to save himself (i.e. a soldier in combat), it doesn't change the fact that killing is immoral. just excuses the act within context.

[quote]dickhead: 02-21-03 22:35[i]
and, again using mexico as an example, since the us does not make social services available to illegal immigrants and generally not even to legal immigrants
[/i][/quote]

this is incorrect. i've had a discussion about this with a relative who works as a welfare fraud prevention agent. she told me that, illegal or not, people who apply for medicare, foodstamps, etc. are judged solely on their financial situation. she said that it is even illegal to call ins. strange.

also, there is a law, at least in california, that says a hospital emergency room cannot turn away a patient strictly on the grounds of immigration status.

[quote]dickhead: 02-21-03 23:12[i]
makes me think that prostitution exists because it is fun to have sex with different people and then not have to worry about getting all involved in a relationship with them.
[/i][/quote]

that's part of it. but, i think there are many different reasons for people to be using professional services.

[quote]virgin terr: 02-22-03[i]
if i was to have a relationship i think my ideal partner would be a prostitute, and i would support her decision to "work", both because i would benefit financially from her income as her mate, and also because i want to do anything i can to encourage prostitution because i have empathy for all the other lonely guys like me in the world...
[/i][/quote]

[quote]rn: 02-22-03 03:36[i]
that is the very reason why i would not date while working. because men cannot see past the "sex" that a sex worker has, and they always seem to figure that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. if i was going to have a partner while i was working, i would only ever date another sex worker (past or present). a) they would understand the difference between work and sex, and b) they would never throw the fact that i was a wh*re back in my face. (it would make issues of disclosure at the beginning of the relationship less complicated as well).
[/i][/quote]

i need to re-think my ideas concerning the morality of prostitution. i know that, if i were to date a pro, i would expect her to give up that line of work. not so much that i think her job is wrong, but because, like rn says, i wouldn't be able to see past the "sex" that she is having at work. it would bug me. i just couldn't handle having to say "have a good day at the office."

does this mean that i really don't consider it moral? vt has a point, that if prostitution is just a job, like any other job. why shouldn't the employees have normal lives? yet, i can't see myself dating an active provider without expecting her to curtail her activities.

[quote]rn: 02-22-03 8:39[i]
so if someone forces me to have sex then walks away, that's [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord123][CodeWord123][/url] - but if he throws me 100 bucks after the fact, that suddenly means i consented to it??
[/i][/quote]

there was a discussion of this in the bangkok and 'thai women' threads. rn, i think it's [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord123][CodeWord123][/url] either way.

[quote]rn: 02-22-03 4:29[i]
if they were able to come to oz legally, they would have no need for these lowlife pimps. brothels would be able to sponsor asian girls and pay their airfare over here (they do that at the moment for girls from interstate - pay the airfare, then take it back from their first couple of bookings). of course the government won't do that, because they would be seen to "condone prostitution". stupid assholes - would they rather be seen to condone asian syndicates trafficking women??
[/i][/quote]

unfortunately, the government knows that legalized prostitution is a magnet for sensationalist media looking to cache in on the 'vocal minority'audience. yet, the women traffickers are a shadow entity that escapes public knowledge in the general case. a sad statement about the priorities of such 'humanitarian' states as the us who chastises other countries for lack of equal rights for women.

well, this has been long. sorry about that. i'll try to stay more current with the postings.

PG, while Medicaid is a federal program, it is administered by the states and in my state, for sure, neither illegal aliens nor resident aliens are eligible for it. I am not sure about food stamps. Nor are resident aliens eligible for TANF or "welfare" in my state, with the exception that if one parent is a resident alien and the other is a citizen who is either absent or incarcerated, the resident alien is eligible for TANF if and only if the paternity (or rarely, maternity) of the absent or incarcerated parent has been PREVIOUSLY established. However, it is true in my state that immigration status cannot be used to deny services at a public hospital.

Since you are a Lakers fan, you probably live in California and "everyone knows how liberal and left wing they are out there." :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dickhead
[i]Since you are a Lakers fan, you probably live in California and "everyone knows how liberal and left wing they are out there." :) [/i][/QUOTE]

Wish that were true :-) Unfortunately, CA is a fairly conservative and, historically, republican state.

A quick web search reveals that CA has had 37 total governors since achieving statehood: 20 Republicans, 15 Democrats, 1 Whig or "American" or "Know Nothing" and 1 Union party, whatever the hell that is (anti-secessionist, I would assume?).

P&G,

[i]"I need to re-think my ideas concerning the morality of prostitution. I know that, if I were to date a pro, I would expect her to give up that line of work. Not so much that I think her job is wrong, but because, like RN says, I wouldn't be able to see past the "sex" that she is having at work. It would bug me. I just couldn't handle having to say "Have a good day at the office."[/i]

That's a completely understandable attitude, and one that I would expect from the majority of men. However - does the fact that YOU don't like the idea of YOUR girlfriend working in the sex industry, really make prostitution itself "immoral"? I don't feel that your problems with dating an active sex worker relates to any sense of 'morality'. I think it would have more to do with - well, in a word - your male ego.

You have to BE a sex worker to fully understand what I mean by the difference between sex and work. And I do not, for one minute, expect a man who has never been a hooker to be able to make a distinction between the two. That is why I could not respect a boyfriend who said it was ok for me to work. Because as far as HE is concerned, he is saying he doesn't mind if I have sex with heaps of people. That really bothers me.

[i]"Does this mean that I really don't consider it moral? VT has a point, that if prostitution is just a job, like any other job. Why shouldn't the employees have normal lives?"[/i]

I think Joe and I had a discussion about it being a 'job like any other' a while back. I might clarify my position on that again. I believe that sex work should be considered an OCCUPATION, like any other income generating activity is (rather than a crime or a sexual deviation). But I do not believe it is a job "like any other". Like in many jobs, there are some issues that are faced by sex workers, that are unique to the job. It is an extremely intimate job, and one that carries a huge amount of negative stigma. This is bound to cause particular problems and create unique challenges for the people involved. But I don't think that in itself automatically qualifies the job as not 'normal'.

I work in social services and activism - which is a perfectly 'normal' job - but it, too, would create some very unique problems for me and any of my significant others. I come home with bucketloads of emotional baggage and huge amounts of anger and frustration...my partner would have to deal with my crying fits, my incessant ranting (which I currently use you guys for LOL) and the fact that I am completely obsessed with my work. It will take a certain sort of person to be able to tolerate all that - but I'm sure he's out there somewhere.

You have to remember that Terry's comments were directed at me - and I have already told him in the past that I would not date while I was working, because of the dramas it would cause. But just because it doesn't work for me, (or you), doesn't mean that it's the case for everyone. Like I said in my last post, there are many sex workers all around the world who are in loving relationships. Those women and men have perfectly 'normal' lives.

I think the essence of the issue of being in a relationship with a sex worker comes down to one single question more than any other -- "How is the sex I have with her different than the sex she has with clients?" And that is a question based on the issue of emotional security, as I think it has far less to do with the sex itself than it does with the emotional veneer around it. In other words, if my partner is brilliant at her job, and her job entails convincing men for a short period of time that she cares about them and that their happiness is the most important thing on earth via sexual congress, then how can/does one know the truth of where one stands in a relationship with her?

It's not about how many dicks she's sucked or taken, it's about what I can or cannot believe when she's involved with mine.

Obviously, this is true regardless of whether a women is a sex worker or not, as it's the basic issue of trust and security in a relationship, but I think the situation and issue gets magnified in this instance, because you are being with someone whose stock in trade is being a physical and emotional chameleon who also has, as RN has so aptly described elsewhere, the ability to mentally and emotionally distance herself from what it going on as a way of maintaining that self. I think the bottom line in a relationship like this is the fear that this would be happening, not so much that your partner would be treating her clients like you, but that she'd be treating you like her clients.

[i]"It's not about how many dicks she's sucked or taken, it's about what I can or cannot believe when she's involved with mine."[/i]

So like I said - it's all about male ego! LOL

Lots of men have very similar feelings about 'regular' women who have slept with lots of guys, as well. Am I as good in bed as the others? Did she scream louder with the last guy? Will she get bored with me? Is my penis smaller than the average ones she's seen? Add to that the stuff you said about us being "chameleons", and I would think sex workers - ex or current - are probably quite threatening to men. Remember that (dreadful!) estimate I made a few months back? I'm not sure that's a past count that every man could handle.

Do you think making her 'give it all up' when you get together would ultimately make all that much difference? Even if she's not doing it any more - can you live with what she's DONE?

Joe -- [i]"How is the sex I have with her different than the sex she has with clients?"[/i]

That's actually very easy. With a client, there is no history, no future and no 'us'.

Let's just say the client is a particular favourite of mine. We have fantastic sex, multiple orgasms and then lay back stroking each other and talking like old friends. The chemistry is there, the attraction is there and the friendly rapport is there - it may even have the appearance of real intimacy and friendship. But it's not! I don't know his last name, or even his real first name probably. I don't know what he's done in the past, nor what he plans to do in the future. I don't know his friends, his family or his workmates. He's not going to just call me one day to share good news, or cry on my shoulder when things go bad. If he drops dead tomorrow, nobody is going to let me know. And all the same stuff goes for him, too.

Sometimes the relationships can become very close and it may feel like we are really sharing something - but in reality, we only share with each other on a 'need to know' basis. He might tell me all about his sexual dysfunctions, describe his bizarre fetishes in detail and ask me to take a look at the strange lump he felt on his arse...but heaven forbid I might find out what suburb he lives in, or what his son's name is!

It's not really so much of a case of learning to 'distance' yourself from the intimacy - it's learning to realise that it's just not there in the first place. There's no depth to it. It's not real. That's what makes it so different to having sex with someone you love. You have a history, a future and an 'us'. That's real.

Well, RN, really, relationships are all about ego, period, both male and female, and men certainly don't hold a patent on ego issues there -- though theirs may manifest in specifically different ways. Relationships are like religion in that it's necessary to willingly suspend disbelief and trust in things you can't see or quantify. (Which probably explains why there are so many people disappioned in both!)

And though I know we're close to revisiting the issue about disclosure of a sex worker past in a relationship, I truly do think the issue is one of confidence and trust. Knowing whether or not you can believe your partner is key, or at least knowing how far you can believe them and in what areas. It's rather the same issue of being with an actor or actress, fraught with the same difficulties (though the particulars of when someone is or isn't on state are different, and role play is different from emotional disengagement.)

For me, personally, the past is only an issue insofar as it affects the present. Presuming I have a good sense of trust with a woman, I don't care in the least how many partners she has or has not had other than knowing how I need to treat her in terms of adjusting to the fact that she has or does not have experience in relationships. I care in that I prefer someone who's got skillz, but there are different ways to get them as well :) But then for me the truth is that it's far more critical that I've got someone with whom I can spend a good three days out of bed and be comfortable and compatible -- the bedroom is important, of course, but it's easy to get along when screwing, and the test of a relationship is more when you're not.

I don't see myself having any particular trouble being with someone who was/is a sex worker, honestly, as that would really be a secondary issue. My ego's big enough to drown out pretty much anything other than the noise of my own selfish needs :D and I've spent enough time with people in the trade in various situations to have a decent sense of how things would or wouldn't work. I would probably not want her working while with me, but to be perfectly frank that's less about what she'd be doing, and more because I can't picture being with someone who isn't highly intelligent and quick, with some degree of ambition, and people with those characteristics can do many other more fulfilling things, and are generally going to be more fulfilled by them -- something for which you present ample evidence. And the latter issue is, of course, also ego-driven in that I recognize I work best and am happiest when I'm with a partner who challenges me to move or get left behind, and I need an equal, not a lesser. If I was to be with someone who had all those characteristics, who also made a truly compelling case for why sex work happened to do all that in a way that I could see and use as a catalyst, then I'd have to say go for it.

And what if you [i]do[/i] find out what his son's name is, or what suburb he lives in? Does that move the issue of what is or isn't real sharing? Where's the point at which things can cross over? That crossover can happen in any kind of situation, from doctor-patient to co-worker, etc.

The problem really is that the membrane separating what is real and what is not is so very thin, and in a relationship it's necessary that the perception of that membrane be agreed upon and shared. As Einstein said, "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." And heaven knows there are plenty of relationships in the real world that have no depth, even among people who have been with each other for years. People who live together and still operate on a "need to know" basis.

Witness your recent situation -- your client misunderstood what reality was, and the nature of the relationship, hence all hell broke loose. While he's an extreme case, the seeds of that kind of misunderstanding are within all of us, all the time, in every situation.

[i]"Where's the point at which things can cross over?"[/i]

That, I guess, comes down to the individual sex worker. I can honestly say that I never had a client who really managed to 'cross the barrier'. As I have said many times before, I had quite a few regulars that I was very close to - but still, it just wasn't the same somehow. There was always that invisible line in the sand between us, that kept me from actually classing them as 'friends'. And I do admit I did that on purpose, much the same as a psychiatrist or doctor would I suppose. Professional distance. Every girl is different of course, and the barrier is probably not so defined for some of them. But for me personally, there was no 'point' where it could have crossed over. I just wouldn't have let it happen.

As for that idiot client in particular, he obviously has some serious problems with reality! We never even got NEAR 'the line'! (I wish we had though, because then I would have been able to send the boys around to his place to give him my regards). What part of "I will only f*ck you if you give me money" did that moron not understand?! LOL

[i]We never even got NEAR 'the line'! [/i]

You mean, near [i]your[/i] line, right? Obviously, this bozo's was was different, which is part of the point -- in any relationship there's negotiating and exploring lines.