sentinel00

You were a what!?! I can't believe this.

Tell me you have breast implants and/or tattoos, and this friendship is OVER!

Divide et Impera

Hahaha! Some people...

To LadyShea: I have no doubt about the intelligence of "dancers", one of my ex-girlfriends(actually my ex-fiance), was a dancer who easily had an IQ as high as mine, which is probably why I loved(love) her so much, and was so heavily attracted to her.

Note: She did break my heart into 10 million pieces though.

Shit happens.

[ November 03, 2002: Message edited by: Apparatus ]</p>

christ-on-a-stick

I do find it ludicrous that it is (as another poster said) it is illegal to sell something that it's legal to give away for free. Makes NO sense to me...

The other thing I find funny, living near the porn capital of the world and having done some work within that industry, that it's illegal to pay a girl to screw a guy but if you get a business license and *film it* it's ok to pay a girl (and the guy!) to screw the guy!!! <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

GeoTheo

I don't think it should be illegal. I think it is more moral to go to a prostitute than to try to trick a woman into letting you use her for sex.
I know there are women who somtimes just want sex and not a relationship, but in my experience, usually not the norm.
I think marriage is the purest and idealist expression of sexuality, but realistically I don't think prostitution will ever go away. I also think that frequenting prostitutes is unwise, spiritually, emotionally and financialy.

Arrowman

Move along folks, nothing immoral happening here.

But I will disclose a double standard. If one of my female friends said to me "I met this guy last night and we went back to my place and had sex" I'd have no problem. If she said "I met this guy last night and he offered me $100 for sex so I thought, what the hell, and we went back to my place..." I'd feel uneasy about that. I know that's a double standard, but it's a gut feeling I can't deny.

Although on further (self-) analysis, I'd say I'd feel concern for my friend in either case, if I thought she was acting in a negative or self (emotionally-) destructive way. The money would probably be incidental; I'd just be more likely to have that feeling if there was money involved.

I disagree; I think prostitution is illegal because the prevailing (Christian) morality is against it. I don't think the "immorality associated with prostitution" is because of the illegality; it's vice-versa.

The stereotype of prostitution as an exploitative situation (it should be illegal because it exploits women) is IMHO a post hoc rationalisation for the illegality, using the genuinely exploitative situations that do occur as the basis, and ignoring the fact that those situations arise from, or are encouraged by, the illegality in the first place.

Which brought these responses (among others):
These are valid points, but I would like to offer a less "negative" interpretation. (I will assume that we're talking about an initially friendly and convivial [business] relationship turning colder and more "condescending" over time, and not about anything outright [verbally] abusive.)

Let's suppose I start visiting a prostitute on a regular basis. I start out being friendly, polite etc, but all the while this is a business relationship and one in which I do not wish to become emotionally invested (and I suspect most prostitutes would not want me to get emotionally entangled either). After a while, I cool down on the "friendly" aspect, perhaps because I
- am actively avoiding the emotional involvement I fear;
- fear that the prostitute will see me becoming too emotionally involved, so I over-react;
- I don't want to be seen as some sad loser who is buying emotional contact as well as sex;
- or (less charitably) I just stop pretending this is anything other than a cold business transaction.

- or any combination of the above. My point is, that a "cooling" of the relationship, which may show up as condescension, is not necessarily rooted in some "power" thing on the part of the man. Some of the above reasons may not be very solid, and the men may be acting inconsiderately, but they are not necessarily the sign of something else, if you know what I mean. The same sort of thing could happen in "friendly fuck" relationships where no money is changing hands.

And I think the above is a fairly valid hypothesis because I can see myself acting that way.

[ November 03, 2002: Message edited by: Arrowman ]</p>

Douglas J. Bender

If sex is intended to be an intimate sharing of two people, uniting them in a physical manner which reflects the uniting of their hearts in love, then prostitution is immoral, as is any sex outside of marriage. Not to mention that homosexuality is immoral, since if humans are created to enable their love to produce something wonderful in their "image" (procreation), no homosexual relationship would qualify.

The argument would boil down to whether sex is intended as I mentioned, or whether it is just something that has evolved, and whatever pushes our buttons without hurting others is just fine. And, I would argue that prostitution would hurt people, specifically the prostitute and his or her "client" - offering sex for money would devalue sex in the eyes of both.

As an example of the effects of this kind of a view of sex, a girl I unfortunately slept with one night back in 1986 said (she was divorced, and apparently had been with several men previously), after we first had sex, "See, sex is no big deal". It kind of took all the romance and glamour out of it, and I felt that she could never view sex as anything more than a mechanical stimulation event, pleasurable though it may be. (By the way, that was my only experience - that night; and it was before I became a Christian.)

Sex without love is basically masturbation.

In Christ,

Douglas

excreationist

What if either of a married couple is known to be infertile - e.g. the woman might be over 60 or one could genetically be totally infertile (I think hermaphrodites usually are).

lunachick

Hmmm, I'm going to jump in here and reveal a rather seedy side of myself in an effort to dispel the odd myth. I feel I can do this as I have been a "parlour girl" during a couple of phases in my life. I worked in a 'reputable high class' parlour.

In NZ, it is law to provide the Parlour with solid ID. This is in case your are a wanted criminal, or something 'happens', like a death or fire, etc. This is not revealed to anyone, is kept on a central police database, and cannot be used against you in anyway. It is also 'parlour rules' that you have six monthly sexual health checks, the parlour owner/manager sights the relevant documents to prove you are 'clean' and up-to-date.

Now, the process (in the establishment I worked): All men, once they've paid the door fee - which would include the service of their choice (ie. fantasy stuff, straight, bi, etc) would join the girls rostered on that night to chat with them, relax, and eventually make a choice of girl(s). Once in a private room, they had to shower first, which gave the girls an opportunity to look them over for anything untoward. Porn movies would be playing, the men would get a massage if they wanted one, whatever.

The women that work: they are aged from 18 upwards(legal adults in NZ - age of sexual consent is 16, but that is too young to work in a parlour). They are from a variety of backgrounds - some single mums supporting their children and getting out of debt, career hookers, students, business women, ALL kinds of women. Generally the junkies, the runaways, the abused and battered woman are street girls.

In NZ we have a <a href="http://www.nzpc.org.nz/Index.htm" target="_blank">Prostitutes Collective</a>, which put out a regular magazine called "Siren". In it, they discuss safe sex, the sex industry at large, and have an "ugly mugs" page which shows police pics and current info on men who are known to be abusive clients.

The men who visit parlours: The are any kind of man. It is wrong to think that only the ugly, lonely, whatever, feel the need for a sexual connection in such a setting. Many men have fetishes they are too embarassed to discuss with their wives or partners. Some just want some nookie during their lunch time after a stressful business meeting. Some are young virgins or less experienced guys that are looking to get more sexual knowledge before hitting on that lovely girl they want to impress with their prowess. Some are divorcees or widowers who are not yet ready to jump into a new relationship, but they still have a deep need to be touched by a woman they can lie naked with without shame or commitment - even if only for an hour. Some are young studs who have that arrogant male attitude of lets get ourselves a slut and fuck her. (they're always the worst in the sack too, btw.). Some guys are happy just to talk for most of the hour, lying there stroking your naked waist while you listen to their dreams and stories. Some are really good looking. Some not so good looking. But they are all human beings in need of something noone else can give them at that time. The business arrangement almost makes the 'exchange' kind of free and unconditional.

Sometimes I hated what I did, sometimes I had a blast. I always learned something from the assortment of men that came (pun not really intentional ) and generally felt some compassion for them. Those that didn't particularly need my compassion, I simply tried to have a good time with them.

As a foot note: parlour girls are probably way safer than street girls, or those 'nice' girls you pick up in a nightclub for the price of a few drinks. To start with, if you are ever found out to not be using condoms you are fired on the spot. Parlour girls are well-educated in sexual safety and health, unlike the dizzy drunk chick at the nightclub.

Oh, I never worked in my home town and the last time I worked in the sex industry was 5 years ago. I used to only work Thursday and Friday nights. I have absolutely no problem with it on any moral level, and no problem with the women or the men who choose to use the sex industry for whatever reason at all. It has not negatively affected my self-esteem in any way, and those friends (male and female) who know me and what I used to do have no problem with it either. My dad (who retired from the Police Force after 30 years on Friday) also has no problem with it. My mother would be another story, so it's good she doesn't know!

In my opinion it is important to have a safe and healthy sex industry. Trust me, it's a needed service and not something to demonise.

Heheh. I bet I just made one or two of you think ill of me. Too bad!

Take good care of each other folks,
Lurv from moi.
x x x

Edited for typos, and general corrections.

[ November 04, 2002: Message edited by: lunachick ]</p>

Glory

I didn't express myself clearly. You are absolutely correct that immorality is associated with prostitution in people's minds because of the prevailing religion in the U.S.



This is very close to what I intended to say.

What I meant was that the various immoral acts which are related to prostitution such as pimps abusing their girls, would not happen if prostitution were legal. The violence and drug abuse associated with prostitution would not occur if prostitution were legal. These were the immoralities I was talking about.

I totally get what you mean about being concerned about a friend's promiscuity. I would be as well.

When I talk about a society that accepts prostitution, I am talking about a society very different from mine and, I suspect, yours. I envision a world with very different rules and attitudes about sex. If you remove the stigma attatched to casual sex, you have changed everything. One night stands need not be cause for concern anymore than going to a restaurant is if you change the prevailing attitude.

I don't have all the details of my imagined utopia fleshed out so I'll ask you to bear with me as I am having trouble writing all this down. Suffice to say that I think the prevailing attitudes about sex colour our perceptions so drastically, that it is difficult to imagine something as different as I propose. I am talking about doing away with the stigma attatched to sex. All of it. It's radical, I know.

Glory

Arrowman

In other words, if you base your moral code on a book of ancient myths.... well, of course.

But I think the intention of this thread was to give deeper consideration (thought) to the subject than mere recitation of one's religious beliefs. GeoTheo, for example, and even Amos, in his inimitable way, have done that. You know - something which talks about how real people feel and act in their myriad different ways. Because they're human.

&lt;snip irrelevant reference to homosexuality&gt;
False dichotomy. The Biblical view of sex and the "just something that has evolved" are not the only two views of sex and human behaviour.
Well, you would argue that, wouldn't you - mainly as a post hoc justification for your religious moral code, though, and not from any first principles which actually relate to human beings. Even within a marriage, sex can be a loveless act which hurts one or both partners emotionally. The world is (and people are) a bit more complex than "inside marriage = good and positive, outside marriage = bad and harmful, paid sex = really, really bad".
So - you slept with someone, you were looking for more emotional / romantic content than she was, you were disappointed when she didn't feel as romantic as you did about the encounter. That's too bad. Lots of people have been there, done that. It says more about the need to "know yourself and know what you're getting in to" than the need to abstain entirely.

I'm not sure that your disappointment in that particular encounter is a case for "the effects of this kind of sex"....
...or was it her you were concerned about? Well, maybe she was just working through her new found singledom. Maybe she was quite capable of, and ultimately seeking, an emotional commitment - just not yet. Maybe she had some serious issues to deal with, maybe she didn't. All we know about her is (a) she was divorced, (b) she had had other partners before you and (c) she said "See, sex is no big deal". Is that the extent of your conversation, the extent of your understanding of this woman?
1. You say that like it's a bad thing
2. Sex between friends (not "Love") can be more than masturbation.
3. If you can't handle sex without "Love" then don't do it. Just understand that not everyone feels that way.