Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/26/2004 6:12:06 PM EST
(rehetorical post people: no need to answer the questions asked)

Why is prostituion a vice crime when the same thing without the 'offical deal' is completly kosher and out in the open? My normal turf is pretty well off, a fact I forget and get reminded of when I travel. Recently I've seen some pretty clear examples of pure trophy wives. These women are all about their targets money and nothing more. Frankly, I don't feel sorry for the men invloved because they know damn well what is going on. The relationship is one big payoff. Honey, we're going to fight (read no sex) unless I get a new Lexus SC. To these women, 'high maintenence' equals high cost. Her love (sex) can be measured by the dollar value of the most recent gift. The crazy irony of it all, is that when these women lose their looks, they get dumped and call the man a shallow arrogant bastard. Perhaps he just feels the contract has outlived it's usefulness.

I guess society doesn't question the relationship because "who are we to question their love". I guess we shouldn't question a businessmans need for a hotel triste either eh?

Should we start highlighting some marriages as the 'prostitution loophole' ah la 'gunshow loophole'?

Before you get bent about me being down on marriage, I'm specifically talking about obvious trophy relationships.
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 8:18:36 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 8:20:09 PM EST
a hooker is like a scab crossing the picket lines, a hooker will take you for 100 bucks but a wife will take you for 50% of everything you have and everything you will make.
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 8:26:36 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/26/2004 8:42:23 PM EST by piccolo]

Originally Posted By mike45acp:
a hooker is like a scab crossing the picket lines, a hooker will take you for 100 bucks but a wife will take you for 50% of everything you have and everything you will make.





It's because women have largely set the "social" rules in society, and prostitution damages one of their primary assets: control of sex. If a man can get satisified elsewhere and has no lasting ties to the women who satisfy him (the latter is what you're really paying for), then a woman's bargaining position is significantly weakened. Thus, prostitution is a threat to women, and therefore usually seen as a threat to society, at least in areas where women have a strong presence in society.

Sure, there are additional factors to be considered, like the spread of disease and unwanted pregnancies, and those are no small factors, but the primary factor is in the paragraph above.

-Troy


these IMHO are correct.


Edited to add, about 20 years ago in Kodiak, a girl I was just starting to get involved with wanted me to take her to Seattle for a long weekend.(Fat chance, i wasn't in my 'money season' at the time)

I didn't argue, I simply whistled and waved a hooker over and right in front of my VERY soon to be ex g/f, the hooker and I negotiated a weekend deal. I looked at the now embarrassed and pissed off young lady and told her that she was a bit too rich for my blood. I left the bar with the hooker, leaving her in the bar to deal with the now very amused crowd of barflies.

Outside, I gave the hooker a few bucks to hide out somewhere for a while until my now ex g/f went home. It wasn't long after being embarrassed that publicly.

Funny, but I was respected for the way I handled the situation, people spoke of the incident for quite a while.



Link Posted: 8/26/2004 8:28:00 PM EST
I wonder why I can go to a Gene Juarez and pay to have an attractive young woman rub every part of my body except my penis and that doesn't bother anybody.
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 8:47:01 PM EST

Originally Posted By SNorman:
I wonder why I can go to a Gene Juarez and pay to have an attractive young woman rub every part of my body except my penis and that doesn't bother anybody.




Because you are not married.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 3:20:10 AM EST
It must be a crime because your local government makes money off the fines, and it gives officers something to do other than sitting around eating donuts.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 3:24:48 AM EST
You don't legalize prostitution cuz some have perverted marriage.

You teach people to honor the instituion of marriage, and then you avoid dopey threads like this one.

(you KNEW I'd post something like this DP - I didn't want to disappoint)



Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:01:01 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:04:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By Troy:
That has never worked throughout history. It is the Oldest Profession, after all.

Not everyone will or even wants to marry, and many marriages don't last, for various reasons.

-Troy




Murder is the OLDEST wrong committed by man.

Doesn't mean we don't maintain our standards against it.



Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:10:12 AM EST

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Troy:
That has never worked throughout history. It is the Oldest Profession, after all.

Not everyone will or even wants to marry, and many marriages don't last, for various reasons.

-Troy




Murder is the OLDEST wrong committed by man.

Doesn't mean we don't maintain our standards against it.



That's debatable as long as one doesn't subscribe to the literal Bible translation. In bonobos, males will bring food and groom the females for sex. Sounds pretty similar to prostitution to me.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:19:05 AM EST
Hmmmm . . .

Another great question is why is PORN legal? It's the same damn thing . . . you're paying a woman to have sex.

I guess because the .gov can tax porn, but not prostitution.

Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:22:40 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:25:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By Magnus357:
That's debatable as long as one doesn't subscribe to the literal Bible translation. In bonobos, males will bring food and groom the females for sex. Sounds pretty similar to prostitution to me.



This isn't even in a Biblical context.

You do NOT excuse ONE behaviour in the light of other destructive behaviour.



Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:28:20 AM EST
My point was simply that paying for sex is fairly common. How the deal is constructed determines legality and societal censure...
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:28:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By Troy:
It's because women have largely set the "social" rules in society, and prostitution damages one of their primary assets: control of sex. If a man can get satisified elsewhere and has no lasting ties to the women who satisfy him (the latter is what you're really paying for), then a woman's bargaining position is significantly weakened. Thus, prostitution is a threat to women, and therefore usually seen as a threat to society, at least in areas where women have a strong presence in society.

Sure, there are additional factors to be considered, like the spread of disease and unwanted pregnancies, and those are no small factors, but the primary factor is in the paragraph above.

-Troy


Wow. A beer for this man!!
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:30:21 AM EST

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
My point was simply that paying for sex is fairly common.



That's just a cynical spin on it.

Under that context, EVERY faithful male "pays" for sex, especially the single income households .
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:37:19 AM EST

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Magnus357:
That's debatable as long as one doesn't subscribe to the literal Bible translation. In bonobos, males will bring food and groom the females for sex. Sounds pretty similar to prostitution to me.



This isn't even in a Biblical context.

You do NOT excuse ONE behaviour in the light of other destructive behaviour.



Please you know that the statement about murder being the oldest wrong committed by man was in reference to Cain.

The fact that Bonobos participate in what is essentially prostitution is completely applicable because it illustrates how natural the act really is. I'm not saying everyone should accept prostitution as the norm, but outlawing it hasn't done any more good for society. Just like gun control, all legistration restricting or outlawing prostitution has done it create a grey market. Prostitutions is still VERY common and occurs year round all over the states.

Legistrating morallity is worthless.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:39:05 AM EST
What DriftPunch refers to is not prostitution. It is serial polygamy.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:39:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
My point was simply that paying for sex is fairly common.



That's just a cynical spin on it.

Under that context, EVERY faithful male "pays" for sex, especially the single income households .



Sounds about right.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:41:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By Magnus357:
Please you know that the statement about murder being the oldest wrong committed by man was in reference to Cain.

.




So what???

It is STILL true in any sane society you DO NOT legitimize one behaviour because of the ocurrence of another destructive behaviour.

I don't need the Bible to explain that to me.

Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:44:52 AM EST

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
My point was simply that paying for sex is fairly common.



That's just a cynical spin on it.

Under that context, EVERY faithful male "pays" for sex, especially the single income households .



The context of this post is trophy relationships. Ergo, love is contingent upon a steady flow of money. Should I not be cynical about that?
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:46:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Magnus357:
Please you know that the statement about murder being the oldest wrong committed by man was in reference to Cain.

.




So what???

It is STILL true in any sane society you DO NOT legitimize one behaviour because of the ocurrence of another destructive behaviour.

I don't need the Bible to explain that to me.




YOU were the one that brought murder into the discussion of prostitution. I was only making claim that the only evidence of murder being the "first wrong" committed against man comes from the most historically tenuous portion of the Bible.

Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:54:07 AM EST

Originally Posted By RiffRandall:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
My point was simply that paying for sex is fairly common.



That's just a cynical spin on it.

Under that context, EVERY faithful male "pays" for sex, especially the single income households .



Sounds about right.



I'll disagree. Then again, I love my wife and think she's wonderful. She may not be a breadwinner, but she takes good care of our kids, the house, and me. Then on top of that, she tries to make me happy in bed. My point is: My wife and I see our roles in marriage as eternal roles and God-given responsibilities. Not as some sort of sex-for-cash system.

If I was "paying" for it, I'd have dumped my wife several years ago when she got nerve damage from delivering our first child. Fortunately, there's more to our relationship than that.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:54:09 AM EST
just do what nevada has a system of liscensing and regular STD testing.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 11:58:51 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/27/2004 12:02:37 PM EST by garandman]

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:

The context of this post is trophy relationships. Ergo, love is contingent upon a steady flow of money. Should I not be cynical about that?



Then, in your mind, What's the differnce, in economic terms, between a "trophy wife" who marries for the Lexus and the "stay at home mom" whho marries for children and security??

BOTH rely on males to bring home the green so they can live their lifestyle of choice.

Link Posted: 8/27/2004 12:01:43 PM EST

Originally Posted By Magnus357:

YOU were the one that brought murder into the discussion of prostitution. I was only making claim that the only evidence of murder being the "first wrong" committed against man comes from the most historically tenuous portion of the Bible.





If you want to fixate on that obscure Bible reference, fine, whatever.

The POINT is you do NOT legitimize one destructive behaviour because another destructive behaviour is wrongly tolerated in a society.

And you DO NOT need the Bible to know that is true.



Link Posted: 8/27/2004 8:49:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By piccolo:

Originally Posted By mike45acp:
a hooker is like a scab crossing the picket lines, a hooker will take you for 100 bucks but a wife will take you for 50% of everything you have and everything you will make.





It's because women have largely set the "social" rules in society, and prostitution damages one of their primary assets: control of sex. If a man can get satisified elsewhere and has no lasting ties to the women who satisfy him (the latter is what you're really paying for), then a woman's bargaining position is significantly weakened. Thus, prostitution is a threat to women, and therefore usually seen as a threat to society, at least in areas where women have a strong presence in society.

Sure, there are additional factors to be considered, like the spread of disease and unwanted pregnancies, and those are no small factors, but the primary factor is in the paragraph above.

-Troy


these IMHO are correct.


Edited to add, about 20 years ago in Kodiak, a girl I was just starting to get involved with wanted me to take her to Seattle for a long weekend.(Fat chance, i wasn't in my 'money season' at the time)

I didn't argue, I simply whistled and waved a hooker over and right in front of my VERY soon to be ex g/f, the hooker and I negotiated a weekend deal. I looked at the now embarrassed and pissed off young lady and told her that she was a bit too rich for my blood. I left the bar with the hooker, leaving her in the bar to deal with the now very amused crowd of barflies.

Outside, I gave the hooker a few bucks to hide out somewhere for a while until my now ex g/f went home. It wasn't long after being embarrassed that publicly.

Funny, but I was respected for the way I handled the situation, people spoke of the incident for quite a while.





Beach Combers or Tony's?
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 9:02:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By Kodiak-AK:
[


Beach Combers or Tony's?



Antoines-on-the-Mall. (Tony's.)

Hey, next time yer in there, ask Android (Andy) to point out the Codfather to you. Ask the Codfather about the time out at the Beach the waitress pissed me off and I bought her a coupla brews and at the crucial time, when she was half-whacked out, I Saran Wrapped the toilet seat of the employees can.

I sure wish I could find a place to get Vitaman R out here in PGH.
Top Top