Because some women are revolted by the idea that all sex is prostitution.

I don't know about this woman, but women in general trade sex for security, aka money.

It's hard for women to admit this but it is done everyday. Women change the wording to make themselves feel better.

Also women make no effort to understand men or the male sexual drive. Its been all about women since the 1960's and most women want it to stay that way.

Over and over I see men and women demonstrate the same actions and/or behaviors. Women always make excuses for other women, almost never do they make excuses for men.

You could present this same scenario with a woman going to a gigolo and women would probably applaud the woman for being empowered, progressive, modern, liberated because she met her needs without having to commit to and be tied down in a relationship.

Double-standard anyone?

David, of course you really mean 'some women', not all women. Or maybe it's just the few that you've had bad experiences with. The women on this blog don't seem to fit that description either; in fact, they seem to actually like men for who they are, not as wallet transport systems.

I could say that all men are lazy parasites, but that's not true, that's just my ex-husband. Since then, I've made much wiser choices and now would say that men are solid responsible people (or maybe that's just the ones I date now...).

I forgot to answer the question. I would ask him why he went, how many times, the general quaility level of the hooker, and if he used protection every time. Then I would render my decision, probably that it didn't matter, and if he was responsible, it's a better idea than a drunken hookup with that Palin girl.

I can't say for sure how I would react, but my initial response isn't moral outrage. It's more health and safety related.

Sex with an escort is, in the educational vernacular, sex with the hundreds or thousands of men she's had sex with. I might be a bit squeamish about a guy who's been in that position. If it's years ago, and he's been well-tested since then, I'd probably shrug and move on.

I would also ask whether he's talking "escorts" or drug-addled $20 hookers behind the discount mall. I'd have less respect for someone patronizing the latter, simply because it smacks of exploitation and a level of crassness that would put me off.

Revolution is a common reaction to fear. If i was LW, I'd try to sort out what fear of mine was giving me that particular reaction before making the decision (if the relationship was a healthy, loving one otherwise).

Seems we tend to really screw our lives up obsessing about the past in ourselves and others, which serves no useful purpose other than to create painful wreckage in the present.

It's a personal decision.

90% of what we are having "strong" reactions to in the present are really past crap.

I'd try to get that put in perspective (my own root fears of abandonment, betrayal, etc) before saying either way. If the choice would be the same after careful thought, well, what did you loose? At least you aren't making it based off of some sort of memorized reaction.

There is a freedom to be able to make decisions this way.

This would be a startling discovery for me to find out: "I didn't really know you at all!!!!", "If he did it once, he'll do it again" ...you know the deal. But how much of that is just old garbage if this guy is really a great guy and that was part of his past but not him now? Do I really want to live my life worrying about this when the relationship was great otherwise?

And how many men haven't paid for sex but ran around trolling bars and had hundreds of one night stands, or unprotected sex, with women they don't even remember the names of, just what drink they were buying them that night?

Posted by: Chrissy at July 17, 2009 9:23 AM
David, of course you really mean 'some women', not all women.
----------------------
Correct. I'm speaking in generalities.
I find most of the women on this site brighter and more objective than the average woman out there.

(awww jeeez) I meant Revulsion not Revolution.

(giggling)

I say it revolted her because she saw that her man was capable of completely separating sex from love. There is no way to know if the next time he makes love to her, he might be faking the emotional aspect. Or worse, he could engage in a sexual affair and show no outward signs of emotional distance that most women would be able to pick up on.

For me, I wouldn't be revolted. But I would certainly be more cautious in the relationship until I saw he was committed to me as I was committed to him.

Sounds to me like they have fundamental differences in how they see love and relationships. I'm not saying they should break up immediately; maybe they could learn to understand the other's perspective. But I'm continually baffled by how people remain in relationships that are not based on honesty, open communication and true compatability. No partnership is an absolute fairy tale, but ignoring glaring incompatabilties is a great way to set yourself up for divorce somewhere down the line.

I was personally revolted when I found my wife had gone to some incredibly expensive hair dressers in the years before we married. I am not saying it broke the relationship up, but I could not understand her willingness to pay hundreds of dollars for a haircut when there were so many reasonably priced alternatives. I wasn't sure if she would do it again during the marriage. It was kind of weird though, many of her friends thought like her, that well, women had different physical drives and needs regarding hair and shoes and fashion that guys could never understand. What a laugh!

We sure did have different thoughts on hair.

Capuchin monkeys seen (in experimental setting) to pay for sex: http://news.cnet.com/Freakonomics-writer-talks-monkey-business/2100-1026-6177655.html

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1700821,00.html

Considered prostitution when macaque needs sexed.

What Feebie said (gawds, I luvs ya Feebs!).

Also, it would depend on the individual whether or not it was a deal-breaker for me. I know that the man I am currently with cheated on his wife. He told me. He also told the woman he cheated with that he didn't love her, it was just a sexual thing, because his wife was not giving him what he needed at home. I don't hold it against him; it was discreet; his children never knew; it was occasional, but more frequent than he planned on; and it had stopped long before he and I got together.

And Lauren, you make perfect sense as well, especially this - But I'm continually baffled by how people remain in relationships that are not based on honesty, open communication and true compatability. I see it all the time, and it makes me wonder. BF and I talk all the time about everything that is going on in our lives, I think it defeats the purpose not to.

Thanks, Flynne!

Jerry, that was funny stuff.

I think some women don't understand that men can have sex devoid of emotional connection, but yet also love a woman and connect with her on an emotional level.

Isn't it time prostitution was legalized? It would be safer for both parties. I'd rather find out that a man I was with had the occasional escort than discovering he was a pig who picked up and slept with anything. I always said even when it was Eliott Spitzer. Who cares?

Jeez, all men have visited hookers or otherwise paid for sex sometime in their lives.
All men like pornography (even, if like me, they become bored as the quality is too low. Can't we get some good pornographers in this country?)
All men would like to have sex with lots of women. Concurrently, if possible. We love recreational sex.
Hey, and all women would like to marry a billionaire, and go recreational shopping like they never did before. Make like Palin in a Macys.$250k in a day, and just getting the engines warmed up.
But, men and women have to live with each other, and there are some compensating benefits. Usually. Sort of. Okay maybe not, but genetic suicide is not appealing either.
Just don't expect different. Maybe in degrees, maybe in shades, but not at the core.
If your wife shops and lies about the bills, so be it. If your husband screws around a little, and lies about it, so be it.
It ain't change, so caterwauling and pompous posturing gains nothing.
As for hookers and disease: Almost universally, condoms are used. Some time back several thousand Las Vegas hookers were tested, w/o a single AIDS case. Public health officers will quickly confirm that prostitution is not a "vector" in AIDS. It is gays humping in the ass that is a vector. That's the facts jack. Drug users too.
You know, if early on we had quarantined AIDS carriers....

"You know, if early on we had quarantined AIDS carriers...."

... you'd have found some other group to hate.

I suppose if it was a one time experimental thing... but I dunno, paying for sex seems really cold. I'd be worried about the coldness factor. I'd be worried about how he saw me.

Not saying it would be a dealbreaker, but it would definitely be a point against. Of course if he made up for it in other ways.

I dunno. It seems really cold.

I'd also wonder about the girls and where they came from... were they free-spirit "sex positive" unionizing San Franciscans? Or runaways who started selling it when they were 13 to escape abused homes?

Of course, its hypocritical of me, as I've worked in the adult biz. I'll be up front and say I'm biased because the whole experience left a bad taste in my mouth (no no, not THAT kind of bad taste you sickos!!!)

"David, of course you really mean 'some women', not all women. "

Yeah, that was a little over the top way to phrase it.

The legal definiton of prostitution is basically the exchange of value for sexual favors. Value can be as little as a meal; sex can be as little as "the pleasure of her company." People can get hooked up for as little as that, but usually only if they are involved in pimping and trafficking. On any other level, it's a stupidly rigorous standard.

But ask yourself, how would you characterize a situation where sex is involved, and one person pays for meals and clothing, maybe other presents and maybe even housing, and the other doesn't reciprocate in any way other than sex? Might this be what Brian was referring to? And how many women are in situations like this?

A lot aren't, but might like to at least have the opportunity to turn it down!

Not an off the bat deal breaker, it would really depend on the details and how recent it was. My concerns would be health related.

I personally think that certain types of prostitution should be legalized. I actually watched a really good special on high end prostitution the other day that brought up some good and bad points about making it legal. Like Lauren said, you don't really want to encourage the $20 drug addict at the strip mall, most likely underage or who has been working since underage. On the other hand, especially once you get to the end of the spectrum where you are actually going out to eat and on dates, it's hardly any different than what some woman do anyways, without the branding of "prostitute".

If the whole debate about abortion is “it’s my body, I can do what I want!” then I really don’t see why a woman couldn’t sell her body, or hell, her organs, if she wanted to. Actually, isn’t that kind of what a surrogate mother does anyways?

At least if it was legalized you could set some health standards in place as well as (hopefully) some sort of protection for the girls as well.

"it's a better idea than a drunken hookup with that Palin girl."

Did you see those photos of Sarah in Runners World???

She's a hottie.

But I know that some women (not all) are jealous of a smart, successful, sexy woman.

Cold? can you phrase that in a way a guy would understand?

Yes, we had this thread already. It was a good one :)

I'd never date a guy I knew had paid for sex. That's my right and my choice. As for why:
1. smacks of desperation. Most hookers (and porn stars) are not particularly attractive, They're just there and don't say no to cash. There are plenty of women willing to do one night stands with a man with any desirability at all.
2. Rhetoric aside, most hookers aren't there by choice to work through school or take men for all they're worth. They are there because they are addicted to drugs, or were taught early on via molestation that they are only good for sex. They don't live well, or long.
3. Except for the very rare and very expensive private exclusive top escorts, they do a LOT of men daily. That's a lot of body fluids going where you go. And a LOT of chances for a condom to fail, and bad things to happen to you or her or both.

Mostly, I just find it gross, although I think prositution should be legal. It's one area where I agree with other's right to do it, but do NOT want it in my life at all.

I thought the Palin comment was funny (it just popped into my head) because she got pregnant because they didn't use contraceptives, made the guy get engaged to her and then broke it off. I'm not jealous of other women.

As far as prostitutes go, there's another often overlooked factor for Men.

Yes, you are paying for her to show up and have sex but almost as importantly, you are paying her to leave when it's over.

Someone earlier made a comment about being concerned that her man was able to separate sex from love. To which I reply. Oh, come on.

I think the problem most women have with the direct payment of money for sex is that this drives DOWN the price of sex. With a professional, a man knows the MAXIMUM he will have to pay for sex. With an "amateur," there is no maximum -- the sky's the limit!

First, I would agree with Lauren. It would be a health and safety issue.

However, it is much different from trolling for women in bars. The likelihood of the prostitute having sex with hundreds of men is higher than the average woman. Saying that, if he ventured to a "reputable" place, where protection was always mandated, and he never bended the rules and he's been tested for a good few years thereafter, I would feel comfortable that my life wasn't at risk.

But for being a deal-breaker in a relationship, I think that's an immature way of thinking of the issue. People have sex, paying for it doesn't automatically mean that they are more or less moral than the next person.

"Or found some other group to hate"--
Hey, riddle me this, Gog-Mogog (Great Name, the old Christian monsters of the north):
If, very early on, AIDS carriers had been quarantined, which group would have been spared incredible, vast and horrible suffering?
Of course, gay males.
As a hetero-male, I have always been at extremely small risk (to this day I know of no straight makes with sexually contracted AIDS. It is virtually an urban myth.
It is gay males who would have been protected by quarantine, or other prophylactic measures.
Quarantine is accepted public health practice, and has worked in Cuba.
If done early enough, yes several thousand gay males would have had certain liberties restricted. They would all be dead by now--and not the many more thousands that followed.
It is a tough question, and I grant not a simple one.
No hatred, just facts. Anal sex and needles is how AIDS is transmitted. Get over it.

Momof4, Re #1

Sure it can, but does it always? The fact that there are supposedly plenty of women willing to do it for free via the one night stand doesn't really make it more desperate to buy an escort. Many of those gals into one night stands at the club are just as much the village bicycle if not more so than a escort/hooker. I'd bet the mid-high end escort is far more safe than the average party girl at the club.

A woman can go into a club even if she's got little desirablity and likely get laid by closing time. The guy on the low end of desiribility totem pole is going to have a far harder time getting his pole ridden. Though these days its probably easier than in the past thanks to modern hookup culture.

Momof4, also Re: #1,

Yes, it does smack of desperation. I think you will agree that women can smell desperation on a man a mile away. So if a guy has had a bit of a dry spell, his desperation builds and builds, and the longer his dry spell, the less likely he is to break it since it will be more likely to drive women away. It's a downward spiral. How is he supposed to break out of it?

You also make it sound like it should be fairly easy for your average guy to get laid. I think if you took a poll of average single men, you'd find that about 20% of them are able to get laid with any regularity, and the rest might go several months or even years in between encounters. Most guys are pretty confused when it comes to seduction.

I'm having trouble figuring out who she is that all those guys with hundreds of partners are screwing.

seems like there are two schools of thought here.
1] long as the guy has done clean, and isn't a psych about it, what's the problem?
2] If it isn't FREE, it must be BAD. Which makes the value of a woman either zero or less. How does THAT work?

I would trust a woman LESS if she went home with me as a stranger from a bar, than one who makes her living in this profession. If I seek her, I control the situation, I can investigate and such. From a bar? Not so much. It's a business transaction, each party protecting themselves appropriately. If they don't, that is their problem.

So, how about the times when you get something for free, and it isn't what you thought, or even worse, comes with hidden costs? Lots of drunk one-nighters? How is that a better or more intelligent choice?

At some level, you will have to decide about this guy, and how things went down. Is he smart? I find drunk-nighters to be MORE desperate, because they are going in wearing beer-goggles, to find someone else wearing beer-goggles. At least a guy forking over cash has to make some strong decisions to do so.

Seems like there is an internal conflict within some women about how they feel about all this, and if they don't know, how's a guy to figure it out?

About the health and safety issue. Yes it can be, of course. But what if he didn't get coodies? Now what? There is still something there that is NOT giving this woman that warm and fuzzy feeling about her BF's past indiscretions. So we are back at square one.

>>However, it is much different from trolling for
>>women in bars...

It is different. One group is not being manipulative about what they want (I want sex and no headaches or "call me's" the next morning)... and the other group, is. I am not applying this to ALL men who go out and drink and have a one nighter. It's the ones who are intentionally dishonest about it, almost to the point of premeditation. Not a really nice character attribute if you ask me...but because they haven't slept with a hooker, they get a pass on the social stigma "oh, that was back in them wild days"...

I wouldn't say I wouldn't have a problem with finding out my guy had sex with escorts. I think my Ego would be in complete distress for various personal reasons. I honestly don't know what I would do in this situation without actually being there and knowing the person I was with. I'd either be able to let it go, or not. Tough to say.

But I have ran into guys who didn't have "slept with a hooker" on their resume but have intentionally manipulated situations to sleep with women (buying them drinks, lying, etc) who would NOT have bed them otherwise. I think that type of shit is pretty cruel.

I’d rather have a guy with neither experience, but at least with one, I’d know he was being honest in his dealings (especially if he told me, which sounds like this lady’s boyfriend did) when he was out sowing his oats, than a complete crap shoot with the other variety.

"But for being a deal-breaker in a relationship, I think that's an immature way of thinking of the issue. "

People can have whatever they want be a dealbreaker for them. Some people only date blondes, some only Drs, some only guys who have never done whores. The great thing about being human is we get to choose who we have relationships with, for any reason we want. If it icks her out, it icks her out. Period. She should find someone who doesn't make her feel that way, and he should find someone who doesn't feel that way.

Even total party girls rarely go above a few dozen guys. A hooker will have that in a good weekend.

There probably aren't 1000 whores in the US that are actually high-end and not doing anyone they can as often as they can. And this guy probably didn't have access to them. Few people do, it's a very discreet group passed by word of mouth of rich and powerful people, they don't advertise in the yellow pages.

Nope, SwissArmy, "Cold" is the best I can do, because I'm having trouble putting it into logical words. It's an emotional, gut reaction. Perhaps it's my estrogen talking.

But the thought of a guy going to a hooker makes me feel a little bit frozen. In an instinctive way. I can't quantify it. Something about it frightens me. It seems so cold.

Probably because most hookers AREN'T the sex-positive free-lovin' types.

Or probably because it makes me think of all the angry posters on this board who think all women are out to ruin them (I won't name names, but we've all seen the posts). As much as I can sympathize with them, I don't want to be involved with someone who thinks like that. And somehow going to a hooker puts a guy in that camp for me. The angry camp. Maybe the guys who go to hookers are well-balanced, happy, sunny cheerful guys, and that I'm totally wrong. Like I said, I'm going on an emotional reaction.

NicoleK -

"But the thought of a guy going to a hooker makes me feel a little bit frozen. In an instinctive way. I can't quantify it. Something about it frightens me. It seems so cold."

That is perhaps one of the most emotionally honest things i've read in quite sometime.

I can remember feeling like this too.

Actually, momof4, the special I watched was all about how the internet has opened up the doors of high end prostitution because you can advertise your services with relative anonymity through an agency or your own site. Also, the uh...I believe the special used the word "hobbyists" can look at pictures and bios of the girls while still being anonymous too. The girls that they interviewed said that they've had clients ranging from Business CEO's to school teachers, so it wouldn't be out of this guys range. Oddly enough, before the internet, high to mid range prostitutes listed their services in the back of publications at adult bookstores, not quite the yellow pages but still not inaccessible.

I'm not saying this guy did any of that, but it's not as few or a discrete as you seem to think it is. They even have a word in the UK to describe students paying their way through college through website solicited prostitution (with screened clients, etc, so I suppose it counts as higher-end at least).

I,d have to agree with Feebie about how emotionally honest that is NicoleK...

but that also means there is no fix. A man thus confronted has only the option to turn around and leave, and maybe the next time to never tell the truth again. :shrug: This seems rather sad to me.

Swissy -

Bingo. "Yer good...no, no, yer good".

Ha!

The world for a whore!
The sky for a harlot!
All life, at your door
For a woman of scarlet!
A bitter exchange?
A bad bargain to strike? It
May seem to you strange
The fact is - I like it!

You offer me gold
Place, power, and pleasure
To have and to hold
Inexhaustible treasure!
I'd give it and more
In this planet of boredom
For a girl that's a whore
And is proud of her whoredom!

---Aleister Crowley

Well... there is a fix. People who go see whores shouldn't be involved with people who don't want to be involved with whores.

As I said, it isn't a dealbreaker. It would just make me trust them less. But obviously if they had other things going on that made me trust them more, things would work out.

Also, if it was something way in their past, something they'd gotten over... I mean, as I said, I have a helluva past myself.

This made me ask my husband if he'd ever been to one, and he said he had almost gone but was worried about hygeine so used lots of porn instead. I don't think he was lying, he's pretty honest about this stuff.

Definitely more than 1000 high end hookers in this country, and I saw some in Vegas and they were anything but ugly. In fact, had I not hooked up with a hot 24 year old Marine, I was considering myself and I'm a straight woman! Of course there is a difference between a crack whore and someone high end. As far as club girls, I know a few and they are over the number 100 when it comes to conquests. That's not for me, but I don't begrudge them. I'd worry more about those one night stands as far as diseases go than a high end hooker.

I wonder, why does it "smack of desperation"?

For some I'm sure that is the case, but for many it is just simple convenience.

Like the difference between taking the time to cook a meal from scratch, and ordering a pizza.

The chase is well and good, and many of us enjoy it, but sometimes you just want to get off with a hot girl and go to bed.

Only in America have I ever seen this be a big deal.

Ladies, I love yah, I truly do, but remember, as much a pain in the arse as you find guys to be occasionally (or frequently *L*), you're anything but less so in return.

And by the way yes there are those in the flesh trade that are exploited, desperate, or otherwise very poorly off, but that represents only one part of it, though in all honesty, I can't imagine wanting to go to one of those.

Give me the enthusiastic euro ones any day, they're ANYTHING BUT exploited.

Truth of the matter is, monogamy is increasingly rare and unlikely, especially as the social stigma fades further and further into the distance, yes the odds might be higher patronizing an escort, than picking up some chick at a bar, or even dating some nice girl met by chance on a Saturday morning at the grocery store...but those odds are rapidly slimming down.

Kristen is dead on the money.

Its probably true that many women are horrified at it because they are horrified at the fact that men can divorce sex from emotional attachment so easily. Truth of the matter is though its not exactly attached with men in the first place.

As someone once said, "Making love is what the woman does while the man is fucking her."

Sometimes that is an exaggeration, sometimes it is anything but, truth of the matter though is that there is a REASON men don't have a booming romantic porn industry, but a sky high 10 billion dollar one that skips straight to the rut with seldom more than a 5 minute scene laying build up, if they even bother with that.

You can talk about that any way you like, but that won't change the underlying nature of the beast.

Observations which may have been made already:

I know girls who have been over the 100 mark by their 2nd year at the community college. Amateur vs. professional - what's the difference?

Charlie Sheen has hired a few. Would you really shoo him away, ladies?

Tarika Wilson, serial thug-mat: better or worse person than a hooker?

As a man, the least expensive sex you'll ever have is the sex you pay for. Or so I've heard. Haven't personally tested that.

Hi Holier, I promise to never finish your sentences for you again. The build-up sounded like you were about to trash gays for spreading AIDS, when actually you were expressing concern for their suffering.

My error!

But your post brought to mind Magic Johnson retiring after his infection and the following (then-current) stats:

"At the time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had tallied about 200,000 full-blown AIDS cases in the United States, one-third of them among blacks. The CDC also reported that 57,879 people had tested positive for the AIDS virus at public clinics, 9,142 of them (16 percent) were heterosexual men and women with multiple sex partners."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-11-30-magic-aids_x.htm

I hypothesize there is a "separating sex from love" continuum. Men tend to reside on the easier-to-separate end while women are on the harder-to-separate end. This leads to compatabilty issues. There might even be some sort of quantifiable distance that two people can successfully tolerate. And while I am tempted to hypothesize that the distance is important more to the woman than the man, my instincts tell me that men are similarly sensitive to this distance. I'm sure there's some sort of evolutionary psychological reason for all this: levels of committment, division of labor and emotional or physical support. As an armchair psychologist, I say these two people are probably too far away from each other on that spectrum.

"Charlie Sheen has hired a few. Would you really shoo him away, ladies?"

Yes, for any number of reasons!

"of them (16 percent) were heterosexual men and women with multiple sex partners."

I see. And how is it that we know those Men never had sex with another Man???

Oh, they asked them and they said so. I guess that settles it.

There are lots of men who would rather admit to having sex with the family dog than sex with another man.

Heterosexual Aids for Men is largely a myth. Not counting Africa.

"Well... there is a fix. People who go see whores shouldn't be involved with people who don't want to be involved with whores." NicoleK

ah, but that's not what we are talking about is it? we're talking about a time some years ago, long before the LW appeared on ths scene. How many of sowed a lot of oats in our younger days? I know a perfectly respectable mother of 3 who basically took on everyone on the football team numerous times, including my room-mate. She was in heat with anything that moved, frequently several of them. Does her hubby know or care? Dunno. As long as she is faithful now, I doubt it. She prolly feels the same way.

But then what happens when she finds out that his 21st birthday present popped out of the cake and didn't let him sleep, because his buddies all went in to buy him a night to rememeber? What if he did so several times that year or following. Maybe he decided that though it was fun, it was too expensive. Maybe he found somebody who did it for free.

I'm talking about how you deal with someone who has a past, just like you have a past. Yeah, if he's still visiting a red-light, theres big trouble potential. But if it happened 5 years ago? Would you say the same about his nasty piece of work ex-wife/girlfriend? How is she any different? How are any girlfriends he had different? You don't know who they are, or what their history was. Coulda been some girl that rutted with the whole football team...

Yick-those women whose playing cards are passed out in Vegas are not high-class. Ooo, let me look for work on a street corner....

Well, nice to see you've higher standards than to fall for a millionaire TV star with a hit show, who apparently has no diseases, because he acts like a jerk, but I don't doubt that a million other women will let him shop around, no matter what Wikipedia says about his acrobatic sex life.

Amy, you can't leave us hanging like that. Your distaste for Sheen...is it personal experience or just reputation? I'm curious although I've read a few celebrity interviews that have described him as creepy.

Amy, has any man ever written to you with the converse of this question (ie asked you for advice after he found out that his wife/GF was an escort in her past life)?

It'd be a turn-off for me for one reason: desperation. Maybe I'm biased because I'm a college student and we tend to have a lot of sex (lots of parties, lots of alcohol, lots of opportunities) but I don't think it's that hard to find someone interested in having sex with you. If you have to pay someone for sex, then you're probably either unattractive or you don't have game. I mean, George Clooney probably isn't out there hiring prostitutes, right?

Now if I'd been dating someone for awhile and found out that they slept with a few hookers way back in the day, I doubt it'd be a deal breaker because I'd have had enough time to see for myself that they're not some ugly loser. But if it's a recent thing, then that's a problem-although I'd still be interested in hearing WHY they decided to hire a prostitute. Honestly guys-if you're banging hookers, girls just don't want to know. Along with your number of sexual partners and that case of chlymidia you caught junior year abroad, it's something to keep on the DL.

Also, to address the comparisons made between picking someone up in a bar and paying for sex: a major difference is that when you pick up someone in a bar, you know they want to have sex with you. Sure, you might have paid for a few drinks, but that doesn't obligate anyone to sleep with you. It's your looks, your personality, your charisma that's getting this person into bed-not your wallet. Whereas when you hire a hooker, you know she's only sleeping with you because it's her job. And she probably wouldn't look at you twice otherwise.

I just don't see the appeal of sleeping with someone who isn't attracted to you or into you at all. Again, it leads back to "wait, you couldn't find anyone who wanted to have sex with you?"

Amy, there is a WIDE range of acceptable behavior between paying and tricking a girl. There are plenty of girls cool with one night. Plenty. Who really, actually, do want to fuck you (if you're not pathetic). No money required, no 3 am guilt trips. Why would that be less appealing than doing a girl who sees you rather like a root canal-not fun, but necessary to get to the desired end result (money in her case, less pain in the case of a root canal).

I like to think doing me is an end in itself, not merely a way to money. But hey, that's me.

"There are plenty of girls cool with one night."

THOSE are the ones who bang on the door @3am/want to know what's wrong with them...

ends up that girls and guys have an entirely different perception about this [Amy is obviously one exception]... as we might have expected. Shannon, as often as not it's beer goggles that get someone in bed with you. Since I don't drink I was OFTEN the wingman to keep friends from waking up with someone they would regret. Including guys that were pretty shabby. That didn't last too long, since it was such a drag for me... I couldn't really pick anyone up becasue I was sober, and it would seem like I was taking advantage of them if they weren't. And... I saw so much of how they were all careless about who/what they took home I figured you could get just about any nasty social disease from anyone. In a well respected college town, with the "nice" girls. "and that case of chlymidia you caught junior year abroad," Probably AT LEAST as likely to happen here as abroad. A few of my friends ended up with this or that...

Somewhere along the way it's been said that women hate the idea that a guy wouldn't differentiate what he did with an escort and what he did with a girlfriend, but that IS just physical. Amy said: "but yet also love a woman and connect with her on an emotional level." Is it too hard to believe that it's 2 different things for us?

Shannon

It's your looks, your personality, your charisma that's getting this person into bed-not your wallet.

Are you sure you're a chick? I can assure you, the wallet is often the FIRST consideration. After all, what do you think "Game" is? The act of misrepresenting yourself to a woman (the mark) long enough to get her to have sex with you, and then ditching her after two weeks of hot sex and saying "It's not you, it's me."

Shannon, you are mistaken. Many successful, good looking men use escorts and not out of desperation. Sometimes its just about satisfying a need without the drama attached. I don't see how its better to get a girl drunk and then because the alcohol has lowered her inhibitions take her home. With an escort, its all laid out, you pay,you get what you want, she leaves. There's no questions about the future, about do you love me, etc. Sometimes men just want sex and that's it. And honestly, as much as women are wired differently, sometimes we would like that too. How many college girls do you know that have a friends with benefits or a fuck buddy? Wouldn't it be nice to be able to just pick up the phone and know that what you want is getting delivered and there's no explanations asked for where you were or who you were with?

"Heterosexual Aids for Men is largely a myth. Not counting Africa."

Ok, that seems like a self-negating statement. Heterosexual AIDS for men is either real or it isn't.

I might have something here, might not.

I bet that the biggest reason women think hiring a hooker is a bad thing is that they do not want to think money can even get close to what they have to offer.

I know that the act of sex itself can be, and often is, mechanical. It's also not really enough. Why does Emma Watson have so many fans? It's not because she's the hottest thing on two feet (although she's very nice), it's because Hermione is smart and cares deeply. I confess that I hope Emma herself is that way, and tough enough to stay successful for many years.

Traci Lords is at Dragoncon this year. There's a survivor. I plan to congratulate her on her success and see if she's a vending machine. I think not.

I can't imagine why this woman would be so upset. All men always pay for sex, one way or another.

"I would ask him why he went, how many times, the general quaility level of the hooker, and if he used protection every time"

In my opinion, only the last question is important. The others strike me as invasive, asking for way too much information, as it's PAST behaviour. I don't think anyone has the right to practically pry open someone's soul and ask for the last scrap of information. Would you answer all of those questions about past boyfriends? Many women seem to feel that no privacy is allowed in a relationship, none! Every tiny detail has to be revealed or it's not 'honest'.

I don't understand how it 'smacks of desperation' more than trying to talk various women at a bar out of their panties on a Friday night.

The LW did say 'escorts' and not 'hookers'.

> Because some women are revolted
> by the idea that all sex is
> prostitution.

This is a theme with you, time and again. You love to prop that particular chip up on your shoulder and walk through the town square, daring anyone to knock it off. It's like you're eager to announce that Nobody's REALLY happy in love... People who say they're happy are actually just WHORES, man!

Or do I misread you, Brian?