CMIIW, correct me if I'm wrong, but this guy wasn't pestering girls outside the Boston Immigrant School for the Blind & Dim-witted.

If he wasn't pestering youths or unsophisticated people, and he is in fact a recent widower, then yeah, he should have been cut some slack instead of humiliated in international media.

Prostitution (and Johnning) it still bad news, though.

What is the difference between giving a woman $50 for a quickee at her place vs. buying her a dinner and drinks for $100 for a quickee at her place after dinner? (Other than the fact that the 2nd option cost twice as much as the first)

Present the matter in the second woman in precisely those terms when you ask her out: She'll explain.

But don't you know, it's "human trafficking" to pay someone for their time. Capitalism! Exploitation! All that! LOL!

I'm conflicted. My logical brain and my libertarian nature say, "sure, women and men should be able to market their services for otherwise legal activity." But my eyes tell me that prostitution in general destroys people. So I guess the only way to resolve is to de-criminalize work to make a society where there are always better options for supporting yourself.

prostitution in general destroys people

No. It isn't the root cause, it tends to be a potentially observable symptom. The root cause tends to be an addiction - drugs, booze, gambling - and a quick way to make some serious coin to pay for said addiction. I suppose that meth mouth allows one to give better hummers, but that seems a bit extreme to up one's game.

"But don't you know, it's "human trafficking" to pay someone for their time."

Yep - the politically correct line nowadays is that all sex workers ( ranging from strippers to career escorts ) are sex slaves in bondage to .. men of course.

It's gotten so bad that police and human rights organizations who deal with real human trafficking have called for advocates to stop coopting the term for their fundraising, and for local police to stop claiming they are breaking up human trafficking rings when they're really busting plain old sex solicitation. It's distracting from genuine efforts and diluting those resources.

There are a bunch or articles online that have been published by women who work as private escorts, meaning that they screen their own clients or work with a few trusted individuals who recommend clients.

A consistent depiction they offer of their clients includes that of a man around 50 or above (like Kraft) who is either single or married to a woman who no longer desires to have sex. Now it's likely that some of those guys are lying, but these women don't seem to think so.

It's an open secret that a lot of women lose their sex drive as they get into middle age. This is especially true after menopause. But you're only supposed to acknowledge that if it allows you to complain about 'selfish' men. Yet when men that age seek out younger women or escorts, this fact must be denied in order shame men.

If you “own your own body”, then you can rent it out. And own it you do.

prostitution in general destroys people

No. It isn't the root cause, it tends to be a potentially observable symptom. >>>

May have to agree to disagree. There's a chicken and egg problem, to begin with. Yes, there are high levels of substance abuse among sex workers. I'd have to numb myself with anything I could get my hands on in order to have sex with random strangers, some of whom are terrible people and very few of whom I would otherwise be attracted to . That's got to account for at least some of the substance abuse by others. I also think that humans (especially women) aren't wired to have such intimacy with numerous random strangers. It's psychologically damaging. I also personally believe that we have a spirit as well as a body and that our souls are damaged by random sex with strangers that we only consent to in exchange for material goods.

It's an open secret that a lot of women lose their sex drive as they get into middle age. This is especially true after menopause. But you're only supposed to acknowledge that if it allows you to complain about 'selfish' men. Yet when men that age seek out younger women or escorts, this fact must be denied in order shame men.

It's still adultery. Period.

I can only hope that if I ever do get married, and my hypothetical wife loses interest in sex, that I will be man enough to have the self-control to merely either jack off or just sit back and watch the TV.

Prostitution is just an extremely pleasurable way for two people to abuse each other, with one earning some money, IMO.

It's still adultery. Period.

I can only hope that if I ever do get married, and my hypothetical wife loses interest in sex, that I will be man enough to have the self-control to merely either jack off or just sit back and watch the TV.

Prostitution is just an extremely pleasurable way for two people to abuse each other, with one earning some money, IMO.

mpetrie98 at March 24, 2019 12:49 PM

Well bravo for your moral certitude, but I dont like the fact that most people seem to want their sexual preferences enshrined into law.

A lot of people seem confused here, because they think this is an issue for the federal government. It is not. California or any other state has a perfect right to legalize prostitution under certain conditions and in certain places, as Nevada did.

"I dont like the fact that most people seem to want their sexual preferences enshrined into law."

You and Amy both seem confused. There's a big difference between widespread social ostracism by the public and media, and being arrested and imprisoned.

The same libertarianism that says you should be able to pay someone for sex also says that says that whatever percentage of the population who wishes may shun you and say you're a bad person when they find out you did so.

Freedom to buy sex doesn't cancel out freedom of speech or association.

Also, when a man pays a woman for sex, he's making an economic statement in the market that her value lies primarily in her ability to sexually gratify him. That's pretty disrespectful outside of a pretty backward framework about the role of women.

RigelDog: But my eyes tell me that prostitution in general destroys people.

I R A Darth Aggie: It isn't the root cause, it tends to be a potentially observable symptom. The root cause tends to be an addiction - drugs, booze, gambling - and a quick way to make some serious coin to pay for said addiction.

In a little over two years working in health services in a big city jail hundreds of hookers and johns were referred to me (all were routinely referred to health services before they left booking)

With the hookers, addiction was pretty much universal: heroin, crack, meth, benzos, opioids and alcohol. Those things truly destroy people, including people other than the ones addicted.

Sexually transmitted diseases were a given. All of them had herpes- all. Most all had at least one other STD. About one in five had hepatitis C. Some had hepatitis B. Some had HIV. Some even had full blown AIDS, knew they had it, and were still hooking. Many of them also had one or more of: scabies, lice, ring worm, impetigo, abscesses- some life threatening, staph infections- even MRSA, the flu, pneumonia and other respiratory infections, giardia, occasionally chicken pox, one with TB.

They don't make "serious coin". They're poor, sometimes homeless, or sharing motel rooms with other drug addicts. Some live off and on with relatives or friends. Some live with boyfriends who are also drug addicts- if the boyfriend is very young he might also be hooking. They shoplift, burglarize and rob. Some have apartments, with subsidized rent and utilities, food stamps and other benefits. Some also have day jobs- house cleaning and geriatric home care were favorites as it gives them easy access to other people's belongings.

A lot of them have children- toddlers, grade school age- living with them, or with relatives or friends, or in the motel room with Mommy's friends, or in foster care. Some of the children also "help pay the bills", by spending time with Mommy's boyfriends (drug dealers and pimps) or being babysat by men while Mommy runs errands or goes to work. Some of the kids I work with now have had a lot of experience helping pay bills.

The johns were pathetic. Four or five times a week the cops would bring in a string of them. By "string" I mean there would be six to eight sad looking men linked together on chains, like stringers of fish. Their age range was 18 on up. One of the cops would be a good looking, hyperactive young female in a ho costume, proudly strutting around and displaying her catch. Most of the johns looked like working class men: T-shirts, sweatshirts, jeans or shorts, work clothes, work shoes, tennis shoes or flip-flops, beer bellies, needing a shave, a shower, a haircut, deodorant. All of them wearing a shamed expression that said, "I am the biggest dumb ass in the county". These were also routinely referred to health services before they left booking so we could educate them on all of the above.

We used to ask some of them, "Why would you think a good looking young woman like that would be out on the street at night offering blowjobs for $15? You didn't think she might be a cop?" We'd advise them, "Use some common sense. A good looking, healthy prostitute is out of your price range. If you're looking for a $15 whore, first get her to smile. If she has nice teeth, that's a cop. You're looking for someone with a high tat-to-tooth ratio. The lower her tat-to-tooth ratio, the more likely she's a cop".

Also, when a man pays a woman for sex, he's making an economic statement in the market that her value lies primarily in her ability to sexually gratify him. That's pretty disrespectful outside of a pretty backward framework about the role of women.

Does the same thing apply to anything else a man pays a woman for?

How come it's always Amy's male visitors, ones who rarely comment on other topics, who affirm these oughtabeeleegle posts?

The sisters always sit this one out.

Hmmmmmmmmm

I am always amazed at the people who have no problem with sex work, and think it should be a legit option for people to make money, would never consider doing it themselves. Nobody should have to be so desperate that they have to put themselves in that kind of position. It is not the same as any other job. I highly doubt there are many people who do it as their first choice. Amy often complains about low pay for writers, why doesn't she just fuck for money if it is such a great idea???

Does the same thing apply to anything else a man pays a woman for? ~ Ken R at March 24, 2019 9:24 PM

Yes. If you're paying an accountant, her primary economic value to you lies in her ability to do your taxes or books; in her knowledge of tax law.

Robert Kraft is a pig who does not need, or deserve your sympathy. He is not some sad sack widower longing for the touch of a woman. He has a pretty smoking hot girlfriend, who was with him a the Super Bowl. From what I have read, he went to this place bc he wanted something unsavory. Why else would a billionaire buy sex in a nondescript Florida strip mall? How would he even find such a place if he weren't actively looking for it?

Initial accounts said that the women who were "working" there were worked so hard they had no time to attend to their personal hygiene and were in a severely broken down physical state. I cannot understand how a person can regard themselves as "ethical" and "moral" and not find this use of poor, broken, underclass women as inhumane. I guess this is the kind of morality that comes from atheism.

I keep hearing from the men on this board that sex trafficking is not a "real thing". Sorry to disappoint you, but it is and its a huge problem here in Texas, especially in the area I live in. We have a high number of missing children, mostly female, from around this area. Almost all of whom are children who have been placed in state care and have spent many years in the foster system. These girls get lured out of these crappy situations by men promising to love, care for and provide them with some stability. What ends up happening is that the girls are groomed into sex work with drugs and alcohol. It is very similar to what is going on in the UK with the Pakistani rape gangs in places like Rotherham. These are the women who become prostitutes and they have not made an affirmative choice to become prostitutes or drug addicts. They are young, vulnerable women looking for what their parents should have given them in the first place and by the time they realize they have been duped, its too late bc they are addicted and have no where else to go even if they could get away.

If your libertarian mindset allows you to be comfortable with that, I can't change your mind and that is why I don't post on this topic, but it does disgust me that people can take such a cavalier attitude to so much human suffering.

Before WWII, prostitution was semi-legal in most places. Even today there are places where it goes on sort of in the open. In the South one day I stumbled into a bar where there were probably 20 black hookers with white pimps. Rather unusual but it seemed like a nice clean operation.

The primary motive for banning sex work is the claim that it is disgusting and any woman who does it is being exploited (particularly for extreme feminists who view any PIV sex as rape). Since poor people don't know what is good for them, we must stop the exploitation. But in general, people take a job if it is the best they can find given their circumstances, and that includes hooking. Another hidden motive is that women don't like the competition.

Is it not also exploitation when women go on lots of dates just for the nice dinner? But exploitation of men. Heck, you can call prostitution exploitation of men's sex drive too since it is men who pay.

Claims about the violence prostitutes face are ironic because they only face violence because it is illegal and they can't work in a nice safe cathouse with a security guard, like in the old days. Having a secure place would also mean that they could make sure the girls are disease-free, like in Nevada.

It was pointed out that prostitution is icky and is soul-destroying, but I think it is the other way around: women who are already broken by addiction and are both lazy and desperate turn to it.

Claims about the violence prostitutes face are ironic because they only face violence because it is illegal and they can't work in a nice safe cathouse with a security guard, like in the old days. ~ cc at March 25, 2019 9:08 AM

I think with some research, you'll find this is mostly theoretical and not true in reality.

How does a prostitute prove she was raped when her job is having sex with strangers?

As we know from basic free-market economy 101 theory, a saturated market results in lower prices, an increase in demand and supply and increased acceptance of the “merchandise”. When we apply this to the sex trade, this means more women abused in prostitution, more men paying for sex, and further risk of pressure to practice unsafe sex. It also results in a total acceptance of the system of prostitution, and of men paying women for access to the inside of their bodies for one-sided sexual pleasure.

AND

Legalisation has been a disaster. Under this regime, demand, trafficking of women and girls, and the illegal brothel sector has increased. There is no evidence of a decrease in violence, HIV rates or murders of women in legal sex trades, but there is evidence that the rights and freedoms promised by lobbyists for legalisation and decriminalisation were transferred to the brothel owners and sex buyers.

So, the beneficiaries of legalized prostitution are not the prostitutes, but the pimps and the johns.

I am not a feminist and dating and prostitution are nowhere near the same thing at all.

"I am always amazed at the people who have no problem with sex work, and think it should be a legit option for people to make money, would never consider doing it themselves. "

As an argument, this does not persuade me. There's lots of jobs that I would not consider taking, e.g., garbage man. But I'm glad some people do. You have to convince me that a woman agreeing to have sex for money is so uniquely horrible, more so than almost any other human activity, that no one should be permitted to do it even if there is a full and complete understanding and consent between the two parties. I don't see it.

I'm not blind to a lot of the issues that street hookers have. However, most of them were already pretty messed up before they started hooking. (Same goes for a lot of the johns.) If it were somehow possible to physically prevent them from hooking, I don't see that it would improve their situations one whit.

If women really want equality they would stop trying to or allowing the normalization of things that negatively effect them. If prostitution and the desperation that drives mostly women to it, were a man thing, you wouldn't see support to try and legitimize it by calling it empowerment, of in these people's best interest to keep them safe and the rest of it. Rather than create another way for women to legally be treated like second class citizens, we should try to do more to stop them from feeling desperate enough to have to sell themselves

cc: "one day I stumbled into a bar where there were probably 20 black hookers with white pimps. Rather unusual but it seemed like a nice clean operation... Having a secure place would also mean that they could make sure the girls are disease-free, like in Nevada."

It seemed like a nice clean operation? How could you possibly tell? This is a fantasy. It takes anywhere from a few days to several months after exposure to sexually transmitted diseases before they can be detected by tests (window period) During that time they can be transmitted through sex.

There is no such thing as safe sex with a prostitute. Legal or not, sex with a prostitute is high risk.

Stormy: "...we should try to do more to stop them from feeling desperate enough to have to sell themselves"

I wish there was more being done for those who do it out of desperation or against their will. However there will always be prostitutes. There are women, and even young girls (and boys), to whom having sex is no more emotionally or morally significant than drinking a Coke. If someone will give them $20 for a quick sex act it's just a quick twenty dollars to them.

Sheep Mom: "Initial accounts said that the women who were "working" there were worked so hard they had no time to attend to their personal hygiene and were in a severely broken down physical state."

It's not likely that their poor hygiene and physical condition are secondary to (i.e. caused by) their involvement in prostitution. More likely their involvement in prostitution, poor hygiene and poor health are all secondary to other things like drug addiction, poverty, mental illness, low cognitive ability, abuse, and lack of ability or motivation for self-care in general.

Maybe there ARE plenty of prostitutes who are just lazy. I doubt the highly attractive call girls in "Mayflower Madam" had no other options - such as living in New Jersey instead of paying Manhattan rents. (Most people who work in Manhattan, IIRC, don't live there.)

That doesn't change the fact that for the AVERAGE prostitute, the work is easy to get into - but very difficult to get out of. I've never heard anyone claim otherwise.

Sheep Mom ✓

"Does the same thing apply to anything else a man pays a woman for? "

Yes. If you pay anyone for anything, you're saying the transaction is optimal given available options. Price is the means of conveying what you consider optimal. You wouldn't pay a chef to take out your appendix, or a plumber to cut your hair. Every transaction is an implicit statement that each party is getting the optimum value they can from the other.

"I am always amazed at the people who have no problem with sex work, and think it should be a legit option for people to make money, would never consider doing it themselves."

There are literally THOUSANDS of occupations I think are legit, but which I wouldn't consider doing myself.

"Nobody should have to be so desperate that they have to put themselves in that kind of position."

That's how I feel about mucking out horse stalls or working in a smoke-filled bar, but in the latter case, there are people who willingly choose to smoke themselves, so there it is.

"Amy often complains about low pay for writers, why doesn't she just fuck for money if it is such a great idea???""

Amy apparently believes her writing abilities exceed her ability to fake being turned on. Given her sense of humor and candor, I'm inclined to agree with that assessment.

"If your libertarian mindset allows you to be comfortable with that,"

I doubt anyone here is defending most of what you describe. The libertarian position is that legalization would prevent those situations, much like ending Prohibition replaced seedy speakeasies in warehouse basements with fancy nightclubs. When an industry is criminalized, it becomes dominated by criminal types. The workers in an illegal industry can't turn to the authorities when they are mistreated because they are criminals themselves.

Sheep Mom, I agree 150% with your moral assessment of Kraft and of prostitution. There are plenty of other industries I hold in the same moral contempt. However, I don't see government as an instrument for forcing my beliefs on others.

The "libertarian mindset" starts with allowing things one finds distasteful, has no intention of partaking, and from which one has zero benefit to gain.

"I am not a feminist and dating and prostitution are nowhere near the same thing at all."

When a guy takes a woman out to dinner, they have sex on the first date (a VERY common thing these days) and he never calls her again, and the woman repeats this pattern multiple times with different men, the only difference I see is that the hooker is smart enough to harbor no illusions about what's going on.

"we should try to do more to stop them from feeling desperate enough to have to sell themselves""

So, now it's government's job to stop people from having certain feelings? Huxley and Orwell just giggled in their graves.

There has only been one even partially successful effort to eliminate prostitution - one province in China started executing prostitutes. I don't think anyone here would endorse that.

There are online businesses that connect girls needing their college tuition paid with rich sugar daddies. At various times and places in history, marriage has effectively been prostitution on a retainer contract. There are plenty of legal situations with varying degrees of social approval where sex is to some extent traded for something else of value, so if you're against legalization, unless you want the government enforcing some sort of metric of true love on all sex, you're a hypocrite. About the only consistent position outlawing prostitution is the sharia/Old Testament Israeli positon of prohibiting all extramarital sex. If anyone is calling for that, I'd be willing to listen and be persuaded, because at least it's consistent.

I'm curious how the prohibitionists feel about strippers, since that's effectively foreplay for money.