Because it hurts the children involved.
Because it hurts that person.
Social pressures. We’re conditioned to think sex is so special.
Yup.
whoa there, guy. marriage is a sin? since when, and according to what religion?
in the Catholic church, it’s considered a sacrament–by definition, something that is supposed to help lead to holiness.
sex, however, is still viewed (by the Church) through the jaundiced prism provided by St. Augustine (whom i consider quite a hypocrite. he got plenty of his as a young guy, but once he converted, suddenly it was a Big Bad Thing that nobody should ever enjoy. sheesh. between him and St. Paul, no wonder the church is so outta touch. muttermuttermutter )
: ahem : sorry for the hijack, but i couldn’t let that once pronouncement stand unchallenged.
I must also point out that there is a wide variety of doctrine that falls under the label of christian. Just as many christian viewpoints regarding sexuality as there are sects of christianity. In other words, a lot.
Forgot one:
If sex is no diferent from other activities, would you allow your wife/husband to have sex with other men/women?
On the surface, the argument makes sense - sex is ok, selling is ok, why isn’t selling sex ok?
But how many of us would like the following scenarios:
-I think [insert your name here] is some kind of [insert your job here] and I believe his wife whores.
-My daughter is going to college next year to major in Whore
-Yeaahhh!! I got a job in that new whorehouse!
-When I grow up, I want to whore.
-Mom, Dad, my wife…the whore.
Maybe it is just “societal pressure” but that’s the price of living in a society instead of an anarchist’s free-for-all.
I suppose there are tangible issues as well:
-Spread of disease
-Breakdown of the family (why get married to a woman who will eventually get ugly and make you beg for sex when you can just drop some cash?)
-Objectifies women (more than say Baywatch or Maxim magazine)
-Breakdown of the family (why get married to a woman who will eventually get ugly and make you beg for sex when you can just drop some cash?)
Did you mean this?
For myself, I agree with FairyChatMom’s post way up there. Sex is a sharing of a part of myself (a big part, and I don’t mean what you’re thinking I mean) with someone else. It’s an act of emotion as much as it is an act of my physical body. It’s a way of showing someone how I feel about them, a way of connecting with someone in a way that I can’t do otherwise.
Note that it’s one of many ways I havve of sharing communication, intimacy, love, caring, emotion… the list things sex can express for me is pretty big.
With that in mind… trading money for sex (i.e. faux intimacy, as someone else said) is definitely out of my personal moral bounds. Sex comes with too many other things to be traded away for something so meaningless as a wad of green paper.
And if this means, as Otto says, that I’ve built up a mystique about sex… well, then so what? Sex is one of the things that makes my life interesting and special. It’s one of the many things my wife and I enjoy together, and we choose not to share that with others. It’s special, just for us. And yes, that gives it a status apart from other things. For instance, I have no problems with using my other talents (such as web design) to make money. It helps me, it helps other people, and I enjoy doing it. Sex is definitely “different” for me, however… I could not do the same with sex.
But, that’s what I choose. I don’t expect that others share my priorities, morals, or “mystiques.”
For example, an old friend of mine used to be an escort. She did it of her own volition for a time because she needed money, and when she wanted to stop, she stopped. We didn’t have a problem with it then, and we don’t know, largely because she didn’t have a problem with it, nor did her SO’s at the time. If someone had a moral dilemma about it, I don’t think I’d be supportive of it, but for someone like her, it was fine.
I guess what it comes down to for me is this: there’s nothing wrong with being a whore, in a general sense, so long as you’re doing it of your own free will and have no moral qualms about it. However, there is definitely something wrong with it for me. I simply choose not to sell myself in that way.
Re: IAACE: I wrote a novel called “Siren7” about a ruthless publisher who tries to make an attractive young copy editor into his personal sex slave. At one point, I have the publsher rationalizing his scheme by saying it would be good for the copy editor. His reasoning is pretty much the same as yours.
:eek:
Would I allow my partner to have sex outside the relationship? yes, as long as I have the same privilege and it’s a decision we’ve arrived at mutually. If we decide to open the relationship or close it, that’s our concern and no one else’s.
Substitute “actress” for “whore” in your scenarios a century or two ago and you’d get the same reaction most would give “whore” today. The opinion of professions changes over time and as we as a socirty become less messed up over sex, maybe “I married a whore” won’t be so far-fetched an idea.
“Society” does not automatically have to mean “no whores” any more than whores equal “anarchist’s free-for-all.”
Were prostitution legal, prostitutes would be regulated and licensed, and said license would include regular medical checks. Just like what happens in Nevada now. With legal prostitution, prostitutes would have far more power to demand condom usage and far less incentive to buckle to pressure not to use them in exchange for more money. Can you offer some support that legal prostitution is a cause of reduced marriage rates? Or that legalized prostitution leads to increased objectification of women?
I’m hopping on FairyChatMom’s boat right here. While, logically, sex isn’t really much more than carefully coordinated body movements, there’s still something about it . . . that ‘sharing of self’ deal. Like you’re not just having sex with some other human body, but that you’re connecting in some grand way that combines both the physical pleasure and all those bubbly lovey feelings that are hopefully present as well. (Yes, that was oozy and gushy and gross, and I apologize.) Perhaps it was implanted by TV or too many sex ed classes, but it’s there and I kinda like it and I wouldn’t trade it for anything.
So why might I dislike the concept of prostitution or people who decide to be prostitutes? Because, in that scenario, none of the above really matters or even occurs and I don’t know what to think about someone who WOULD trade the above feelings for something. I just can’t identify with their position, y’know? Like how some of you can’t understand HOW being a “whore” could be wrong or how someone could POSSIBLY like Cadbury’s chocolate or whatever. That’s just how I feel, and feelings don’t have to make sense. I try not to let my feelings force me to judge someone a certain way, but not everyone does, and this is part of the reason why “whores” are “bad.”
I respect the position of people like Otto because it really makes the most sense in the face of debate. Unless she’s being forced to be a prostitute or stripper or whatever at gunpoint, no, being a “whore” isn’t really wrong. Maybe all these ‘mystiques’ can’t really hold water, either, but, y’know what? I’m fine with that. Just let me live in my little fantasy world where sex with someone I love is that much better than sex with anyone else and where spending a little extra for the right brand of cola isn’t a waste of money. I’ll try not to step on your toes too much.
I don’t really see the problem with prostitution. It’s something I’d never want to do for a living, but so is being a pediatrician or a plumber. I couldn’t bring myself to give some stranger a blowjob, but I’m sure there are plenty of hookers who couldn’t bring themselves to poke the cute little puppies with needles. The fact that some people (or even most people) aren’t comfortable with doing a job doesn’t make it immoral, unethical, trashy, wrong, or any other negative term you care to choose.
Personally, I find the honesty involved in professional whoring kind of refreshing. I mean, we all know women whose relationships only continue as long as there’s a certain level of money being spent on her. Nice dinners, jewelry, trips, that sort of shit. Putting out in exchange for presents is whoring, and dishonest whoring at that, because it’s disguised as love.
I say do it for love, or do it for money, or do it for shits and giggles. Just be honest about it, whatever you choose to do.
Good luck with all that. Personally, I would prefer not to taste another guys cock while I’m kissing my girlfriend but that’s just me. The whole purpose of having a wife/girlfriend is that you are making a committment to each other, otherwise what’s the point? Why go through the charade?
I would like to see a cite for that circa 1800 actress=whore statement.
I don’t see that our society is “messed up” over sex. Everyone has their opinion of what is appropriate sexual behavior and it seems that every liberal thinks anyone who does not believe that being a homosexual, a pedophile, or overly permiscuous is somehow “messed up” or “uptight” or whathaveyou. If most of society feels that prostitution is immoral, well we live in a democracy.
Anyhow it’s still a shitty job. Forget the Julia Roberts Pretty Woman fantasy bullsit. There is just something pathetic about a woman reduced to walking the streets at 3:00 am to solicit sex from the dregs of society so she can feed her kids or buy crack or groceries or whatever.
Either way, I still don’t want them hanging around my neighborhood. If that makes me “messed up” about sex than so be it.
No. Other than the fact that by definition, you are purchasing a woman for the purpose of having sex. What is more objectifying than that?
What honesty? People don’t become prostitutes because they think it would be a cool job and they happen to be night owls. They do it because they have little else going on and it beats starving. Let’s not pretend that it’s the same thing as buying a pizza from someone who hates being a delivery boy. Not like I have all this whoring experience or anything but to me it seems like taking advantage of someone’s misfortune.
Not all prostitutes fit this stereotype. Some choose it because they control their hours of work, make good money, and occasionally enjoy the sex. Such people have self-esteem and are psychologically healthy.
Regarding the drugged-out street-walking wrecks, is the problem prostitution? It seems to me that the real problems may include: lack of money, lack of education and opportunity, drug addiction, and long-term untreated psychological problems.
There are a number of readily available mouthwashes which will take care of your girlfriend’s cock breath without leaving behind the stink of imposing your morality on others. And really, is that the issue? That you don’t want to taste another man’s penis? As for making a commitment to another, why is that commitment lessened by a mutually agreed-upon decision to allow the other to have sex outside the relationship?
I didn’t say that actress=whore. What I said was that the opinion of professions changes over time.
(italicized material added to make the quote make sense)
First, equating homosexuality, promiscuity and pedophilia is bullshit. Second, bringing homosexuality, promiscuity and pedophilia into this discussion is irrelevant since they have no bearing on the subject at hand, which is whoring. Finally, as long as you insist on bringing homosexuality into it, in a country where it is illegal for me to legally form a family in the name of family values, where it is illegal in a dozen states for me to have consensual sex with the adult partner of my choice in the privacy of my own bedroom, yes, I would say that indicates a certain level of mess-upedness about sex.
So if prostitution were legalized tomorrow you’d change your moral opinion?
Were prostitution legal, it could be zoned. Anyone wishing to engage in prostitution would go to a specific neighborhood. Don’t want to be around it? Don’t go to that neighborhood.
My escort friend certainly didn’t spend any time hanging around street corners at 3 AM looking for tricks. Nor did his clientele consist of "the dregs of society. ’ It would be useful if you could learn to look past this stereotype of sex workers and their clients to focus on the larger question.
Raping a woman would IMHO be more objectifying than paying her for sex. Murdering her, likewise. Sexually harassing her as well. The key is consent. If a woman (or a man) consents to be rented, how are they objectified?
And you spoke to how many prostitutes exactly before forming this opinion?
It’s a figure of speach. Don’t be obtuse.
If a person is in a committed sexual relationship their partner should be able to provide for their needs (unless you’re some kind of 12th century duke or somthing who married for a political aliance with France or something). If they feel that one person cannot provide for their sexual needs, don’t pretend that you are in a committed relationship. Just go around and sleep with whoever you want.
In other words, if there’s no diference between a “commited partner” and some random you pick up in a bar, what’s the point of having a partner?
No
Right…because zoning keeps the crack-hos off my street. I’m pretty sure that there would be black market prostitution. Not every ho can afford to lease out a high-class brothel.
Out of curiousity, was your friend ever sexually abused as a child or anything out of the ordinary like that?
Cause the very act of selling a person like a piece of meat is objectifying. You aren’t building a relationship with them or anything.
Admitedly my experience with prostitutes is very limited.
I find it interesting that most of the people moralizing about prostitution and stereotyping prostitutes seem to know little or nothing about the sex industry. Not that that’s ever stopped anyone from having an opinion…
You say it’s a figure of speech, but I find it very revealing.
Well, to hell with bisexuals I guess.
If one partner has a sexual need that the other partner can’t or won’t fulfill, partner A has two choices. One, s/he can deny that s/he has that sexual need or two, s/he can seek it outside the relationship. If partner B has no objection to partner A’s seeking that fulfillment outside the relationship, who are you to declare that this partnership is somehow less committed than yours?
Oh gee, why would someone engage in a committed relationship over random pickups? Maybe there are emotional, financial, familial etc. aspects to the committed relationship that aren’t in the pickups? Just because you apparently have all of your sexual needs met in your relationship doesn’t make your relationship superior by definition to one where the participants have freely chosen to open it.
Who said anything about a “high-class brothel”? How about an inexpensive motel? How about the client or the prostitute’s home? How about a group of prostitutes pool their resources and rent a house together? The point still stands, if prostitution were legal within “red-light districts,” there would be no need for “crack hos” to stand on your corner.
I don’t know, and it’s irrelevant.
Because you say it is? I don’t “build relationships” with 99% of the people with whom I interact. Am I “objectifying” all of them? Or am I only objectifying the ones I have sex with?
Oh, and who are you to say that a sex worker and a client can’t or don’t “build a relationship”?
Yes…I am revealing that I am not interested in dating a girl who sleeps with other men while we are dating.
How about go out and find someone who both satisfies you sexually and provides the emotional needs?
By DEFINITION, the fact that someone sleeps outside their relationship is less committed than someone who is monogamous. That’s what a commitment is.
I feel the topic is drifting here but what exactly is the point of an “open relationship”? Do you have one person who is you “girlfriend/boyfriend” who has right of first refusal? Is there one person who is just
I would be willing to bet that “red-light districts” would continue to be a detractor from the local neighborhood, just like the pawn shop, strip club, porn shop, liquor store, and 24 check cashing store (all legal).
Maybe the question you should ask is why these things all have an NIMBY effect on the neighborhood. Is it because they attract a shady element or is it because they are an indicator that there is enough of a shady element to support these industries?
Not really.
You “objectify” someone when you look at them as a product or service, not as an individual person (IOW, you view them as an “object”). It is diferent from going to a store or restautant. The clerk or waitress is “objectified” somewhat because you are viewing them, not as a person, but as a representitive of the product or service you are purchasing. With prostitution, and to a lesser extent stripclubs, the product or service is the person themselves. To be, there just seems to be something inherently wrong with being able to purchase a person.
On the other hand, I can see a point that if I am going out and trying to get laid anyway, I might as well get a couple hundred bucks for it.
Please. Most of the people on this board have no understanding of half the bullshit they write. Besides, I watch those specials on HBO just like everyone else.
By the way, I am just expressing my opinion here (as is everyone else). Things are not the way they are or are not “because I say”.
And again I point to our friends, the bisexuals. Bisexuals by default can’t have all of their sexual needs met by just one person. If the committed partner of a bisexual person consents to the bisexual having sex with another person, how dare you declare that relationship is less committed than a monogamous one?
Well, no, by definition a commitment as that to which the people actually involved in the relationship commit. A relationship whose partners commit to “forsaking all others” is no less committed than one whose partners commit to “forsaking all others, except when we both mutually consent to it.” And what about polyamorous people, who form committed relationships with three or four partners? How disgustingly presumptuous of you to declare that any relationship outside your particular configuration is less committed (and perhaps less valid?) than one that matches yours.
Or perhaps it’s because blue-nosed busybodies have declared such things to be “shady” thus starting the cycle to begin with?
When exactly did you read my mind to determine how I look at the people I have paid for sex? How can you, locked inside your own head, claim to know what every person who has ever paid for sex has thought about the person from whom they are buying it?
So “legitimate” escorts who accompany people in need of a date for a social function are inherently wrong for doing so? And, if you object to “buying a person” then by all means don’t do it. That doesn’t make you any moral than one who would pay for sex or than one who sells it.
Then please don’t express your opinions as if they are facts, and please have some ability to back them up beyond “it’s just wrong” or “BY DEFINITION.”
Actually, the product in strip clubs is the dance. The product in prostitution is a variety of sexual activities. The persons themselves remains their own agents. In slavery the person is the product, I don’t think it applies anywhere else.
What makes you think a person is a sex act or a dance?