and more while we’re waiting:
Here we have a bunch of stats, including “90% of street prostitutes are drug addicts” and a CDC figure of only 4% of prostutites interviewed stated they’d used condoms for every vaginal contact in the prior 5 years (which means that 96% of them didn’t always use condoms).
http://www.webjohn.net/health.shtml
This later one, IMHO, puts to rest the claim that the sex worker, by virtue of their status, would be more careful.
Shall I go on?
It should also be noted that condoms aren’t 100% reliable, of course. Besides the usual ripping & tearing issue, there is also, I’ve heard somewhere, the fact that the AIDS virus can travel through the walls of a condom because it’s so tiny. Anyone out there heard something similar?
I don’t hate people who are involved in sex work (e.g. strippers, phone sex operators) but I do think jiggling your breasts in some strange man’s face is an undignified way of making a living. So I wouldn’t want my daughters to do this for a living.
Nor would I want them to air their dirty laundry on the Jerry Springer show, for much of the same reasons.
It’s undignified.
Unca Cecil disproved that already. http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a940506.html
Reminds me- one of my sisters worked in phone sex while she was in college and lived with me and my husband. No problem, but one day she wasn’t feeling too well, and decided to take a couple calls at home. She figured we were at school, it wouldn’t hurt anything.
He and I walked in just as she was starting the climax of the call. The look on her face…she ran upstairs to finish and he and I ran downstairs so the caller couldn’t hear us laughing. I still snicker thinking about it.
On a more serious note, though, when she did show dancing (I guess they keep the nipples and groin covered, but it’s still tips and drinks), some guy must have followed her home. Sent her flowers, unsigned, 3 or 4 times…the shop wouldn’t tell us who was sending them, though she had a good idea who it was. Her boyfriend and my husband took turns taking her to work and picking her up till she quit. Icky.
Zero, so somehow they are perfect and never make mistakes? Maybe theres a reason why they never released it.
rjung: thanks for the info. One more myth down the tubes…
Of course, all streetwalkers who have tested positive for HIV and other diseases immediately retire from the profession and find another means of support. :rolleyes:
I am truly interested Stoid, in understanding a man who I am assuming loves and respects his wife but accepts the fact that she spreads her legs for hundreds of men then brings sloppy seconds home to him. Did he really have no problem with this at any time? Did he trust that every man she was alone with would not harm her or was he even concerned? Was the very real possibility of her being arrested something he didn’t worry about? Was the danger, no matter how careful she was, of contacting a potentially deadly disease something that didn’t keep him awake at night? Did he ever feel degraded when out in public with the knowledge that at any given time they may run into someone who had recently fucked his wife?
Was her income so lucrative that he was willing to accept all of these risks in exchange for the almighty $$$?
I also think your view of the adult sex industry to be unrealistically sugar coated.
Diane wrote:
Larry Flynt didn’t have problems with his wife boinking other men (and women), if The People vs. Larry Flynt (the movie) is to be believed.
That just happens to be one of my favorite movies (I own the video). My point exactly, Athena (wasn’t that her name?) was one very fucked up individual.
Somehow I kinda doubt that, but I’ll play along…
Not hundreds. She was a very good and expensive call girl. Most of her clients were regulars. Also, one date could and often did cover a week’s expenses. Sometimes much more. Her most memorable date was with a man who paid her $10,000 for one night, and they never even had sex. He just wanted company all night while he got high. (She didn’t, she’s never used drugs). Typical pathetic Hollywood guy, too much money, not enough soul. Lucky for her, eh?
None. Ever. Kinda liked it. They are swingers in their private life.
Pretty much. She worked for the top madam in Los Angeles, whose clientele was thoroughly checked out. At that level, you really don’t see a lot of strangled hookers. Again, you (and most people) lump all prostitution into one basket, and that is just not accurate. Just because woman A accepts cash money for sex and woman B accepts cash money for sex, doesn’t make their experiences, attitudes, behaviors, environments, clients, all the same. Any more than a homeless woman accepting a meal in exchange for sex is the same as you sleeping with the guy who took you out to dinner.
He worried about it a lot, especially since the LAPD was targeting her. She had been one of their own, you see, and was in the process of writing a book about them that was not going to be very flattering. So they DID arrest her, though not for prostitution. (Again, very, very difficult to nail call girls) They set her up on a pandering charge and got her that way. And it was a setup, and the point was the book, given that that was the only thing they seized in the bust. She ended up serving a couple of years. I’m sure some Dopers have seen her on TV, she’s been on every damn TV show out there, including 60 Minutes. And my dad even went on Geraldo. Yuck.
I guess not. He trusted that she would protect herself, and she did.
Why would he? What’s degrading about it?
Degrade:
He didn’t feel any of this applied. They were and are sexually open people, and (rationally, I feel) do not make a distinction between her giving it away for free because she enjoys it and charging for it.
I do not share my father’s and my stepmother’s lifestyles. I do mostly agree with their attitudes, and I agree completely with their right to live in a way that works for them. And it most certainly does work for them. Unlike most people I have known personally, heard of, read about, and seen on television who give all kinds of lip service to honor, fidelity, family values, blah blah blah, and then treat each other like shit, cheat, and end up divorced, my father and his wife have demonstrated REAL devotion to each other and to their relationship over the years. I know of (and am part of) couples who love each other deeply, but my dad and his wife live and breath a commitment and devotion to one another that blows most others away. They worship each other. They adore each other. They would and have suffered tremendously for each other. It has been over 25 years, through some very, very tough times, and I am as sure of this as I am of anything: they will be together til death parts them, and I’m pretty damn sure that whoever is left behind won’t last long.
So who is anyone else to judge their sex life, eh? Isn’t love, devotion, and loyalty what it’s really about?
And I think yours is unrealisitically grim. The fact is that it isn’t has horrific as you think, and it isn’t all just peachy for everyone who does it, either. Depends on the person, what they do, and why they do it.
And virtually all the negatives that have been expressed here by you and other posters are negatives that could be almost completely eliminated with legalization and a cultural change in attitude. Sex work is not * inherently * degrading. Legalize all of it, regulate and tax it, and treat it like any other business without all the stigma and you’d find it far less disturbing job to do. I wouldn’t do it, but I wouldn’t be a massage therapist for the same reasons: I don’t like touching strangers naked bodies. Does that mean it’s degrading to do so?
Stoid
Althea.
And she became a drug addict after the man she loved was shot. What about the many years previous? What was so “fucked up” about her, not including the fact that she was sexually free, which is not the definition of “fucked up” that I use.
Or do you consider anyone and everyone who develops a drug dependency or alcoholism to just be fucked up whether they are actively acting out their addiction or not? Because if you do, you’ve just written off a huge segment of America. (Including our new President!)
stoid
I apologize for sounding like an asshole, but I really am curious about the relationships between a husband and his hooker spouse. I want to know what it is that allows a man to be able to accept this. Is it the almight dollar? Is it a lack of something? Or, as in the case of Athena and Larry Flynt, are there more things involved such as drug addictions and mental illness?
Under what circumstance would any of you men reading this thread accept your wife’s choice to be a hooker?
**
And I’m sure she represents the average call girl experience.
**
Which somehow seems less sad to me then a husband who doesn’t care if his wife sells her ass.
**
And you just want to look at the rosey side.
**
Prove it. You’ve provided us with all sorts of things according to your step mother. How about providing us with some sort of alternate source? How many prostitutes have STDs? When will you back up your claim that prostitutes are at a lower risk of STDs then the average person?
I’ll agree that legalization will help improve several aspects of prostitution. I just don’t agree that we’ll be making into a respectable occupation or that they’re at less risk then the general population for STDs.
You started this thread asking why people “hated” sex workers. Most people don’t hate them but most people seem to think that prostitution is a fairly nasty occupation. They’ve even told you why they thought it was a nasty occupation. You’ve done nothing to dispel their beliefs.
**
Stripping is perfectly legal in many areas. How many parents would be proud of their son or daughter stripping for a living?
Marc
STOIDELA –
Now, I’m no math wiz, but I’m pretty sure this doesn’t follow. Let’s say 1% of American women make their living through hands-on (so to speak) sex work. That would be, oh, 1.4 million women or so. Add in some males in there and we’ll round it up to 2 million. Now those two million people account for * 3 to 5 percent* of STD transmissions, out of a population of, what? 250 million? So less than one percent of the population produces five percent of the disease. I think that’s pretty statistically significant.
Anyway, I don’t think you can say that you are “more likely” to get an STD from your average college student than from a sex worker. The fact that 75% of STDs are contacted by college students (even if accurate) does not reflect the fact that the incidence of infection in college students is about one in four, and there are 31 million high school and college students. Therefore, it is statistically far less likely, just based on the numbers of non-infected potential partners, that a person would contract an STD from the average school-related “hook up” than that he or she would contract it from a sex worker. Add in the sheer number of sexual encounters of the average sex worker, as opposed to the average college student, as well as the likelihood of a sex worker either contracting a disease (multiple opportunities daily) or transmitting it (multiple opportunities daily), and the changes of catching something from a sex worker go up again.
Again, math is not my forte, so I will gladly accept correction, but I don’t think the raw data you cite supports your conclusion that one is more likely to catch an STD from a random college student than from a random prostitute.
And you, ** Stoid** keep on looking only at the level of tthe highly paid call girl - which, even you must admit, is a very small percentage of the sex worker population, even in this country.
You should investigate data on sex workers world wide. (I have been, since you started this thread). It included some horrific percentages in Africa and Asia of anywhere up to 50% of the sex workers being HIV positive. The actualy life conditions and realities of the great bulk of the sex workers world wide are abysmal.
You may wish to continue to only look at the one end of the rosy picture, where you are content to talk about ‘if only laws and social mores would change, all could be like this.’ Without, of course, giving any idea why this would be so.
I would venture a guess that there’s relatively few people out there who would be able to (and willing to) spend $10,000 for a single night’s worth of whatever. So, in what way would the average street walker’s life be improved? Lack of arrest? Ok, that might be a plus, but frankly, for many on the bottom end of the spectrum, the time spent in jail is about the only time they have where they’ve got a warm bed to sleep in, access to medical care and food. (not that I’m saying that they should be in jail, just that lack of jail time might not be a benefit).
Would they get paid better? I would doubt it - generally by legalizing an activity, one expects the cost of the activity to go down (recalling all the legalization of drug debates). While you may point out the sex workers in Nevada as examples, keep in mind that they’re the only legal ones in the US and that taints any comparison.
Would they have less opportunity to get killed/beat up? How so?
We’re still waiting for your back up to your other assertions about the rates of STD infection (though, in my perusal, I did come upon two sites that quoted the exact same stuff you did - without the source documentation, of course).
YOu’ve made choices, you feel your dad and step mom had/have a great relationship. Fine. Don’t attempt, however to extrapolate from the sample of one that it’d be a fine idea for many, please.
STOIDELA says:
It does not change the fact, however, that they both accept money for sex. They are both prostitutes by definition. You may portray your stepmother’s livelihood with all the glamour and wealth you like and that does not change the fact that at the end of the day she was a whore, just like the strung-out crack whore on the street.
These are not the same because the former (a meal in exchange for sex) is by definition prostitution while the latter (sleeping with a guy you dated) is not – unless you are sleeping with the guy solely because he bought you dinner. Casual sex is not prostitution.
Pandering, of course, is the marketing of prostitution, so I’m not sure why you’re careful to say she wasn’t arrested for prostitution as if pandering is somehow better. In fact, as you must know, she’d never have served “a couple of years” for a mere prostitution charge. And she may have been arrested out of spite, but if she was convicted there probably was some truth to the charge.
Many people strongly feel, with justification, that prostitution meets all of these definitions. It reduces the worker in rank or status – which even you cannot deny, unless you would argue that being a prostitute is not a profession looked down upon by society as a whole; it dishonors the participant in the eyes of those who think there is no honor in selling your body or your sexual favors; it lowers the moral character of those who engage in it (or capitalizes on an existing lack of morals); and it debases women as a whole by encouraging the objectification of them.
This might just as easily be *in spite of * your step mother’s work as because of it. Or perhaps it has nothing to do with it at all. My parents have been married for 32 years and love each other as much now as the day they met. My mother never sold herself. Neither did my grandmother, who was married for 53 years to my grandfather.
The point you are not getting is that for many people – if not most people – sexual fidelity is an integral part of “love, devotion, and loyalty,” which cannot exist without it. Your parents might be the exception but they ARE the exception, not the rule.
This made me laugh. What social more could not be abrogated by a “cultural change in attitude”? Sure, we say human sacrifice is wrong now but if we could only have a “cultural change in attitude” on the matter, then we’d realize it was okay. Same with polygamy and bestiality – if the whole culture would change its attitude about those subjects, then it wouldn’t think they were less than desireable. In other words, you are saying that if people didn’t think sex work was wrong and degrading, then they wouldn’t think sex work was wrong and degrading.
Sex work is not degrading because it involves touching naked bodies. It is degrading because it involves the selling of sexual favors. Your stepmother may rationalize it by saying she makes money for what she would otherwise give away, but that ignores the commonly-held beliefs in our society that (a) some things are so intimate and personal that they should not be saleable and (b) sexual liscentiousness, whether for money OR fun, is not a desireable quality. People respect the sexually choosy, not the sexually indiscriminate. People in general do not hold high opinions either of those who buy sex or of those who sell it. I realize that many say protitution should be legalized because every person has a right to do with their body whatever they will; that does not mean that everything they might choose to do with their body is admirable.
It may not be the nicest of terms but the fact that she screwed anything that breathed, had some major and multiple addictions, was mental sick, and was basically a very disturbed individual, does warrant the definition of “fucked up”. You do know that the term is multi-faceted, right? If you have a suggestion for a better term, feel free to offer.
Judgmental on my part? Maybe, but I seem to remember in both the movie and an article written about the Flynts that she felt, probably more than anyone, that she was pretty fucked up and sought help before her death.
$2/minute or $10,000. The price doesn’t really matter. Having to pay for companionship is kind of pathetic, isn’t it? Especially when the hooker goes on to laugh what a loser the john was after pocketing the money.
Hey, if I paid a guy $10,000 for a night’s work, he better have redecorated my whole house by morning.