Prostitution

synd

synd wrote: »

I think to condemn prostitution as exploitation altogether is oversimplification, (some) sex workers enjoy their jobs, however most are forced to take up prostitution due to economic condition.

I would agree except to say that pretty much everyone works due to economic condition...

Prostitution due to western cultural norms ect is considered socially degrading - as are many other occupations which entail a high degree of subjugation to both symbolic and physical domination by others of a higher station. Therefore it is invariably those of lower economic class who are involved in prostitution - it reflects the rule of the rich over the poor much as anything.

If prostitution was a socially respectable job middle class woman would disproportionately work within it, the fact that this is not the case seems to be ignored by advocates. Consider the fact that Russia per head of pop has a much higher proportion of sex workers than Ireland, this is not due to prostitution carrying different cultural connotations in Russia - rather due to economic disparity.

I would agree that prostitution is a target industry for women & men of poorer backgrounds. And yet there is a difference in the common viewpoint about prostitution in Russia compared with that of Ireland. Russians sees the need and partially accept the value of it in their society. There is disapproval but nothing like that of Ireland.

The developed capitalist world in essence places what it culturally regards as degrading upon the people of the third world for entertainment and profit. (Lets cut the bull****) - we all know about sexual power dynamics, western men objectify (poor) foreign woman and make them to do degrading things for perverse entertainment, - the fact that the woman do it and are payed doesn't justify the form of social organization that facilitates such exploitation. If you really think wealthy men fly half way around the world to engage in sexual intercourse then your thinking is dangerously one dimensional - men are purchasing more than sex, there purchasing control over another human being, power. Power to exploit - abuse - de-humanize - torture - and yes (Im sure kill in some rarer cases). (Sex for money) is a superficial neo liberal veil designed to hide the social dimension of the transaction.

This is where you lost my agreement. Prostitution is a sexual activity. What you're describing is something completely different, and you're passing all prostitution off in the same context. That the customers are there to objectify and degrade the women/men involved. Yes, there is more to having an escort than just the sex involved, but generally not in the manner you describe/suggest.

Actually what you describe can be bought without sex being involved and it would be legal in most countries, with the exception of the killing reference.

Neo-liberal philosophy is poison in its assertion that without force any market transaction is free from exploitation - If we followed that line of reason to its logical conclusion we could contend that a rich man who sexually abuses and tortures a starving child has done nothing wrong (because it was a voluntary transaction and he paid).

Except that we've been talking about prostitution in the format whereby the prostitute is an adult. You're not talking about prostitution in Ireland, but something far more darker, and frankly something the majority of customers would avoid like the plague.

People are (under capitalism) not afforded equality of self determination - and therefore subjugated to hierarchical organization, those at the bottom are most tightly controlled, poorly paid and disrespected. I advocate equality in social organization and the democratization of the workplace.

Under capitalism no-one has equality in the determination of the institutions that effect their own immediate existence - this needs to be changed.:cool:

Huh?

synd

I would agree except to say that pretty much everyone works due to economic condition...

Yes, economics is the base of most social interaction however different forms of economic organization create different social systems.

I would agree that prostitution is a target industry for women & men of poorer backgrounds. And yet there is a difference in the common viewpoint about prostitution in Russia compared with that of Ireland. Russians sees the need and partially accept the value of it in their society. There is disapproval but nothing like that of Ireland.

The point was that prevailing cultural norms are fairly standard across Europe despite relative differences in valuation of particualr norms, forgive me for not chasing the red herring.

The Irish perspective on sexuality is (to a small extent) an exeption. Id put this down to the fact that we are post industrial nation that never underwent the process of industrialization. Ireland was a disperced rural society controlled by the church, due to the fact we never had large condenced urban populations our cultural norms didn't homogenize at the same rate as other developed nations.

This is where you lost my agreement. Prostitution is a sexual activity. What you're describing is something completely different, and you're passing all prostitution off in the same context. That the customers are there to objectify and degrade the women/men involved. Yes, there is more to having an escort than just the sex involved, but generally not in the manner you describe/sugges

t.

Prostetution is sexual activity true, however your ignoring the socio economic and symbolic dimensions of sex. You have to stop thinking of commodity transactions in such simple terms. The woman isn't merely selling a service, she is (for a time) selling her initiative and self control. The prostitute is subjugating herself to the domination of another who by force of a momentary economic disparity uses her as a tool devoid of full human capacity. The prostitute becomes a de-humanized commodity as opposed to a person.

There is no interpersonal equality in the sexual activity itself under such circumstances - it is the economic and physical dommination of one person by another (it is this feature as opposed to the act itself that I oppose)

However this is not confined to prostitution, its a reflection of capitalist wage labor in general. I dont focus on the various manifestations of exploitation, I oppose the underlying system that facilitates them.

Actually what you describe can be bought without sex being involved and it would be legal in most countries, with the exception of the killing reference.

Yes it could be bought, just because something is legal hardly justifies it tho.

Your taking a neo-liberal position, so it follow's that you consider all market transactions justified so long as there concentual. Thats a seriously ****ed up philosophy when you consider the implications - I mean you could justify torture and child abuse under that line of reason (so long as they where concentual financial transactions).

So mr Friedman, is torturing and humiliating a staving african woman in exchange for food justfiable ? And Id appreciate an actual answer (as opposed to neo-liberal cop out) so I digagnose just how ****ed up you are

Except that we've been talking about prostitution in the format whereby the prostitute is an adult. You're not talking about prostitution in Ireland, but something far more darker, and frankly something the majority of customers would avoid like the plague.

Im reffering to the exact same thing followed to its logical end. Please stop trying to restrict the range of discourse in order to hide your total lack of social concience. This discussion is about prostitution across the board - the topic encapsulates wider social and economic dimensions.

Huh?

Huh is right (A).

synd

synd wrote: »

The point was that prevailing cultural norms are fairly standard across Europe despite relative differences in valuation of particualr norms, forgive me for not chasing the red herring.

Cultural normals across Europe are fairly standard? You have got to be joking. The differences in which different countries across manage prostitution and the cultural reaction to it are staggering. Cases in point, compare Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and... yes, Spain.

Red herring? Hardly. I've been to Russia roughly 12 times and I've seen & experienced some of the levels of prostitution that exist there. The point is that I have Eastern European friends and have been out with them in numerous settings, so the aspect of prostitution has been raised in the past. Either from observing the reality of it in Russian lives, or experiencing it firsthand. What is strange was that it was you that introduced Russia as an example...

The Irish perspective on sexuality is (to a small extent) an exeption. Id put this down to the fact that we are post industrial nation that never underwent the process of industrialization. Ireland was a disperced rural society controlled by the church, due to the fact we never had large condenced urban populations our cultural norms didn't homogenize at the same rate as other developed nations.

Aye the Church played a major role but there are similarities between the UK attitude to prostitution and the Irish ones. Personally, I feel that many of our own hangups about this industry/profession come from the previous periods under British rule, and the aspects of that rule that was merged with our own culture. The exception being that Britain has been exposed to prostitution on a much larger scale for centuries, whereas Ireland having a much smaller population and being mostly isolated has escaped that.

t.

Meaning?

Prostetution is sexual activity true, however your ignoring the socio economic and symbolic dimensions of sex. You have to stop thinking of commodity transactions in such simple terms. The woman isn't merely selling a service, she is (for a time) selling her initiative and self control. The prostitute is subjugating herself to the domination of another who by force of a momentary economic disparity uses her as a tool devoid of full human capacity. The prostitute becomes a de-humanized commodity as opposed to a person.

Actually I'm not ignoring these aspects you're putting forward, but the simple fact is that you're labeling all prostitution in the same light, and the desires of the consumers in the same manner. There doesn't seem to be any leeway in your perception of this activity either by the prostitute or the consumer.

Simply put, the majority of customers going to a prostitute are looking for straightforward sex. No strings, and no issues. Maybe 1 hour during which two-three perfectly normal and socially acceptable sexual positions are used.

You've fallen into the Media blackhole that says that paying for sex is always about getting weird and unacceptable acts. Extremist S&M, Severe Bondage, crossdressing, Strangulation, Golden showers, etc. Its a way of making the whole area dramatic and sinister. When in most cases its not. Of course, there exists those that seek more extreme forms of sex, but that's the case with couples themselves.

As for the prostitute becoming a de-humanized commodity... I would hazard that its people with your opinions that would treat them like this. Most customers of prostitutes are grateful that they have the ability to relieve themselves, and probably treat prostitutes more humanly than "normal" people.

There is no interpersonal equality in the sexual activity itself under such circumstances - it is the economic and physical dommination of one person by another (it is this feature as opposed to the act itself that I oppose)

Of course there is no interpersonal equality. Its not about meeting someone for a meaningful conversation, or treating each other like old friends. Its about fulfilling a physical service. While there may be some friendliness between regulars, its only a surface feeling. Its a commercial transaction between two or more people.

However this is not confined to prostitution, its a reflection of capitalist wage labor in general. I dont focus on the various manifestations of exploitation, I oppose the underlying system that facilitates them.

Wonderful. :rolleyes:

People work and earn to satisfy their needs in life. There will be an employer and an employee. By your reasoning every employee is being dominated economically by their employer. Hell they're being physically dominated because they're required to be in the workplace during the hours stipulated by the employer.

Yes it could be bought, just because something is legal hardly justifies it tho.

So, who makes the justifications? The people of a country? You? Where do your justifications come from?

Your taking a neo-liberal position, so it follow's that you consider all market transactions justified so long as there concentual. Thats a seriously ****ed up philosophy when you consider the implications - I mean you could justify torture and child abuse under that line of reason (so long as they where concentual financial transactions).

It must be wonderful living in a world of black & white. Where everything can be categorised. It reflects in the manner you make your replies almost like you're writing a college paper on economics.

I'll make it simple for you. I make my own decisions & opinions based on each circumstance that is placed in front of me. I formed my opinions on prostitution through over a decade of participating as a customer. My opinion, oddly enough isn't set in stone, and has changed over time.

So mr Friedman, is torturing and humiliating a staving african woman in exchange for food justfiable ? And Id appreciate an actual answer (as opposed to neo-liberal cop out) so I digagnose just how ****ed up you are

No, i wouldn't believe it being justifiable. I'd view it as being completely and utterly wrong.

And if you read back over my posts, I've never been one to cop out on anything. I say what i think, and if proven otherwise, I'm perfectly capable of learning from it. So, I'd appreciate that you stop labeling me with your nonsense.

Lastly, You don't know me. You couldn't diagnose ****. And putting a at the end doesn't make your attitude any better, or more acceptable. Deal with my posts directly.

Im reffering to the exact same thing followed to its logical end. Please stop trying to restrict the range of discourse in order to hide your total lack of social concience. This discussion is about prostitution across the board - the topic encapsulates wider social and economic dimensions.

Lack of social conscience? haha... because I don't view prostitution as being wrong in itself? That I'm willing to approve of certain aspects and also being able to disapprove of other areas.

You see, I'm pretty well traveled. I've seen prostitution occur in dozens of countries over the last few decades, and I've seen the manner in which those societies dealt with it. There are plenty of aspects to prostitution which I'm completely against, and would feel very strongly about. And yet, I am not completely against this industry because I recognize that it is not the same everywhere, not all prostitutes are the same, the customers are not all the same, and their needs differ greatly. I have my own experiences of this, and they help to shape my opinions.

IF you want to actually discuss prostitution across the board, try saying something specific. Talk about the industry in different countries, the types of prostitution involved, the types of people who work in it, the types of people who avail of the services... Pick something to talk about, rather than throwing out massive generalizations.

Huh is right (A).

I said "Huh" because I couldn't understand what you were trying to say. Sounded like gibberish, and I wanted to hear you write it a different way.

aare

Leaving aside all the other issues that have been done to death.

This is a very old thread...going back years...and most of the posters seem to be guys.

So let me throw you a curve with a perspective nobody seems to have mentioned:

As a woman, I would, personally, far rather be *paid* to assist in gratifying the casual sexual needs of others than just *used* for it.

If you can find enough women who respond positively to polite requests for casual sex, my attitude is redundant...but I, honestly, doubt if you can.;)

Think about it.

synd

Cultural normals across Europe are fairly standard? You have got to be joking. The differences in which different countries across manage prostitution and the cultural reaction to it are staggering. Cases in point, compare Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and... yes, Spain.

Your deliberately missing the point, the level of acceptance may vary however the basic attitude remains the same given that our cultures share the same valuation system. Prostitution may be far more acceptable in France than in Ireland - however its still generally regarded as an undesirable occupation given cultural norms. It entails a high degree of subjugation and activity in what is regarded lowly and servile - therefore scorned.

Actually I'm not ignoring these aspects you're putting forward, but the simple fact is that you're labeling all prostitution in the same light, and the desires of the consumers in the same manner. There doesn't seem to be any leeway in your perception of this activity either by the prostitute or the consumer.

No - Im not labeling all prostitution in the same light, your straw-manning my position. In fact, under conditions of egalitarianism I wouldn't have an issue with it considering the activity would be based on preference as opposed to need or desperation. So just to re-iterate, I don't oppose the act itself rather the socio economic power disparity it represents.

You've fallen into the Media blackhole that says that paying for sex is always about getting weird and unacceptable acts. Extremist S&M, Severe Bondage, crossdressing, Strangulation, Golden showers, etc. Its a way of making the whole area dramatic and sinister. When in most cases its not. Of course, there exists those that seek more extreme forms of sex, but that's the case with couples themselves.

One of the main reasons men in relationships visit prostitutes is to engage in activity that they would not engage in with their partners. The question is why would a man engage in one act with a prostitute but not with his partner ? :cool:

As for the prostitute becoming a de-humanized commodity... I would hazard that its people with your opinions that would treat them like this. Most customers of prostitutes are grateful that they have the ability to relieve themselves, and probably treat prostitutes more humanly than "normal" people.

It has nothing to do with how the two individuals conduct themselves during the transaction. The transaction is in-itself de-humanizing in that one person by definition becomes a commodity/tool - how they are used isn't the point.

Of course there is no interpersonal equality. Its not about meeting someone for a meaningful conversation, or treating each other like old friends. Its about fulfilling a physical service. While there may be some friendliness between regulars, its only a surface feeling. Its a commercial transaction between two or more people.

Well there you go - by your own admission one person becomes a tool at the disposal of another's will.

Wonderful. :rolleyes:

People work and earn to satisfy their needs in life. There will be an employer and an employee. By your reasoning every employee is being dominated economically by their employer. Hell they're being physically dominated because they're required to be in the workplace during the hours stipulated by the employer.

Precisely. People require access to the means of life for sustainment, under capitalism ones degree of self determination is tied to an indentured economic disparity. Those without wealth/property must subjugate themselves before the rich and act as tools in the process of production and service. Those at the bottom are worst effected, socially de-valued and subjected to the highest degree of control from above. There is no initiative required from the rank and file, only obedience. The capitalist workplace breeds alienation, apathy, kills initiative and breeds sado-masochistic impulses.

The current system of social organization does not facilitate equality in interpersonal relations - I believe everyone has the right to equally manage the conditions of their own immediate existence, this would require the democratization of every institution/workplace.

So, who makes the justifications? The people of a country? You? Where do your justifications come from?

Well cultural values generally stem from prevelent ideologies. I adhere to a few basics, namely - liberty, self determination, equality ect. I think society should consider what it values and then proceed to organize itself in a manner that facilitates those values. Naturally opposing idealogical models will conflict - its inevitable.

It must be wonderful living in a world of black & white. Where everything can be categorised. It reflects in the manner you make your replies almost like you're writing a college paper on economics.

I categorize that last quote, its called argumentum ad hominem

No, i wouldn't believe it being justifiable. I'd view it as being completely and utterly wrong.

Why ?

synd

synd wrote: »

Your deliberately missing the point, the level of acceptance may vary however the basic attitude remains the same given that our cultures share the same valuation system. Prostitution may be far more acceptable in France than in Ireland - however its still generally regarded as an undesirable occupation given cultural norms.

Actually, I'm not intentionally missing your point... I only partially agree with you. Prostitution in various european countries like Spain and Germany is more accepted than other countries. You made the sweeping point, not me.

As for being an undesirable occupation, sure. But as i posted a few pages ago, there are plenty of undesirable occupations which people continue to place themselves in.

It entails a high degree of subjugation and activity in what is regarded lowly and servile - therefore scorned.

There you go again... subjugation... ok. Explain to me where this occurs, and in some detail.

No - Im not labeling all prostitution in the same light, your straw-manning my position. In fact, under conditions of egalitarianism I wouldn't have an issue with it considering the activity would be based on preference as opposed to need or desperation.

The problem with making massive generalisations is that it is you yourself that places yourself in that position. I'm not Straw manning your position. You do so yourself by labeling people into categories.

So just to re-iterate, I don't oppose the act itself rather the socio economic power disparity it represents.

So, if more people from wealthy backgrounds were involved you would have no problem with the industry?

One of the main reasons men in relationships visit prostitutes is to engage in activity that they would not engage in with their partners. The question is why would a man engage in one act with a prostitute but not with his partner ? :cool:

I had a relationship with a girl who loved to be slapped during sex. It was one of the ways she would orgasm, but I hate any degree of violence during sex. I refused to do it, so she lost out on what she considered a fair thing to do during sex. Another example would be the case of Anal sex, which many couples are unwilling to do together.

There are many cases of partners being unable to get the manner of sex they desire from their partners. For both sexes.

It has nothing to do with how the two individuals conduct themselves during the transaction. The transaction is in-itself de-humanizing in that one person by definition becomes a commodity/tool - how they are used isn't the point.

I get a massage from the spa down the road. She becomes a tool in your eyes. In my eyes she's a person doing her job.

Well there you go - by your own admission one person becomes a tool at the disposal of another's will.

Sure, and yet not to the degree you continue to suggest. And i continue to argue against. We are all tools to some degree.

Precisely. People require access to the means of life for sustainment, under capitalism ones degree of self determination is tied to an indentured economic disparity. Those without wealth/property must subjugate themselves before the rich and act as tools in the process of production and service. Those at the bottom are worst effected, socially de-valued and subjected to the highest degree of control from above. There is no initiative required from the rank and file, only obedience. The capitalist workplace breeds alienation, apathy, kills initiative and breeds sado-masochistic impulses.

The current system of social organization does not facilitate equality in interpersonal relations - I believe everyone has the right to equally manage the conditions of their own immediate existence, this would require the democratization of every institution/workplace.

Show me one country or existing successful system which entails what you suggest.. Otherwise, you're not really dealing with reality.

Well cultural values generally stem from prevelent ideologies. I adhere to a few basics, namely - liberty, self determination, equality ect. I think society should consider what it values and then proceed to organize itself in a manner that facilitates those values. Naturally opposing idealogical models will conflict - its inevitable.

Your impression of equality could be another mans slavery. After living in China, I'm not so quick to assume that western society is free and just. That assumptions on other cultures are so well informed, and balanced. The basic fact is that everyone has their own version as to what equality, liberty etc entails, and comparison of those opinions would show up a wide range of differences.

I categorize that last quote, its called argumentum ad hominem

Thats convenient. I should have used that at least 3 times from your previous reply. :rolleyes:

Why ?

Why not? You asked a question, i answered it.

Loxosceles

CoolGuy2006 wrote: »

Ok, im a guy, mid 20's.
My problem is with prostitution. Why has it become so acceptable nowadays.
... (snip)

Should i come down off my high Horse.

Not at all. I am amazed by how often Irish men use prostitutes and brag about it, when using a hooker in the US is a sign of failure at picking up women at all, and a shame to any man. And then, condom use is compulsory since most men are terrified of not using one. What's even funnier is that Irish guys hate condoms, use prostitutes constantly, (who are often angry and slave-trafficked, don't care and will take an extra 40 euros for a creampie), and casual IV drug use quadrupled from 2002 to 2006, and doubled _that_ since then. HOLY FSCK what stupidity.

Ireland=Haiti. I've been sitting here laughing for a while at what is in the cards in the next decade, and I'm from the US where the sexual revolution required a major facelift in the 80s due to AIDS. I guarantee, it will decimate a huge section of your nation if habits and laws don't change NOW. All the married men who use prostitutes, and pass it on to thier wives. All the cases of seeming leukemia or sudden schizophrenia which will shoot up as HIV makes its little home in the lymph and brain tissue in 10 years time.

It will hit country and city alike because the majority of married men go to hookers-I'd say at least 60%+, and a huge number of singles go to keep their lives free from what they think is female nonsense. And they don't like condoms LMAOOO!!!!!!!! Compared to less than 20% of married men in the US who will use a love glove, and hardly any single men because they're enjoying their single men status and probably having safe sex with a woman who isn't a prostitute anyhow.

I'm American and I am now celibate in this country because of what I've seen. Celibate and lucky.

You may wonder where your country is going to come up with the money right now to bail out banks, just wait for what the HSE is in for, in another few years, as HIV starts turning into AIDS in proportion to time of infection during the Tiger, starting about 1997, and then watch it explode upwards in about 2 years.

Just you wait. LOL!

in my circle of friends it's very frowned upon.. i personally don't have much of an issue with it, would never use one but i don't think it's exploitation if they choose to do it.

some people will do anything for money,
i work a 9-5. other's sell their body.

getz

if you go to a bar meet a lady buy her drinks take her for a meal - most men have done this take her home [and give her one] how different is she to a prostitute ? technically its the same as paying her money

aare

getz wrote: »

if you go to a bar meet a lady buy her drinks take her for a meal - most men have done this take her home [and give her one] how different is she to a prostitute ? technically its the same as paying her money

Not really, the money is much more useful, and doesn't have to be as self indulgent. After all, when you give her money she could use it to buy new trainers, or school books for her child...the drink is no more use than a hangover next day really...

philologos

aare wrote: »

Not really, the money is much more useful, and doesn't have to be as self indulgent. After all, when you give her money she could use it to buy new trainers, or school books for her child...the drink is no more use than a hangover next day really...

The question is raised though, why is prostitution necessary, and if it isn't what's the point in legalising something that is as morally contentious as it is?

One would also have to raise questions about the risk, you speak of a child, what is the probability of a child coming into the world through this even with contraception which can and does fail? There are too many considerations to be factored in to make this reasonable by any means.

aare

Jakkass wrote: »

The question is raised though, why is prostitution necessary, and if it isn't what's the point in legalising something that is as morally contentious as it is?

One would also have to raise questions about the risk, you speak of a child, what is the probability of a child coming into the world through this even with contraception which can and does fail? There are too many considerations to be factored in to make this reasonable by any means.

Though most most women in prostitution are mothers, working to support their children, that is really just a red herring as I only gave that as an example.

The fact remains that drinks to be consumed in your company are not something that can be exchanged for the necessities of life, as money can. In fact, I have to say that personally, I would want to be paid just as much for drinking with a man I did not wish to be with as for intercourse with him, as both would be, equally distasteful, hard work.

Your second point is a valid one. In my experience there are very few forms of auto-kidology equal to the of a woman in prostitution if she should become pregnant during a period when she is working.

• Any amount, or type, of contraception can fail
• Accepting money for sex is not a form of contraception anyway

Some deal with it by taking a few days to shop in the UK and coming back "unpregnant", others develop a personal mythology that limits the risk of pregnancy to personal relationships.

Bottom line:

Nothing in life is ideal, however, most things come closer that letting your kids grow up hungry or homeless.

Of course, recently that was not likely in Ireland unless you really were overburdened with "other factors", so most women in prostitution came here from less fortunate countries overseas (where is would be equally unhealthy for a child to be hungry or homeless)...

But beware, that could be about to change. Perhaps the law should change to reflect that possibility?

PS. As Jesus is on record as taking a lot of his meal breaks with "les girls" I very much doubt if he would mind prostitution being legalised all that much, because if he did, they would hardly have been willing to eat with him.

philologos

Yet, these aren't adequate reasons to excuse it. The sheer risk of bringing children into this world without knowing their father is just appalling and we shouldn't live in a society where that should happen any more than it happens already. This isn't "just a career" there are many many other aspects of this to take into account let alone the fact that prostitution is based around sexual objectification.

I don't quite understand your example of drinking with another with prostitution, if you could clarify it it would be much appreciated. I don't think they would be "equally distasteful" at all. Degrading yourself is rather different than uncomfortable presence.

Also, as for Jesus the Bible speaks for itself about his opinion about lust and adultery within society (Matthew 5:28), and had a high regard for marriage (Matthew 5:32).

aare

Jakkass wrote: »

Yet, these aren't adequate reasons to excuse it. The sheer risk of bringing children into this world without knowing their father is just appalling and we shouldn't live in a society where that should happen any more than it happens already.

I think maybe I should clarify that most of the women in prostitution are providing for children born in very different circumstances, at a time in their lives when having to sell sex for money was something most of them didn't even have nightmares about.

Apart from which, I take it that you have no problem with prostitution where:

• The acts involved do not involve penetration
• The lady in question is medically established to be incapable of conception whether by nature of sterilisation

Jakkass wrote: »

This isn't "just a career" there are many many other aspects of this to take into account let alone the fact that prostitution is based around sexual objectification.

So are one night stands one person fills another up with drink and anything they want to hear in order to use them for sexual intercourse (and, due to the drink involved, the risk of conception and disease is significantly greater).

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't quite understand your example of drinking with another with prostitution, if you could clarify it it would be much appreciated. I don't think they would be "equally distasteful" at all. Degrading yourself is rather different than uncomfortable presence.

I would personally regard tolerating an uncomfortable presence as degrading myself.

Jakkass wrote: »

Also, as for Jesus the Bible speaks for itself about his opinion about lust and adultery within society (Matthew 5:28), and had a high regard for marriage (Matthew 5:32).

Actions speak louder than words, he chose to dine with hookers.

smileykey

I would instantly lose respect for someone if I knew they had paid for sex from a prostitute.It's exploitation and its so degrading to the woman or man selling it. Even if a person is not trafficed or is not a sex slave, it isn't a career move people make for the great prospects, in some way or other, be it debt, drugs or starvation, or the fear of such, these people are forced into it.

Is it really that common for someone to buy sex?? Do nice apparently decent people do it?

aare

smileykey wrote: »

I would instantly lose respect for someone if I knew they had paid for sex from a prostitute.It's exploitation and its so degrading to the woman or man selling it. Even if a person is not trafficed or is not a sex slave, it isn't a career move people make for the great prospects, in some way or other, be it debt, drugs or starvation, or the fear of such, these people are forced into it.

My own gut feeling agrees with you here, even if my head thinks it shouldn't...it's a bit like thew vicious circle of far eastern sweat shops...on one hand who wants to give money to anyone who exploits people that way, on the other, if there were no sweat shops, how would the people who work in them survive?

smileykey wrote: »

Is it really that common for someone to buy sex?? Do nice apparently decent people do it?

All I know for sure is that the people who pay for it are demonstrably nicer and more decent that the people who use other people for sex or ego gratification WITHOUT giving anything in return. Beyond that I just don't know.

smileykey

smileykey wrote: »

I would instantly lose respect for someone if I knew they had paid for sex from a prostitute.It's exploitation and its so degrading to the woman or man selling it. Even if a person is not trafficed or is not a sex slave, it isn't a career move people make for the great prospects, in some way or other, be it debt, drugs or starvation, or the fear of such, these people are forced into it.

Is it really that common for someone to buy sex?? Do nice apparently decent people do it?

Have you bothered to read even a few pages of this thread? There are plenty of examples given of normal "nice" people going to prostitutes, and not finding anything wrong with it.

Loxosceles

Loxosceles wrote: »

Not at all. I am amazed by how often Irish men use prostitutes and brag about it, when using a hooker in the US is a sign of failure at picking up women at all, and a shame to any man.

And yet the US has a much larger investment in prostitution that most countries in Europe. While its frowned upon in most states in the US, its clearly something that's ignored when convenient.

And then, condom use is compulsory since most men are terrified of not using one.

Firstly, most prostitutes in Ireland will not perform their services without a condom.

What's even funnier is that Irish guys hate condoms,

Secondly, Irish men are no different than most men in that we don't like condoms. In fact I don't think i know any guy that does like using them. Doesn't stop us using them though. You might want to compare rates of STD's between Ireland and the US...

use prostitutes constantly,

Constantly? Wow... I know we had money during the celtic tiger, but we would have had to be super rich for that. Throw in the numbers of prostitutes needed to match such a supply, you might want to rethink such a statement.

(who are often angry and slave-trafficked, don't care and will take an extra 40 euros for a creampie)

Proof. Evidence. Statistics to back this up. Otherwise, its the usual crap.

, and casual IV drug use quadrupled from 2002 to 2006 , and doubled _that_ since then. HOLY FSCK what stupidity.

Relevance to prostitution?

Ireland=Haiti. I've been sitting here laughing for a while at what is in the cards in the next decade, and I'm from the US where the sexual revolution required a major facelift in the 80s due to AIDS. I guarantee, it will decimate a huge section of your nation if habits and laws don't change NOW. All the married men who use prostitutes, and pass it on to thier wives. All the cases of seeming leukemia or sudden schizophrenia which will shoot up as HIV makes its little home in the lymph and brain tissue in 10 years time.

You obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about, if you're trying to compare Ireland to the US. Ireland has never had the degree of problems your society has had when it comes to education (or rather lack of), racial tensions, sex crimes etc.

It will hit country and city alike because the majority of married men go to hookers-I'd say at least 60%+, and a huge number of singles go to keep their lives free from what they think is female nonsense. And they don't like condoms LMAOOO!!!!!!!! Compared to less than 20% of married men in the US who will use a love glove, and hardly any single men because they're enjoying their single men status and probably having safe sex with a woman who isn't a prostitute anyhow.

Absolute rubbish. Garbage.

I'm American and I am now celibate in this country because of what I've seen. Celibate and lucky.

You may wonder where your country is going to come up with the money right now to bail out banks, just wait for what the HSE is in for, in another few years, as HIV starts turning into AIDS in proportion to time of infection during the Tiger, starting about 1997, and then watch it explode upwards in about 2 years.

Just you wait. LOL!

I'm waiting... but i think you're talking crap. You don't have a clue. :rolleyes:

JohnK

Theres an article on BBC News today about prostitution in New Zealand where it was only legalised 6 years ago. The brothels aren't the drug fuelled slave crammed hell holes that some here would like to believe, quite the opposite infact. Also what one of the women says at the end is exactly what a lot of people in this thread have said:

Anna Reed to BBC News wrote:

Anna Reed says she loved working as a prostitute - "I had sex, money and men!" - and resents enduring cliches about a job no-one in her right mind could willingly embrace.

"We get so pissed off when politicians portray us as victims," she says.

"It's important to blow down the stereotypes about sex workers - particularly that of the poor girl who is coerced into doing it."

Full article at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7927461.stm

deadhead13

A relatively recent utv documentary on prostitution in Northern Ireland came up with a stark statistic. 80% of street walkers had come through the childcare system in the North. I cannot see using these women as anything other than the exploitation of some of the must vulnerable people in society.

g5fd6ow0hseima

Ive thought about it a bit lately, I feel that:

Prostitutes, in the same manner as drunkards and drug addicts care little for society by simply putting themselves first and ignoring those who they make suffer. Making money through sex is simply a disgrace to me. Im not religious, but I feel that selling yourself for money is hitting rock bottom in life. Couldnt I just go out and sell drugs, and do my part in degrading society? Oh wait, ill be told that selling drugs is different to prostitution. I dont see how, im putting personal gain before the health of society either way, dont you think?

the clientel - well, obviously they have more than a slight preoccupation with sex. It beats me why. Id like to ask those who have visited prostitutes (more than once or twice) why you do so? Its baffling really.

Loxosceles

I'm pretty appalled by how people here usually don't think prostitution is disgusting and degrading. But then, I'm not from a country dominated by C_______s who are quietly rebelling against official dogma by f___ing anything that moves.

The popular attitude here toward sex with prostitutes or with someone outside of marriage is that it doesn't count at all, because it's a commodity of an appetite merely being fulfilled like eating in a restaurant instead of at home. If you're not some guilt-sodden shmuck or mentally disturbed old biddy mumbling the rosary 24/7, you dismiss the whole kit n caboodle of sexual responsibility anyway, because the bizarre dogma that surrounds it is from the middle ages. And then you have this whole cultural thing of covering the real s__t up with mealymouthed moral hypocrisy and babykissing cuteness and playing the naive, innocent bright-eyed paddy while going in and 'doing the business' with a hooker like you're having a pint and betting on a horse, with it meaning just as little. Scuse me while I vomit.

So basically, any necessity for practical sexual morality WITHOUT even considering marriage, regarding a) the sanctity of a woman's personhood and b) the sanctity of a loving, trusting, normal relationship, is set to /ignore and the old Celtic paganism comes right back in force, instead of any enlightened treatment of either women or sexuality.

But women here play right into the "don't ask, don't tell" arrangement so they can have access to a man's money and resources for the rest of his life. Instead of like, actual trust and communication. So believe me when I say I'm equally disgusted by both ruthless female greed and ruthless male sexual exploitation that is far more evident here than at home, sorry to say.

France, Spain, Italy, all South America are like this too. Even though I've been an outspoken humanist and atheist for 20 years, I am so glad I was raised P________t where people are personally responsible for their sexuality 100% of the time, and contributing to the degredation of women is not an option, and if it is an option, then it's one taken in shame and secrecy. I rebelled against it in my youth but now I realise how much of a hypocrite it _hasn't_ made me and how lucky I am for it.

Because the definition of a relationship in my country usually requires TRUST and COMMUNICATION, not "Don't ask, don't tell".

This country drips with mind-numbing cultural hypocrisy. I utterly agree with the Traveller view of Ireland's morality if it weren't for the fact that they're misogynistic religious nuts. But they're right on pinpointing the immense hypocrisy in Ireland's culture, because I thought I was alone in my views until I started talking to the Traveller community and found out that I'm not crazy. The difference is, they think fundamentalism will solve the problem of immorality when I think the opposite.

I don't have a problem with sex, or sex outside marrige. The more the better. I have a problem with loveless sex that's created by the combination of physical need and complete emotional cynicism, and fostered by the fear of the public seeing divorce or actual dating activity. It just boggles my mind and makes me glad I was raised right, where all those arrangements you may view as disposable and un-sacrosanct, make for a lack of hypocrisy and a greater sense of sanctity for the rest of us.

Yay for easy divorce, family planning and dating! We get more functional marriages, our kids are more wanted and our sexuality is accepted while we openly look for a suitable partner. I am SO glad I wasn't raised C______c. But then, considering how I've been treated by them sexually while living here, when I tried to apply my enlightened sexuality- and got treated like a disposable hooker, and you can understand why I'm utterly vicious.


lox.

irish_bob

Tori Prickly Landlady wrote: »

Ive thought about it a bit lately, I feel that:

Prostitutes, in the same manner as drunkards and drug addicts care little for society by simply putting themselves first and ignoring those who they make suffer. Making money through sex is simply a disgrace to me. Im not religious, but I feel that selling yourself for money is hitting rock bottom in life. Couldnt I just go out and sell drugs, and do my part in degrading society? Oh wait, ill be told that selling drugs is different to prostitution. I dont see how, im putting personal gain before the health of society either way, dont you think?

the clientel - well, obviously they have more than a slight preoccupation with sex. It beats me why. Id like to ask those who have visited prostitutes (more than once or twice) why you do so? Its baffling really.

i think your being too harsh on the hookers , hookers are always victims , they only choose to become prostitutes our of desperation , i dont believe they are taking advantage of anyone , they dont go looking for men , the men go looking for them

as for the men that pay for it , they are losers who are presumably too ugly to get with a real woman , having said that , one could sympathise with a pug ugly dude who felt he had a choice of being celibate for life or paying a hooker

its different for men , any woman can have sex whenever they like

all in all , its a sad business

Loxosceles

Deleted User wrote: »

And yet the US has a much larger investment in prostitution that most countries in Europe. While its frowned upon in most states in the US, its clearly something that's ignored when convenient.

Most countries in Europe don't have a population of 300 million.

Deleted User wrote: »

Firstly, most prostitutes in Ireland will not perform their services without a condom.

Oh, and apparently you have firsthand experience of this as well as the frequency and variety necessary to know this for sure?

Deleted User wrote: »

Secondly, Irish men are no different than most men in that we don't like condoms. In fact I don't think i know any guy that does like using them. Doesn't stop us using them though. You might want to compare rates of STD's between Ireland and the US...

When Mr. Spud has the chance not to use a condom, he will. And he's tried with me on many occasions and failed. When men are inculturated to use condoms all the time, they don't whine about it, because the drop in sensation for well made rubbers is _minimal_.

Deleted User wrote: »

You obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about, if you're trying to compare Ireland to the US. Ireland has never had the degree of problems your society has had when it comes to education (or rather lack of), racial tensions, sex crimes etc....

LMFAO!!!!!!! You ARE joking, right? Racial tensions? Sex crimes? Lack of education? Let's see....let's put the wayback machine at 100 years and oh crap, I just got a bullet in my head for being privileged and educated and not Irish. And we all know that before 1916, only the English raped women.

There is more racism here than I've ever, EVER EVER seen in the US even amongst white people who actually use the word n****r in their own company. The Irish do it differently, they will keep their mouths shut and the non-Irish person in question will simply have no opportunity and no place to go. But in their own kitchens and homes the actual words the Irish use are not only appalling, but sickening. If they feel the way they do about other white people like English, Travellers and Protestants, then god forbid they share their views on blacks. And I've heard them, and I've taken notes.

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm waiting... but i think you're talking crap. You don't have a clue. :rolleyes:

Wait 10 years.

Loxosceles

Loxosceles wrote: »

Most countries in Europe don't have a population of 300 million.

But the comparison was made between the US and Ireland.. I answered it.

Oh, and apparently you have firsthand experience of this as well as the frequency and variety necessary to know this for sure?

Oh, I can say from my own experience that every prostitute i have gone to has supplied their own condoms for the service.

Where are you drawing the information that says otherwise?

When Mr. Spud has the chance not to use a condom, he will. And he's tried with me on many occasions and failed. When men are inculturated to use condoms all the time, they don't whine about it, because the drop in sensation for well made rubbers is _minimal_.

What are you on about? Most men do not like to wear condoms. Read any personal problems forum and you will see that.. Most men's magazines have had articles on it, and the alternatives out there for men.

I never said that they don't wear condoms. I said that they do. Care to prove otherwise?

LMFAO!!!!!!! You ARE joking, right? Racial tensions? Sex crimes? Lack of education? Let's see....let's put the wayback machine at 100 years and oh crap, I just got a bullet in my head for being privileged and educated and not Irish. And we all know that before 1916, only the English raped women.

100 years? You're just being an idiot. Go back 30 years and then come back and talk to me.

There is more racism here than I've ever, EVER EVER seen in the US even amongst white people who actually use the word n****r in their own company. The Irish do it differently, they will keep their mouths shut and the non-Irish person in question will simply have no opportunity and no place to go. But in their own kitchens and homes the actual words the Irish use are not only appalling, but sickening. If they feel the way they do about other white people like English, Travellers and Protestants, then god forbid they share their views on blacks. And I've heard them, and I've taken notes.

Strange because most foreigners feel particularly welcome in Ireland, and continue to immigrate here. And oddly enough they don't keep exclusively to their own people, but mingle with Irish society. As for the English, most Irish people are somehow related to the English at this stage.. Protestants? Can't say it bothers too many in the south of Ireland. And Travellers? thats fair enough, most irish are indeed racist against them.

But you're missing the point. The US had major racial problems, which encouraged the spread of STD's. The lack of education towards various communities encouraged a lack of safety when it came to safe sex.

Ireland on the other hand, has a decent education system where most of the population can avail of its services. Sex ed is common in schools, and our levels of std's transmitted are relatively low considering the size of our population.

You've taken notes? haha... thats funny. Really, it is.

Wait 10 years.

Why? Whats going to happen in 10 years? The point is what is happening now.

Tori Prickly Landlady

Tori Prickly Landlady wrote: »

Ive thought about it a bit lately, I feel that:

Prostitutes, in the same manner as drunkards and drug addicts care little for society by simply putting themselves first and ignoring those who they make suffer.

I'm wondering if you have thought about this at all... Who is suffering as a result of prostitutes offering their services?

Making money through sex is simply a disgrace to me.

I guess joining the army and killing people is far more acceptable.

Im not religious, but I feel that selling yourself for money is hitting rock bottom in life. Couldnt I just go out and sell drugs, and do my part in degrading society? Oh wait, ill be told that selling drugs is different to prostitution. I dont see how, im putting personal gain before the health of society either way, dont you think?

How does prostitution lower the health of society? If anything they're helping society, because they're removing some of the sexual tensions that cause violent crime to occur.

the clientel - well, obviously they have more than a slight preoccupation with sex. It beats me why.

Then why make such a statement? If you don't know why, then how do you have such insight into their desires?

Id like to ask those who have visited prostitutes (more than once or twice) why you do so? Its baffling really.

Read back three pages. There are plenty of reasons given. If you really wondered why, you wouldn't have posted to this thread without reading at least a few pages....

Running Bing

deadhead13 wrote: »

A relatively recent utv documentary on prostitution in Northern Ireland came up with a stark statistic. 80% of street walkers had come through the childcare system in the North. I cannot see using these women as anything other than the exploitation of some of the must vulnerable people in society.

This is something a lot of people seem to be glossing over.

What are the backgrounds of most of these girls?

How many girls have been raised in sound loving homes and got a good education and then decided to go into prostitution as opposed to other career routes? I would imagine the number is very very low.

Loxosceles

Loxosceles wrote: »

I'm pretty appalled by how people here usually don't think prostitution is disgusting and degrading. But then, I'm not from a country dominated by C_______s who are quietly rebelling against official dogma by f___ing anything that moves.

So you are from a country with an official dogma of ****ing anything that moves? :rolleyes:

<Snip>
Scuse me while I vomit.

Actually I thought you were vomiting garbage already...

So basically, any necessity for practical sexual morality WITHOUT even considering marriage, regarding a) the sanctity of a woman's personhood and b) the sanctity of a loving, trusting, normal relationship, is set to /ignore and the old Celtic paganism comes right back in force, instead of any enlightened treatment of either women or sexuality.

a) Sanctity of a woman's personhood? Aren't you breaching that sanctity by removing their right to choose of how they use their bodies? After all, there is very little forced prostitution in Ireland...

b) the sanctity of a loving, trusting, normal relationship - Nobody has said that a normal relationship is wrong. I've never cheated on a woman while in a relationship. But I still have the option to go to a prostitute when I'm single if I so wish it.

I don't know what your problem is with the Irish, but whats prostitution or sex got to do with Celtic Paganism? :rolleyes:

But women here play right into the "don't ask, don't tell" arrangement so they can have access to a man's money and resources for the rest of his life. Instead of like, actual trust and communication. So believe me when I say I'm equally disgusted by both ruthless female greed and ruthless male sexual exploitation that is far more evident here than at home, sorry to say.

I think you might be a wee bit confused... Women make as much as men in this country, and marrying into riches isn't particularly high on their lists. A stable lifestyle, sure. But thats perfectly normal, and acceptable.

France, Spain, Italy, all South America are like this too. Even though I've been an outspoken humanist and atheist for 20 years, I am so glad I was raised P________t where people are personally responsible for their sexuality 100% of the time, and contributing to the degredation of women is not an option, and if it is an option, then it's one taken in shame and secrecy. I rebelled against it in my youth but now I realise how much of a hypocrite it _hasn't_ made me and how lucky I am for it.

You really need to eat less suger and try to write clearly. What are you talking about?

Because the definition of a relationship in my country usually requires TRUST and COMMUNICATION, not "Don't ask, don't tell".

All successful relationships require Trust and Communication. You've obviously had a very limited experience of relationships outside of your country.

This country drips with mind-numbing cultural hypocrisy. I utterly agree with the Traveller view of Ireland's morality if it weren't for the fact that they're misogynistic religious nuts. But they're right on pinpointing the immense hypocrisy in Ireland's culture, because I thought I was alone in my views until I started talking to the Traveller community and found out that I'm not crazy. The difference is, they think fundamentalism will solve the problem of immorality when I think the opposite.

I probably shouldn't ask this, but what has fundamentalism got to do with the Traveller community? And I'm suprised by your in-depth knowledge of travellers views.... Considering I grew up in a town in Ireland which has a rather large traveller population... whereas you are American...

I don't have a problem with sex, or sex outside marrige. The more the better. I have a problem with loveless sex that's created by the combination of physical need and complete emotional cynicism, and fostered by the fear of the public seeing divorce or actual dating activity. It just boggles my mind and makes me glad I was raised right, where all those arrangements you may view as disposable and un-sacrosanct, make for a lack of hypocrisy and a greater sense of sanctity for the rest of us.

Yay for easy divorce, family planning and dating! We get more functional marriages, our kids are more wanted and our sexuality is accepted while we openly look for a suitable partner. I am SO glad I wasn't raised C______c. But then, considering how I've been treated by them sexually while living here, when I tried to apply my enlightened sexuality- and got treated like a disposable hooker, and you can understand why I'm utterly vicious.


lox.

Enlightened Sexuality? hahahahahaha... *Deep Breath* hahahahaha.... *Deep Breath* hahahaha..... Funny guy.

deadhead13

deadhead13 wrote: »

A relatively recent utv documentary on prostitution in Northern Ireland came up with a stark statistic. 80% of street walkers had come through the childcare system in the North. I cannot see using these women as anything other than the exploitation of some of the must vulnerable people in society.

Well, Street Walkers are only part of the whole prostitution industry, and nowadays not a particularly large part compared with escorts found through websites or at the back of magazines.

But I'm curious about something. Since the Childcare system has obviously failed to place these women in a situation where they can lead "normal" lives, how would they support themselves (other than prostitution), and what standard of life would they likely have?