Erotic Vacations

ken26

I have a friend in the UK that recently came back from an Erotic holiday organised by an Erotic Holidays Agency. He said he had an unreal time and the ladies were out of this world. He went for one week and had 2 ladies the whole time.

Now I am thinking about trying it, just for the hell of it, you only live once right? Just posting to see what everyone here thinks of it and has anyone ever tried something like this before?

Gran Hermano

ken26 wrote: »

I have a friend in the UK that recently came back from an Erotic holiday with this agency <mod snip>. He said he had an unreal time and the ladies were out of this world. He went for one week and had 2 ladies the whole time.

Now I am thinking about trying it, just for the hell of it, you only live once right? Just posting to see what everyone here thinks of it and has anyone ever tried something like this before?

Package holiday where the 'package' includes some local prostitutes, can't
say it's my cuppa.

hobochris

Sounds a bit shady to me..

r3nu4l

I'm re-opening this thread with the caveat that no erotic travel agencies are named and we discuss it as adults

So lads, would this kind of holiday be for you?

Personally, even if I was single I wouldn't fancy this at all. It's just not for me to be honest. I'd much rather have a regular holiday and if I had a holiday romance great but not a holiday just for the sake of 'gettin' me leg over'...

powerfade

just get cheap Ryanair flights to Amsterdam maybe....

PCPhoto

are you talking about Hedonism ?

the thing that was on TV a couple of years ago - an adults resort in the carribean I think..... basically a swingers and nudists paradise !

I'd go ...but doesnt necessarily mean I'll get laid.

Gran Hermano

PCPhoto wrote: »

are you talking about Hedonism ?

the thing that was on TV a couple of years ago - an adults resort in the carribean I think..... basically a swingers and nudists paradise !

I'd go ...but doesnt necessarily mean I'll get laid.

It's different to the likes of hedonism which is a swingers resort, the package referred to by the OP is pretty much just sex tourism. Channel 4 have had several documentaries on this topic over the past few years might be worth checking youtube/4OD for "My boyfriend the sex tourist".
http://www.channel4.com/blogs/page/fourdocs?entry=sex_tourism_series
The resort in Venezuela featured on the program made for grim viewing
and looks rather similar to what the OP referred to.

petes

Jesus no. This would not be for me at all. I'd prefer waht r3nu4l said. Wouldn't necessarily go on holidays to get laid.

Hell, you can do that here!

CliffHuxtabel

Save up your bread and go to thailand or the phillipines.

Amazing countries and lots of action for cheap

Gillo

Definetly not my thing, travelling halfway across the world to shag a load of prositutes, to be honest it beggers belief. On the other hand I can understand people going away to swinging resorts for a week, suppose it's just like a golf holiday at least everyone there is a consenting adult, still not my thing though.

Is there not a really high risk of coming back with a range of std's or getting banged up (excuse the pun).

Otis Driftwood

Ehhhh,not a hope in hell.

Erotic holidays me hole.

Something like 9 and a half weeks is erotic.

This is just lame.

Emme

OK, this is a gentleman's forum here but I am still going to contribute to this post.

OP, consider that some of the women providing services on these holidays may be trafficked, underage or in bonded slavery. I would hazard a guess that few are providing their services out of choice. Unfortunately this is not an ideal world and slavery still exists, but surely no enlightened person would choose to support slavery?

You are privileged to live in a relatively wealthy country where you are better off than most people in the world.

You could probably have an equally good time if you went on a package holiday to Ibiza or Tenerife. Everyone out for fun, everyone willing, no exploitation. You can do anything you want as long as the other person consents and it's safe.

Reginald P. DuM

nedtheshed wrote: »

Ehhhh,not a hope in hell.

Erotic holidays me hole.

Something like 9 and a half weeks is erotic.

This is just lame.

I agree, pointless stuff really, the only possible thing that I can think of to make it someway appealing is the quality of the women that you'd have access to, but thats not enough to make it feasible for me. Ya can get laid any weekend in most pubs in Ireland really if your desperate enough. And to be considering one of these trips obviously there's an element of desperation for something. But OP if ya fancy the idea go for it, just be wise, cos when ya head down these seedy types of avenues your hole is open in more ways than one.

9 and a Half Weeks was erotic when I was 13 by the way, no more!

deadhead13

I find the idea of paying someone to have sex with with me totally unerotic, just wouldn't appeal to me at all. But each to his own I suppose.

cruizer101

Reginald P. DuM wrote: »

Ya can get laid any weekend in most pubs in Ireland really if your desperate enough.

I think the point of these holidays is for the men who can't which is quite a few.

As for the quality of the girls, I had a quick look at one or two websites and can say in my opinion it would be a waste if going for the quality of the girls.

Emme

cruizer101 wrote: »

I think the point of these holidays is for the men who can't which is quite a few.

As for the quality of the girls, I had a quick look at one or two websites and can say in my opinion it would be a waste if going for the quality of the girls.

None of you seem to be concerned that the girls could be coerced into providing services. As for men not being able to find a woman, I don't accept that for one minute. There are lots of nice women out there, you just have to make the effort to go out there and find them.

I would have thought that in this day and age women should not be a commodity that can be bought, sold or hired by the hour.:mad:

shellyboo

Emme wrote: »

I would have thought that in this day and age women should not be a commodity that can be bought, sold or hired by the hour.:mad:

They're not... but sex is.

cruizer101

Emme wrote: »

As for men not being able to find a woman, I don't accept that for one minute. There are lots of nice women out there, you just have to make the effort to go out there and find them.

I agree with your point about it likely being that women are being expolited here, and don't really agree with the holidays.

But the above is a simple fact, there are many men out there who have serious problems meeting women. They want to experience what it is like and so there is a market for this kind of holiday, plain and simple.

If it was as easy as going out for a night why would some people spend so much money paying for sex.

It may be a sorry state of affairs but shellyboo is right, many are willing to buy and sell sex.

Snowie

To me it sounds a little desperate and a little sleazy doing something like that.....

Agent Smith

I'd imagine it would be like tossing a hotdog down a hallway.


Save yourself the hassle of the STI's... Get a fleshlight and a ryanair flight

ken26

Hi everyone, sorry for the delay, i suppose I better explain how this works properly. First off, I have no problem finding a girl here, that is not what it is about. I just want the experience of being with one or two sexy latin girls for a week or so in a luxury villa near the beach an ocean, the place is a paradise!

Now none of these girls are trafficked, they are all dominican where prostitution is legal, so it is a legit business there. As I said a friend went there and he was able to go anywhere he wanted with the girls with no problems, no minders etc, it is legit.

You can spend a week there at a resort or villa with a girl for about $4,000, which is about 2,800 euro roughly. For this price they pick you up at the airport with the girl, take you to get checked in at the resort or villa where all food and drink is included in the price. When your trip is over they take you back to the airport.

Dominican republic is a poor country and like other poor countries it has a sex trade. These girls get paid more for spending a week with a client than they would for 3 months in a normal job. To be honest in this day in age, I do not see why people see this as sleazy.

Going to the likes of thailand and phil are sleazy where you just pick the girls up from the street etc.

Oh and STDs are not a concern as they get their girls regularly tested and a cert from the doc is available. All sex has to be covered in any case.

Here is something interesting. An escort in ireland can charge almost 2,000 euro for 24 hours, that is a big difference.

Snowie

sounds like your trying to justfy it to your self if you ask me

Emme

ken26 wrote: »

You can spend a week there at a resort or villa with a girl for about $4,000, which is about 2,800 euro roughly. For this price they pick you up at the airport with the girl, take you to get checked in at the resort or villa where all food and drink is included in the price. When your trip is over they take you back to the airport.

Dominican republic is a poor country and like other poor countries it has a sex trade. These girls get paid more for spending a week with a client than they would for 3 months in a normal job.

If you're that concerned about the economic plight of people in the Dominican Republic or any other poor country why don't you make an equivalent donation to a reputable charity that educates the people to get out of situations where they have to sell themselves to foreigners to earn a decent living?

My suggestion - go to a spa resort in Ibiza or Mallorca, make the effort and chat up a fellow holidaymaker. That way you get the pampering and the passion but nobody gets exploited. I hate all forms of s*x tourism, be it men going to Thailand or women going to Turkey. Jamaica is notorious for that sort of thing as well. In my opinion s*x tourism degrades the local people of the tourist country - these people are being bought and sold!

I'm not moralising, but I think that s*x should be a fair, willing, equal and ideally loving exchange between the people concerned and not something that you put a price on. This means I don't approve of gold diggers either.

Tragedy

Even when money isn't involved, sex usually has a price.

(and I don't mean that facetiously either)

PS: http://stevemoxon.blogspot.com/2009/10/big-myth-of-trafficked-prostitution.html

Go proselytize somewhere else please

Bottle_of_Smoke

If it weren't for STDs I'd go for it, but not a chance would I put myself through months of mental torture afterward waiting for the test results.

ken26 wrote: »

Oh and STDs are not a concern as they get their girls regularly tested and a cert from the doc is available. All sex has to be covered in any case.

Get real. Heard this myth about Amsterdam so many times.

So lets say you do get a cert, how could you trust in its validity?

But lets assume it was real. STDs by their nature are impossible to be sure about with a prostitute.

Herpes/Warts can't be tested for.

Much more importantly, a person has to have HIV for three months before they show positive for it on test but will still be infectious during this period. These girls have a different paying man every week. At the very least one johnny's gonna split over a week of sex with a deadly little Dominican girl. No, could not have that hanging over me.

Monkey61

I'm not quite sure how I feel about this really. I have no problem with prostitution (provided that the women are entering into it willingly and entirely of their own volition) as I don't think anyone has the right to tell another adult what they can and cannot do with their own body provided that they are not harming anyone in the process.

For somebody who can't, for whatever reason, chat up women/have relationships/sex, this sounds like a pretty good idea. Fun and harmless as long as everyone is happy to be doing it. It is easy to react in horror and cast down judgements when people want to do stuff like this. Words like sleazy and desperate get bandied about quite a lot in relation to paying for sex, but then one could say that going out clubbing and drunkenly taking home an equally drunk partner is pretty much the same. And although one frequently hears the "oh it's really easy to pull women in nightclubs" thing - but for many people that isn't actually true.

Hmm...I am still on the fence though and would probably see it as a last resort, if you weren't able to find someone to have sex with otherwise as everyone should be able to experience sexual contact in their lives.

If you were going to do it, treat these women with the respect they deserve, be very very careful regarding diseases then why not I suppose. I would just be wary that future partners might not be entirely understanding about this so you would have to be prepared to keep it quiet.

Macha

Monkey61 wrote: »

Hmm...I am still on the fence though and would probably see it as a last resort, if you weren't able to find someone to have sex with otherwise as everyone should be able to experience sexual contact in their lives.

What? sexual contact is a right?

Monkey61 wrote: »

If you were going to do it, treat these women with the respect they deserve, be very very careful regarding diseases then why not I suppose. I would just be wary that future partners might not be entirely understanding about this so you would have to be prepared to keep it quiet.

And how exactly do you determine that the person you are with is not doing their job out of coercion? Ask them?

Smallbit

Tragedy wrote: »

Even when money isn't involved, sex usually has a price.

(and I don't mean that facetiously either)

PS: http://stevemoxon.blogspot.com/2009/10/big-myth-of-trafficked-prostitution.html

Go proselytize somewhere else please

Interesting point but a bit harsh on Emme no?! She's entitled to her point without being accused of proselytizing. Assertive women are regularly labelled lesbian or 'hysterical' when we air our views...

I can see how you might conclude that sex always has a price and yes I've seen many of my friends play that card when it suits them. I personally don't, but I will never apologise for not having sex with a man I don't fancy.

The simple fact is that we're not driven to seek sex in the same way as men, so there will always be an unsatisfied demand for sex. This is where 'sex-workers' fit in, and provide purely physical services.

From a female point of view, or mine at least, purely physical sex is inferior to loving sex and it's not something I do often. Having said that, most guys would be able to 'score' a women on a package holiday from what I've witnessed. I honestly think some men seek to pay for sex up front just to simplify the process for themselves - maybe it's laziness?!

Macha

Smallbit wrote: »

The simple fact is that we're not driven to seek sex in the same way as men, so there will always be an unsatisfied demand for sex.

Where are you getting this from?

Altar_Ego_Boy

Sex tourism is fine as far as im concerned.

Theres nothing unethical about it. Whether or not you consider it desperate is one thing but the fact is that the countries in which these women live have poor economies. The women dont need to be coerced into prostitution because they can earn much more from it than "regular" employment.

I wouldnt go on a "erotic vacation" or to a prostitute myself at this stage but I have experience from when I travelled in the far east when I was younger and it changed my mind on paying for sex from an ethical standpoint.

Of course the issue of prostitution is going to hit a nerve with some women but the bottom line is that theres nothing wrong if its between consenting adults.

However, the danger of catching an STD is real and like one of the previous posters I dont think its worth the risk.

Macha

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Sex tourism is fine as far as im concerned.

The U.N. opposes sex tourism citing health, social and cultural consequences for both tourist home countries and destination countries, especially in situations exploiting gender, age, social and economic inequalities in sex tourism destinations.[1][2][3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_tourism

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Theres nothing unethical about it. Whether or not you consider it desperate is one thing but the fact is that the countries in which these women live have poor economies. The women dont need to be coerced into prostitution because they can earn much more from it than "regular" employment.

Oh yes so then it's OK. You're actually acknowledging that they're forced into prostitution by poverty but don't see a problem with this?

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

I wouldnt go on a "erotic vacation" or to a prostitute myself at this stage but I have experience from when I travelled in the far east when I was younger and it changed my mind on paying for sex from an ethical standpoint.

How exactly?

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Of course the issue of prostitution is going to hit a nerve with some women but the bottom line is that theres nothing wrong if its between consenting adults.

Yes because it's only women who see a problem with sex tourism.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

However, the danger of catching an STD is real and like one of the previous posters I dont think its worth the risk.

I can't tell you how depressing it is to hear that's the only reason you wouldn't do it.

Altar_Ego_Boy

taconnol wrote: »

The U.N. opposes sex tourism citing health, social and cultural consequences for both tourist home countries and destination countries, especially in situations exploiting gender, age, social and economic inequalities in sex tourism destinations.[1][2][3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_tourism


Oh yes so then it's OK


How exactly?


Yes because it's only women who see a problem with sex tourism.


I can't tell you how depressing it is to hear that's the only reason you wouldn't do it.

I dont think there is anything unethical about prostitution. If its consensual then theres nothing wrong with it.

You, however, clearly have an ethical objection. I think the onus is on you to explain exactly why you think it is unethical. All you have come up with so far are questions.

I would think that yes it is mostly women that have a problem with sex tourism or for that matter prostitution in general. Im not saying every man thinks differently.

What you find depressing is your own subjective experience. However, if you think just because you take moral exception to something then that makes it absolutely wrong then perhaps you should do yourself a favour and not adhere to such a rigid code of ethics

cooperguy

Like alot of people here a prostitute just has no appeal to me at all!!

Macha

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

I dont think there is anything unethical about prostitution. If its consensual then theres nothing wrong with it.

Define consensual.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

You, however, clearly have an ethical objection. I think the onus is on you to explain exactly why you think it is unethical. All you have come up with so far are questions.

Yes, yes I do have a problem with it. The problems with sex tourism are many but focus a central point of exploitation. The people involved in prostitution in countries of sex tourism are mostly poor, vulnerable and often children.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

I would think that yes it is mostly women that have a problem with sex tourism or for that matter prostitution in general. Im not saying every man thinks differently.

And do you have any evidence that it's "mostly women" that have a problem with sex tourism? Do you see any difference in the rich American woman giving jewelry & money to the young Caribbean man when she's on holiday and a European man paying directly for sex with a young Thai girl?

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

What you find depressing is your own subjective experience.

What exactly does that mean?

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

However, if you think just because you take moral exception to something then that makes it absolutely wrong then perhaps you should do yourself a favour and not adhere to such a rigid code of ethics

So..your advice is that because I see that something causes suffering for others and find it depressing that other are willing to turn a blind eye and partake in that activity, that the solution is for me to stop caring? What crappy, crappy advice.

Altar_Ego_Boy

taconnol wrote: »

Define consensual.


Yes, yes I do have a problem with it. The problems with sex tourism are many but focus a central point of exploitation. The people involved in prostitution in countries of sex tourism are mostly poor, vulnerable and often children.


And do you have any evidence that it's "mostly women" that have a problem with sex tourism? Do you see any difference in the rich American woman giving jewelry & money to the young Caribbean man when she's on holiday and a European man paying directly for sex with a young Thai girl?


What exactly does that mean?


So..your advice is that because I see that something causes suffering for others and find it depressing that other are willing to turn a blind eye and partake in that activity, that the solution is for me to stop caring? What crappy, crappy advice.

Consensual is when the woman makes the independent decision to become a prostitute. If its the case that she is forced into it by a third party then I, like any other normal person, would have an objection. However, if she chooses independently to become a prostitute then I have no objection.

Of course the people involved in prostitution are poor. The women who become prostitutes make more from that work than they could in other employment. Its an economic decision they make to become prostitutes.

Im not saying you should stop caring about the poor people of the world. However, the women I interacted with when I was in Thailand chose to become prostitutes because they could make more income that way. They made the independent decision and they werent forced into it. Trying to wipe out prostitution in poor nations is unrealistic.

Bottle_of_Smoke

taconnol wrote: »

Yes, yes I do have a problem with it. The problems with sex tourism are many but focus a central point of exploitation. The people involved in prostitution in countries of sex tourism are mostly poor, vulnerable and often children.


And do you have any evidence that it's "mostly women" that have a problem with sex tourism? Do you see any difference in the rich American woman giving jewelry & money to the young Caribbean man when she's on holiday and a European man paying directly for sex with a young Thai girl?

If there's as many guys who take issue with it they're certainly not as vocal.

What exactly does that mean?


So..your advice is that because I see that something causes suffering for others and find it depressing that other are willing to turn a blind eye and partake in that activity, that the solution is for me to stop caring? What crappy, crappy advice.

So what is the solution? Do you really think the odd person not taking part out of ethical reasons is going to make any difference to the sex trade? Its not really crappy crappy advice because you caring isn't going to make the slightest difference.

Macha

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Consensual is when the woman makes the independent decision to become a prostitute. If its the case that she is forced into it by a third party then I, like any other normal person, would have an objection. However, if she chooses independently to become a prostitute then I have no objection.

I have no objection if a person chooses independently either. But you don't seem to think that extreme poverty impacts any way on the objectivity of a person's decision to enter poverty.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Its an economic decision they make to become prostitutes.

Firstly, there are many that are coerced into prostitution. Then there are the many children who are not capable of making that sort of decision and are therefore all coerced by definition into prostitution. Of course it's an economic decision to become a prostitute but one often borne out of a desperate financial situation with other factors to consider, including hours of work and child care. Often women simply cannot work the 14 hour days demanded in many factories because it would require leaving their children alone for that amount of time. Prostitution can offer some a way of reducing this time.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

They made the independent decision and they werent forced into it..

And how exactly do you know that?

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Trying to wipe out prostitution in poor nations is unrealistic.

I suppose we should stop worrying about AIDS and world hunger then as well.

Of course it's going to be difficult but you seem to want to ignore the large role that demand plays in perpetuating sex tourism.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

If there's as many guys who take issue with it they're certainly not as vocal.

And? I really don't see what your point is.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

So what is the solution? Do you really think the odd person not taking part out of ethical reasons is going to make any difference to the sex trade? Its not really crappy crappy advice because you caring isn't going to make the slightest difference.

There are two issues with sex tourism: supply and demand. The demand problem is people like the previous poster who has convinced himself that women go into prostitution willingly. Research has shown that sex tourists often have very rigid attitudes towards male and female roles. Many enjoy the traditional dominance that men enjoy over women in sex tourism destinations. You can hear a sex tourist making that exact point on this video:

http://contexts.org/socimages/2008/04/17/sex-tourism-in-thailand/

Also, I love this story:

The problem on the supply side is the serious poverty that many people experience in countries that serve as destinations for sex tourists. There are weak social welfare structures that leave the poor with few options and allow for the easy trafficking of people (especially children). The governments provide little support for helping people out of the industry as there is often a significant stigma attached to prostitution and they are really at the bottom of the list when money is being handed out.

Jesus OF COURSE it's going to be difficult and I as an individual may not have a big impact but I am human and I don't just turn my empathy on and off like a lightswitch.

Altar_Ego_Boy

taconnol wrote: »

I have no objection if a person chooses independently either. But you don't seem to think that extreme poverty impacts any way on the objectivity of a person's decision to enter poverty

Im guessing you meant to say prostitution. Of course poverty forces a woman into prostitution. We've established that at this stage. Shes not gonna do it for any other reason. The point is that she has not been forced or coerced into doing it. Youre saying a woman shouldnt become a prostitute because it wasnt her first choice of career? In that case the answer to our problems is simple: lets outlaw poverty.

taconnol wrote: »

Firstly, there are many that are coerced into prostitution. Then there are the many children who are not capable of making that sort of decision and are therefore all coerced by definition into prostitution. Of course it's an economic decision to become a prostitute but one often borne out of a desperate financial situation with other factors to consider, including hours of work and child care. Often women simply cannot work the 14 hour days demanded in many factories because it would require leaving their children alone for that amount of time. Prostitution can offer some a way of reducing this time.

Like any other normal person im against exploitation of children, child prostitution and human trafficking. But as you clearly typed above a woman makes the decision to become a prostitute because of her economic situation. She can earn more money in prostitution then she can by any other employment. Yes she had economic reasons for becoming a prostitute but the bottom line it was her decision. You think economic pressure (the market or the economy) is some malevolent third party that tricks a person into making decisions.

Thats not the case. A woman who decides to be a prostitute in South East Asia does it for the same reason as a woman in Ireland or Europe: because it pays better.

taconnol wrote: »

And how exactly do you know that?

I dont know exactly.They told me so and I believed them. Most of them had kids and needed the money.What I will say is that there are so many women working as prostitutes in Thailand, Vietnam and Cambodia (and Im guessing most other developing nations) that one has to conclude it is a global phenonemon and not something that can wiped out by simple changes in government policy. It will only go away when the economies of these countries improve.

taconnol wrote: »

There are two issues with sex tourism: supply and demand. The demand problem is people like the previous poster who has convinced himself that women go into prostitution willingly. Research has shown that sex tourists often have very rigid attitudes towards male and female roles. Many enjoy the traditional dominance that men enjoy over women in sex tourism destinations

Research has shown that men have been paying for sex since biblical times (sorry i dont have any links to prove this), the demand has always been there (yes even before my time in SE Asia) and probably always will be.

I think its clear that you just have personal problem with prostitution per se. I have utmost respect for activists like you who want improve the plight of developing nations. However, its unwise for you to cast sanctimonious moral judgments on others because not everyone is gonna share your moral outlook.

Prostitution isnt wrong by any absolute moral code and the problems of exploitation (as real as they may be) are no more than incidental to it.

Macha

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Im guessing you meant to say prostitution. Of course poverty forces a woman into prostitution. We've established that at this stage. Shes not gonna do it for any other reason. The point is that she has not been forced or coerced into doing it. Youre saying a woman shouldnt become a prostitute because it wasnt her first choice of career? In that case the answer to our problems is simple: lets outlaw poverty.

Either she's forced or she isn't. I don't see how you can just dismiss the economic causes of prostitution as somehow less important than the more violent or more physical causes.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

You think economic pressure (the market or the economy) is some malevolent third party that tricks a person into making decisions.

Yes, when it forces people into professions like prostitution. You think the market is some benevolent third party that has the best interests of people at heart?

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Thats not the case. A woman who decides to be a prostitute in South East Asia does it for the same reason as a woman in Ireland or Europe: because it pays better.

There are hundreds of reasons why a particular person (and let's not also generalise into assuming that all prostitutes are women) goes into prostitution. Economic reasons are a large one but there are other social, cultural and individual reasons why a person would end up a prostitute.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

I dont know exactly.They told me so and I believed them.

Ah right, so it must be the truth then. The only true line that was spoken that was spoken in the film "Pretty Woman" was when she said "I am whatever you want me to be".

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

What I will say is that there are so many women working as prostitutes in Thailand, Vietnam and Cambodia (and Im guessing most other developing nations) that one has to conclude it is a global phenonemon and not something that can wiped out by simple changes in government policy. It will only go away when the economies of these countries improve.

Of course. There is also the question of demand, of course.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

I think its clear that you just have personal problem with prostitution per se.

What exactly does a "personal problem" mean? Are you trying to insinuate that I am the only one who sees a problem with prostitution or that my problems with it are the result of some sort of irrational, personal point of view, rather than an ability to objectively look at the facts? Either way that's pretty dismissive and unfounded.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

However, its unwise for you to cast sanctimonious moral judgments on others because not everyone is gonna share your moral outlook.

What's sanctimonious? I can't say I'm surprised that you resorted to this defense though. It's a pretty standard one that basically boils down to "I don't like that fact that you're judging my actions", well tough. I'm a consequentialist and as such I look at the consequences of actions and see if they cause harm or good. There's no religious or other motivation behind my opinion of sex tourism, whatever you might like to think.

Altar_Ego_Boy wrote: »

Prostitution isnt wrong by any absolute moral code and the problems of exploitation (as real as they may be) are no more than incidental to it.

Define "wrong". And did you just acknowledge that exploitation is a very "real" problem in prostitution and straight after dismiss it as "incidental"? You obviously aren't very bothered about exploitation in that case - you can't have it both ways.

Bottle_of_Smoke

taconnol wrote: »

I suppose we should stop worrying about AIDS and world hunger then as well.

Probably yes with hunger, all western aid generally does with hunger stricken countries is create a bigger starving population a few years down the line.

AIDS; there's selfish reasons to wipe it out. That aside it's much easier to wipe out than people's desire to part take in both sides of prostitution.

Of course it's going to be difficult but you seem to want to ignore the large role that demand plays in perpetuating sex tourism.

And you seem to want to believe that its possible to get rid of the reasons for demand.

And? I really don't see what your point is.

You wanted evidence that women have a bigger problem with the sex industry. Anyone living on planet earth knows that statement doesn't require evidence.

There are two issues with sex tourism: supply and demand. The demand problem is people like the previous poster who has convinced himself that women go into prostitution willingly. Research has shown that sex tourists often have very rigid attitudes towards male and female roles. Many enjoy the traditional dominance that men enjoy over women in sex tourism destinations. You can hear a sex tourist making that exact point on this video:

http://contexts.org/socimages/2008/04/17/sex-tourism-in-thailand/

Also, I love this story:

The problem on the supply side is the serious poverty that many people experience in countries that serve as destinations for sex tourists. There are weak social welfare structures that leave the poor with few options and allow for the easy trafficking of people (especially children). The governments provide little support for helping people out of the industry as there is often a significant stigma attached to prostitution and they are really at the bottom of the list when money is being handed out.

Jesus OF COURSE it's going to be difficult and I as an individual may not have a big impact but I am human and I don't just turn my empathy on and off like a lightswitch.

Ok, aside from the last few lines you appear to be just listing bad things about prostitution. Not relevant - the issue won't go away.

Research has shown that sex tourists often have very rigid attitudes towards male and female roles. Many enjoy the traditional dominance that men enjoy over women in sex tourism destinations. You can hear a sex tourist making that exact point on this video:

http://contexts.org/socimages/2008/04/17/sex-tourism-in-thailand

What's your point here? Are you talking about the guys from minute 18 on? Those guys aren't using prostitutes they're married to thai women.

Macha

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Probably yes with hunger, all western aid generally does with hunger stricken countries is create a bigger starving population a few years down the line.

All you're complaining about is the method with which the West has been tackling hunger. That isn't an argument for not trying at all.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

AIDS; there's selfish reasons to wipe it out. That aside it's much easier to wipe out than people's desire to part take in both sides of prostitution.

You still haven't provided a decent argument for not wanting to bother tackling prostitution. The fact that it will be difficult is really not a valid argument.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

And you seem to want to believe that its possible to get rid of the reasons for demand.

Where did I say that it would be possible to get rid of the reasons for demand?

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

You wanted evidence that women have a bigger problem with the sex industry. Anyone living on planet earth knows that statement doesn't require evidence.

Will if it's so blindingly obvious, you'll be happy to provide some evidence. Spouting "just so" logic will not get you very far in any debate.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Ok, aside from the last few lines you appear to be just listing bad things about prostitution. Not relevant - the issue won't go away.

Er...so in a discussion about sex tourism the damage that it causes are not relevant? Just lovely.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

What's your point here? Are you talking about the guys from minute 18 on? Those guys aren't using prostitutes they're married to thai women.

I was talking about a general attitude expressed by the Western men in the video towards Western women vs Asian women. They don't like the assertive attitude of Western women and so go to countries like Thailand where women are more submissive and they can take advantage of social norms in that country and find a "relationship" with a woman who is more "willing" to play the submissive woman. For me the line between these kinds of marriages and prostitution is very blurred. THAT'S my point.

Bottle_of_Smoke

taconnol wrote: »

All you're complaining about is the method with which the West has been tackling hunger. That isn't an argument for not trying at all.

Fair enough, hunger/prostitution is apples/oranges

You still haven't provided a decent argument for not wanting to bother tackling prostitution. The fact that it will be difficult is really not a valid argument.

Not difficult, impossible from the approach of trying to stop men from doing it for ethical reasons. It was a response to one of your previous points.

Where did I say that it would be possible to get rid of the reasons for demand?

You implied it, intentionally or otherwise, when you said "Of course it's going to be difficult but you seem to want to ignore the large role that demand plays in perpetuating sex tourism.
" to alter ego boy. Mentioning that role in that context implies prostitution could be stopped through a change of attitudes. That is unrealistic which is the point you were responding to.

Will if it's so blindingly obvious, you'll be happy to provide some evidence. Spouting "just so" logic will not get you very far in any debate.

I don't care if you agree with that or not, speaking to people I know a much higher percentage of women have a problem with it. It was in response to something you said to alter ego boy and its not relevant to stopping prostitution. And to be clear I'm not suggesting your opinion is less valid because you're female, just in case that's what you're thinking.

Er...so in a discussion about sex tourism the damage that it causes are not relevant? Just lovely.

I wanted you to answer on a specific part of the discussion, not just list facts about the general topic. That kind of suggests you had no answer

I was talking about a general attitude expressed by the Western men in the video towards Western women vs Asian women. They don't like the assertive attitude of Western women and so go to countries like Thailand where women are more submissive and they can take advantage of social norms in that country and find a "relationship" with a woman who is more "willing" to play the submissive woman. For me the line between these kinds of marriages and prostitution is very blurred. THAT'S my point.

That's pretty offensive to those women, and if two of my half asian friend's mothers are anything to go by its utter bullsh*t. I asked you what difference a few people not using prostitutes for ethical reasons would make and you responded by showing a link with guys were married to women in thailand and called them sex tourists. Not relevant.

Macha

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Not difficult, impossible from the approach of trying to stop men from doing it for ethical reasons. It was a response to one of your previous points.

Yes you're right, it's a difficult issue because it requires efforts in a huge range of areas. Attitudes, culture, economics, etc. Again, I don't see why this is an reason not to try.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

You implied it, intentionally or otherwise, when you said "Of course it's going to be difficult but you seem to want to ignore the large role that demand plays in perpetuating sex tourism.
" to alter ego boy. Mentioning that role in that context implies prostitution could be stopped through a change of attitudes. That is unrealistic which is the point you were responding to.

I didn't imply it, intentionally or otherwise, and it would be nice if you stopped simply taking what you want out of what I write

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I don't care if you agree with that or not, speaking to people I know a much higher percentage of women have a problem with it.

Well I will wait until you prove it with something other than anecdotal evidence. If I believed everything that was claimed on Boards on the foot of anecdotal evidence I would believe everything and anything.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

And to be clear I'm not suggesting your opinion is less valid because you're female, just in case that's what you're thinking.

I should certainly hope not.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I wanted you to answer on a specific part of the discussion, not just list facts about the general topic. That kind of suggests you had no answer

No, you're trying to leave a central part of the discussion, ie the negative impact of sex tourism out of this debate. We are already having a discussion on the difficulties of eradicating sex tourism so your "suggestion" that I have no answers is nonsense. It should be possible to discuss ALL relevant aspects of a debate, not just the parts that one person feels may damage their argument.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

That's pretty offensive to those women, and if two of my half asian friend's mothers are anything to go by its utter bullsh*t.

It would be really nice if you stopped reading into my posts just what you want to. In this case, you have taken my opinion on a particular type of relationship between Western men and Asian women to apply to ALL relationships between these two groups.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I asked you what difference a few people not using prostitutes for ethical reasons would make and you responded by showing a link with guys were married to women in thailand and called them sex tourists. Not relevant.

A reduction in the number of sex tourists will result in a reduction in the industry in the destination countries. Is appealing to their higher nature the most effective way to combat sex tourism? No, that's why we have laws and penalties. Is it important to those people that might be removed or never enter into the industry in the first place? Most definitely. Is it the ONLY measure that should be taken? Of course not but there are far, far too many people who wilfully believe the "happy hooker" myth because it suits them and this false reality should most definitely be challenged.

Also, please stop dismissing aspects of my post as "not relevant" - it's very offputting. I could do the same to large sections of your posts but out of manners, I don't.

Bottle_of_Smoke

taconnol wrote: »

Yes you're right, it's a difficult issue because it requires efforts in a huge range of areas. Attitudes, culture, economics, etc. Again, I don't see why this is an reason not to try.

Its a reason not to try because its utterly ineffective.

I didn't imply it, intentionally or otherwise, and it would be nice if you stopped simply taking what you want out of what I write

Yes you did, unintentionally it appears.

Well I will wait until you prove it with something other than anecdotal evidence. If I believed everything that was claimed on Boards on the foot of anecdotal evidence I would believe everything and anything.

What men and women think of prostitutes isn't relevent to stopping it. I think if you're honest you'll admit more women you know than men have more of a problem with prostitution.

I should certainly hope not.

Yes, that's what I just said.

No, you're trying to leave a central part of the discussion, ie the negative impact of sex tourism out of this debate. We are already having a discussion on the difficulties of eradicating sex tourism so your "suggestion" that I have no answers is nonsense. It should be possible to discuss ALL relevant aspects of a debate, not just the parts that one person feels may damage their argument.

Well discuss them in another part of your post, instead of when i asked a question about a specific issue.

It would be really nice if you stopped reading into my posts just what you want to. In this case, you have taken my opinion on a particular type of relationship between Western men and Asian women to apply to ALL relationships between these two groups.

I did nothing of the sort. The examples I used were the exact type of relationship you claimed blurred with prostitution.

A reduction in the number of sex tourists will result in a reduction in the industry in the destination countries. Is appealing to their higher nature the most effective way to combat sex tourism? No, that's why we have laws and penalties. Is it important to those people that might be removed or never enter into the industry in the first place? Most definitely. Is it the ONLY measure that should be taken? Of course not but there are far, far too many people who wilfully believe the "happy hooker" myth because it suits them and this false reality should most definitely be challenged.

Men don't care if the woman is happy or not, they'll still use prostitutes. Everyone knows the vast majority of non-slave prostitutes enter the field doing something they don't want to do, to make much more money than they could otherwise. Just as drug traffickers do. That's not condoning it, its just pointing out a reality.
Myself I wouldn't use prostitutes for health reasons. If I somehow knew(which is hypothetical because its impossible) they were clean would I stop and think "am I forcing these women to demean themselves"? No I wouldn't because there's millions more men who will use them and me taking a stand won't make any difference. I can't see why you'd believe appealing to people's higher nature is anything but fut futile

Also, please stop dismissing aspects of my post as "not relevant" - it's very offputting. I could do the same to large sections of your posts but out of manners, I don't.

If your arguments aren't relevent to a question I'm going to point that out. There's nothing unmannerly about that and I'd invite you to do the same.

Macha

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Its a reason not to try because its utterly ineffective.

So now we've gone from difficult to utterly ineffective.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Yes you did, unintentionally it appears.

Seriously. If you're going to keep up the strawmans, we'll just call it a day.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

What men and women think of prostitutes isn't relevent to stopping it. I think if you're honest you'll admit more women you know than men have more of a problem with prostitution.

Again, I'll wait until you come up with something better than "if you're honest you'll admit" blah blah.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Well discuss them in another part of your post, instead of when i asked a question about a specific issue.

:rolleyes:

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I did nothing of the sort. The examples I used were the exact type of relationship you claimed blurred with prostitution.

No they weren't. Not at all. It's clear you don't understand the type of relationship I was referring to. And the only type of relationship you referred to was one with a Western man and Asian women, hence your generalisation - not mine.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Men don't care if the woman is happy or not, they'll still use prostitutes. Everyone knows the vast majority of non-slave prostitutes enter the field doing something they don't want to do, to make much more money than they could otherwise. Just as drug traffickers do. That's not condoning it, its just pointing out a reality.

What you wrote is probably true for the most part. But I don't think that clients of prostitutes should be allowed any chance to fool themselves on this topic. It looks like you're taking your own personal view, that you would be perfectly happy to use prostitutes but you have a selfish worry about your own health and are generalising this attitude out to the rest of mankind. Moreover, how can you prove that more men wouldn't use prostitutes if they felt that the prostitutes were perfectly happy (as I'm sure some prostitutes are).

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Myself I wouldn't use prostitutes for health reasons. If I somehow knew(which is hypothetical because its impossible) they were clean would I stop and think "am I forcing these women to demean themselves"? No I wouldn't because there's millions more men who will use them and me taking a stand won't make any difference. I can't see why you'd believe appealing to people's higher nature is anything but fut futile

Well that's an excuse for not bothering to stop and think about the impact of anything you do. Why recycle? Millions don't. Why be nice to anyone? Millions aren't.

Again you have moved from difficult to "futile" within a few posts. I'd like to know where you get your evidence from for that? Do you know anyone that helps get people out of prostitution or read any studies on the issue? Because so far all you've done is state what you believe to be true and demand that I take it as gospel or so obvious that there's no need for you to actually back up what you say with any modicum of evidence.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

If your arguments aren't relevent to a question I'm going to point that out. There's nothing unmannerly about that and I'd invite you to do the same.

It would help if your claims of irrelevance were in any way unjustified. I mean we're talking about sex tourism and you try to dismiss a video about sex tourism in Thailand as irrelevant? The point of video was to explore an attitude towards men and women's traditional roles that is prevalent among many male sex tourists. And we're discussing demand and what to do about it. And it isn't relevant? Right.