College girls selling themselves as prostitutes

44leto

I wonder how much I could have earned, I am sure I would have found some punters who had change of a fiver.

Terry

prinz wrote: »

So you equate arts degrees with learning something you didn't know before? It seems they are of some use after all. Keep digging your hole Terry, reflects badly on you as a poster nothing more.

This entire dialogue is worthy of an arts degree.

What word did I use to describe arts degrees?

K-9

Arts degrees are pointless. You should post that the unpopular opinion thread and the done already thread on AH.

Anyway, some people know the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

Bloody arts degrees. People should be out doing useful things like construction and tiling.

saa

Terry wrote: »

Also, I don't have a degree. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that arts degrees are pointless.

"Well I don't have a degree but I'll tell you a thing or two about degrees"

Reminds me of a friend who is very much against college education, see's it and exercising for that matter as pointless :pac:

gbee

saa wrote: »

would be legal if it meant better protection for sex workers.

But they are not sex workers, they are kids doing what kids do, except getting paid for it and not two Perno's ~ or whatever it is today.

now, it could lead to them continuing in civie street, what they were doing on college anyway, and that's a distraction, but, most of those started in secondary school anyway and, if my info is anything to go on, many female PhD's managed to put this period behind them.

du Maurier

Terry wrote: »

Tonight, whilst reading AH, I learned a new word.
It was as pointless as having an arts degree, but I now know that the word "Twaddle" is just a substitute for "pointless".

This entire dialogue is worthy of an arts degree.

Dwelling specifically on the Arts degree argument you seem terribly embittered. I can't fathom why it's so pointed. Are you experiencing sheer self-loathing because your Leaving Certificate didn't amount to even acquiring the most rudimentary of courses on the curriculum?

LighterGuy

Terry wrote: »

Please answer my questions.

A bit demanding :pac:
But ok, here is what you said.

Terry wrote: »

Why is a woman a "slut" for charging for sex?
I honestly don't see how you came to the conclusion that a woman who is willing to accept money for sex is a slut.

The way I see it is that there are two people involved when it comes to sex.
When payment comes in to it, you have a man willing to pay and a woman willing to accept payment.

I find sex to be a pleasurable act.
I'm willing to pay for other pleasurable acts such as drinking beer, wearing comfortable clothes and drinking beer.

Am I a beer and clothes slut, or does your disdain just lie with women who are willing to make men happy for a few quid?

If so, why?
Why do you believe that women who are willing to have sex for money are "Sluts"?

Now the reason why i didnt get back is because I think you are looking to argue with someone. Not debate. Not voice your opinion. But want a good ol' "i'm right you're wrong" thing.

Also, How can I dispute you? Because you are delusional. And no, that is not a typyical boards.ie insult where I am trying to make my opinion right by personally attacking you (as so many do) .. but you know nothing about prostitution and brothels.

Don't believe me? Lets take 1 prostitute working in a brothel 3 nights a week. She could take up to 8 blokes a night (freaky, but more even) But that's at least 24 blokes over 3 days... A potential 96 different blokes a month ... and im meant to say shes a lovely girl? shes certainly not a slut?

Millicent

LighterGuy wrote: »

Legal, but makes said person a total user.

It's not illegal to be a prostitute.

LighterGuy

Millicent wrote: »

It's not illegal to be a prostitute.

I was referring to what stuffins said about a girl being with a guy for his money. Aka, using him in my opinion.

Terry

du Maurier wrote: »

Dwelling specifically on the Arts degree argument you seem terribly embittered. I can't fathom why it's so pointed. Are you experiencing sheer self-loathing because your Leaving Certificate didn't amount to even acquiring the most rudimentary of courses on the curriculum?

No, Dr. Freud. I just truly believe that arts degrees are pointless.

You seem to be offended by my opinion. Would that be because you have done or are currently doing an arts degree, and feel somewhat afraid that others in society will see your degree in the same way that I see it? Pointless.

prinz

Terry wrote: »

What word did I use to describe arts degrees?

Still digging? I see. Let's start throwing out examples shall we? Neil Jordan? James Joyce? David Norris? Jonathon Swift? George Berkely? Salman Rushdie? Sacha Baron Cohen? .............. wonder what might link these?

saa

gbee wrote: »

But they are not sex workers, they are kids doing what kids do, except getting paid for it and not two Perno's ~ or whatever it is today.

Getting paid in exchange for sex, sex worker. How they go about it might not be too different to how they would if money was not involved but its the other parties that are involved that are putting them at a risk or the whole situation that just having sex usually wouldnt.

And also its kind of hard to get around but if you're working for money through having sex your mind frame will change over time from on and off duty, this is a job, this isnt, the mind makes these distinctions anyway.
A lot of people who do this talk about having to leave their mind during these meetings to be someone else or somewhere else because sometimes it might be fun but more often than not the situation can be tedious, tiring and difficult over time.

prinz

...Barrack Obama? JFK? Adam Sandler? Samuel L Jackson? Lucy Liu? Ed Norton? Jodie Foster? Denzel Washington?.... and on and on and on.

Millicent

LighterGuy wrote: »

I was referring to what stuffins said about a girl being with a guy for his money. Aka, using him in my opinion.

Yes, and you said that was legal. I'm pointing out to you that prostitution is not illegal in Ireland. Just as a general FYI.

LighterGuy

Millicent wrote: »

Yes, and you said that was legal. I'm pointing out to you that prostitution is not illegal in Ireland. Just as a general FYI.

well say it to stuffins i never said it was illegal i was making a comment about users. :pac:

Terry

LighterGuy wrote: »

A bit demanding :pac:

Huh? I said please.

But ok, here is what you said.

Now the reason why i didnt get back is because I think you are looking to argue with someone. Not debate. Not voice your opinion. But want a good ol' "i'm right you're wrong" thing.

I'm always right, but that's not the point here.

Also, How can I dispute you?

You cannot.

Because you are delusional.

Indeed I am.

And no, that is not a typyical boards.ie insult where I am trying to make my opinion right by personally attacking you (as so many do) .. but you know nothing about prostitution and brothels.

I don't feel insulted by you voicing your opinion.

I do not profess to be anj expert on prostitution or brothels. I am, just like everyone else here, voicing my pinion.

Don't believe me? Lets take 1 prostitute working in a brothel 3 nights a week. She could take up to 8 blokes a night (freaky, but more even) But that's at least 24 blokes over 3 days... A potential 96 different blokes a month ... and im meant to say shes a lovely girl? shes certainly not a slut?

You call her a slut. I call her a woman making a few quid from giving men what they want.

I can't believe that I'm resorting to such a cliché, but would you find it ok for a bloke to **** 96 different chicks in one month?
Actually, that's a pointless question. You would most likely treat him as a hero.

du Maurier

Terry wrote: »

No, Dr. Freud. I just truly believe that arts degrees are pointless.

You seem to be offended by my opinion. Would that be because you have done or are currently doing an arts degree, and feel somewhat afraid that others in society will see your degree in the same way that I see it? Pointless.

:pac: How was what I said Freudian?

I'm not offended at all. It's just ignorance stemming from, well ignorance. You've only loaded the thread with assumption after assumption and a linear thought process on a perceived notion of a particular degree. All soundbytes you may have gleaned from the next person. You're getting satisfaction with sneering but at the same time not qualifying anything and at least letting us know what exalted pedestal you occupy.

You haven't even broached the reasons why you said it. You just seem to state it as fact.

The last bit of your point comes across really childish and callow as well.

Terry

prinz wrote: »

Still digging? I see. Let's start throwing out examples shall we? Neil Jordan? James Joyce? David Norris? Jonathon Swift? George Berkely? Salman Rushdie? Sacha Baron Cohen? .............. wonder what might link these?

prinz wrote: »

...Barrack Obama? JFK? Adam Sandler? Samuel L Jackson? Lucy Liu? Ed Norton? Jodie Foster? Denzel Washington?.... and on and on and on.

Attention seeking.

I can break them down one by one if you want.

Millicent

LighterGuy wrote: »

well say it to stuffins i never said it was illegal i was making a comment about users. :pac:

It's actually illegal for the users. Care to weigh in an opinion on those who use prostitutes, since the women who do it are "sluts"? Doesn't say a lot for your two friends if that's the case.

Pace2008

Terry wrote: »

No, Dr. Freud. I just truly believe that arts degrees are pointless.

You seem to be offended by my opinion. Would that be because you have done or are currently doing an arts degree, and feel somewhat afraid that others in society will see your degree in the same way that I see it? Pointless.

I'd admit an awful lot of people just drift into an arts degree because they have no real idea of where they want to go in life, and hence don't get all that much out of it except an unwarranted sense of self-importance. But to categorically describe all arts degrees as "pointless" is anti-intellectual nonsense.

I'd be willing to bet a small amount of money that you think philosophy is just a load of lads sitting around stroking their chins as well.

EdenHazard

CLASS

Millicent

Pace2008 wrote: »

I'd admit an awful lot of people just drift into an arts degree because they have no real idea of where they want to go in life, and hence don't get all that much out of it except an unwarranted sense of self-importance. But to categorically describe all arts degrees as "pointless" is anti-intellectual nonsense.

QFT. I have an Arts degree. I chose two subjects that are my passion in life. What's to criticise in that?

prinz

Terry wrote: »

Attention seeking. I can break them down one by one if you want.

LOL. Stick to scratching your arse I think. You know what it strikes me as? Someone who hasn't personally had any call for utilising the education of somebody with an arts degree (that you know of, although you will more than likely sit down and fawn over any number of actors/artists/musicians who have studied arts) and you think therefore it's all pointless rubbish. Laughable, if it wasn't so f*cked up in a way. Like I've said I've seen some sh*te on this site, but what you've posted tonight comes close to the biscuit.

As for "attention seeking", ... pot, kettle and black springs to mind.

Terry

du Maurier wrote: »

:pac: How was what I said Freudian?

I'm not offended at all. It's just ignorance stemming from, well ignorance. You've only loaded the thread with assumption after assumption and a linear thought process on a perceived notion of a particular degree. All soundbytes you may have gleaned from the next person. You're getting satisfaction with sneering but at the same time not qualifying anything and at least letting us know what exalted pedestal you occupy.

You haven't even broached the reasons why you said it. You just seem to state it as fact.

The last bit of your point comes across really childish and callow as well.

It's late and I'm tired, so I'll just give you a brief explanation as to why I believe that arts degrees are pointless.

They don't actually qualify people for anything other than teaching other people arts degrees.
They are not worthy of government grants because they generally lead to nothing more than recipients being able to put "B.A." on their C.V.

The money should be focussed on people going for medical and practical degrees.

Goodnight.

LighterGuy

Terry wrote: »

You call her a slut. I call her a woman making a few quid from giving men what they want.

I can't believe that I'm resorting to such a cliché, but would you find it ok for a bloke to **** 96 different chicks in one month?
Actually, that's a pointless question. You would most likely treat him as a hero.

For me, he'd be a slut too. just no male equivalent word as popular for it.
All I know is the price of "co*k" will never cost as much as "pu*sy" - not a demand to pay guys is there (unless, we're talking gay)

But demand, its like what you said by giving people what they want. cause no demand no business right?

Ok. What about drugs? I guess I should become a drug dealer and if anyone ever questions me? tell them what you say "hey, you cant label me! I'm only making a few quid from giving people what they want." - hmmm, somehow i think you would label me tho.

Millicent

Terry wrote: »

It's late and I'm tired, so I'll just give you a brief explanation as to why I believe that arts degrees are pointless.

They don't actually qualify people for anything other than teaching other people arts degrees.
They are not worthy of government grants because they generally lead to nothing more than recipients being able to put "B.A." on their C.V.

The money should be focussed on people going for medical and practical degrees.

Goodnight.

Sorry, Terry, usually I agree with you, but that's not true at all. Plenty of my year moved into related fields from their Arts degree.

du Maurier

Terry wrote: »

It's late and I'm tired, so I'll just give you a brief explanation as to why I believe that arts degrees are pointless.

They don't actually qualify people for anything other than teaching other people arts degrees.
They are not worthy of government grants because they generally lead to nothing more than recipients being able to put "B.A." on their C.V.

The money should be focussed on people going for medical and practical degrees.

Goodnight.

They also say you never go full retard. This is testament that the sentiment might not be an accurate finding.

LighterGuy

Millicent wrote: »

It's actually illegal for the users. Care to weigh in an opinion on those who use prostitutes, since the women who do it are "sluts"? Doesn't say a lot for your two friends if that's the case.

Yeah
They rhode sluts and paid for it

Oh, what sorry? you expected something more from me?

MrStuffins

LighterGuy wrote: »

For me, he'd be a slut too. just no male equivalent word as popular for it.
All I know is the price of "co*k" will never cost as much as "pu*sy" - not a demand to pay guys is there (unless, we're talking gay)

But demand, its like what you said by giving people what they want. cause no demand no business right?

Ok. What about drugs? I guess I should become a drug dealer and if anyone ever questions me? tell them what you say "hey, you cant label me! I'm only making a few quid from giving people what they want." - hmmm, somehow i think you would label me tho.

No, because using drugs is illegal. Possessing drugs is illegal. Having sex is not.

Seriously dude, I think you just need to get laid!

Millicent

LighterGuy wrote: »

Yeah
They rhode sluts and paid for it

Oh, what sorry? you expected something more from me?

Why are they your friends if that's what you think about them? Just out of curiosity and then I'll leave you alone for the night to get me some sleep, what is your actual objection to prostitutes or "sluts" as you so colourfully put it?