Ladies your opinions on men using brothels and prostitutes

MaxWig · 26-08-2013 10:38AM

clairefontaine wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/zurich-opens-first-sex-boxes-to-reduce-open-street-prostitution-29528035.html

What will the Swiss think of next....

The damn Swiss, what with their common sense, understanding, sense of care and duty, and their general intelligent approach to prostitution.

It's disgusting.

Keep 'em in the streets - streets with no lights preferably.

And then ignore them. Much better I feel, in the long run!!

clairefontaine · 26-08-2013 10:40AM

MaxWig wrote: »

The damn Swiss, what with their common sense, understanding, sense of care and duty, and their general intelligent approach to prostitution.

It's disgusting.

Keep 'em in the streets - streets with no lights preferably.

And then ignore them. Much better I feel, in the long run!!

Ah sure why don't they just have state subsidised hotel rooms.

Wo want to see that?

starling · 26-08-2013 04:02PM

clairefontaine wrote: »

The things is though, in the West, bar kidnapping and trafficking, we make choices and often say "I have no choice." We stay this because it never FEELS like we have one.

There are people who genuinely have no choice but to engage in prostitution. Kids who've run away from home for example and are too young to get proper jobs. Their choice is thievng or prostitution. It's no use to say "there's always another choice." The fact is that for some people that's just not true.

clairefontaine wrote: »

I happen to agree entirely with that article above in the context of prostitution. You are paying to rape someone essentially. The consent is entirely flawed and debatable, and IMO that does not equal consent.

In your later examples around rape, I don't entirely agree with you universally. Memory is fickle. Alcohol,impairs judgement. Sex is shamed for girls, so much so she might not bear the thought she did this of her own free will, so she scripts it as a rape.

That is exactly the kind of misconception I'm talking about, it comes from the notion of "consent" as "not saying no." The frequency with which false claims of rape occur is wildly overstated. People's false sense of the rate of false claims leads them to presume a woman who was drunk might have consented and then changed her mind and cried rape to save her reputation.

I promise you that making an allegation of rape does not help anyone's reputation and is far worse than simply saying "Yeah I had sex with him so what?"

If people looked at "consent" as an informed choice made by someone who has the capacity to make that choice, this crap wouldn't happen. Instead people think that not saying no is enough.

This is why feminists hav been trying to bring the notion of "enthusiastic consent" into such discussions. Because "enthusiatsic consent" involves the woman actively engaging in sex, as opposed to just not refusing.

clairefontaine wrote: »

And mixed messages too, a girl might give into whatever peer pressure she is feeling, may not want to engage in what she is doing, but hasn't the assertiveness to say back off and thump him one. He has no idea of the signals of this reticence, and thinks they're having a great old time. She goes back to her Barnard or Smith College dorm and tells her friends and they convince her she's just been raped. You can guess what happens next. Or maybe high school and her parents take out a rape charge.

This is also complete bollocks. I'm sorry but when you have sex with someone you can tell when they're a) so drunk they don't know what's going on or b) not really into it, not actively participating, not saying with their words or their body "I want this."

If you think that alcohol and drugs make consent issues "blurry" or "complicated" all that does is provide the perfect cover for the small minority of men who are actually rapists. Lisak & Miller's famous study of college rapists - I mean self-identified rapists, men who answered "yes" to the question "have you ever taken advantage of someone's inebriation to have sex with them, knowing they didn't really wnat it" showed clearly that these men knew they had a good chance of avoiding any consequences because the victim was so unlikely to be believed even if she did make a rape allegation.

starling · 26-08-2013 04:09PM

MaxWig wrote: »

The idea that a woman 'has no choice' is BS. It is BS all day, and all night. If you wish to infantilise prostitutes by suggesting that they incapable of responsibility or choice, fine, but I see no end to that craziness.

If you and your kids are starving, and the only way you can feed them is by having sex for money, then it's not really a choice. It's not what you would be doing if you felt you had any other options. Very few girls go to their career guidance teachers and say "I want to be a prostitute."

There are people who genuinely choose sex work like Bellefemme who posted earlier in the thread. And then there are others who are forced into it by circumstance. It's not infantilising them to say that. It's just the way it is.

MaxWig · 26-08-2013 04:11PM

starling wrote: »

There are people who genuinely have no choice but to engage in prostitution. Kids who've run away from home for example and are too young to get proper jobs. Their choice is thievng or prostitution. It's no use to say "there's always another choice." The fact is that for some people that's just not true.

That is exactly the kind of misconception I'm talking about, it comes from the notion of "consent" as "not saying no." The frequency with which false claims of rape occur is wildly overstated. People's false sense of the rate of false claims leads them to presume a woman who was drunk might have consented and then changed her mind and cried rape to save her reputation.

I promise you that making an allegation of rape does not help anyone's reputation and is far worse than simply saying "Yeah I had sex with him so what?"

If people looked at "consent" as an informed choice made by someone who has the capacity to make that choice, this crap wouldn't happen. Instead people think that not saying no is enough.

This is why feminists hav been trying to bring the notion of "enthusiastic consent" into such discussions. Because "enthusiatsic consent" involves the woman actively engaging in sex, as opposed to just not refusing.

This is also complete bollocks. I'm sorry but when you have sex with someone you can tell when they're a) so drunk they don't know what's going on or b) not really into it, not actively participating, not saying with their words or their body "I want this."

If you think that alcohol and drugs make consent issues "blurry" or "complicated" all that does is provide the perfect cover for the small minority of men who are actually rapists. Lisak & Miller's famous study of college rapists - I mean self-identified rapists, men who answered "yes" to the question "have you ever taken advantage of someone's inebriation to have sex with them, knowing they didn't really wnat it" showed clearly that these men knew they had a good chance of avoiding any consequences because the victim was so unlikely to be believed even if she did make a rape allegation.

Is this 'no choice' thing exclusive to prostitution? Or are there other well documented examples? I'm assuming some people had 'no choice' but to thieve if the example you gave is correct? Can I assume the same goes for drug-dealing? If not, could you explain why? It simply makes no sense whatsoever. The choice to enter prostitution is not a choice taken from a menu of two, or three. It is a choice from any number of decisions.

I have to agree with Claire on this - like it or not, alcohol and drugs do make the lines blurry. Two adults who are plastered out of their minds may have sex. One may decide after that they wished they hadn't. But that does not make it rape. What if both decide they really didn't want to, after the fact. Can they both be raped?

MaxWig · 26-08-2013 04:16PM

starling wrote: »

If you and your kids are starving, and the only way you can feed them is by having sex for money, then it's not really a choice. It's not what you would be doing if you felt you had any other options. Very few girls go to their career guidance teachers and say "I want to be a prostitute."

There are people who genuinely choose sex work like Bellefemme who posted earlier in the thread. And then there are others who are forced into it by circumstance. It's not infantilising them to say that. It's just the way it is.

I understand where you are coming from.

But it doesn't stack up.
Why prostitution? Why not begging? Drug-Dealing? Thieving?

Why is it that prostitution is a non-choice?

The others are punished as choices every day

clairefontaine · 26-08-2013 06:41PM

starling wrote: »

There are people who genuinely have no choice but to engage in prostitution. Kids who've run away from home for example and are too young to get proper jobs. Their choice is thievng or prostitution. It's no use to say "there's always another choice." The fact is that for some people that's just not true.

That is exactly the kind of misconception I'm talking about, it comes from the notion of "consent" as "not saying no." The frequency with which false claims of rape occur is wildly overstated. People's false sense of the rate of false claims leads them to presume a woman who was drunk might have consented and then changed her mind and cried rape to save her reputation.

I promise you that making an allegation of rape does not help anyone's reputation and is far worse than simply saying "Yeah I had sex with him so what?"

If people looked at "consent" as an informed choice made by someone who has the capacity to make that choice, this crap wouldn't happen. Instead people think that not saying no is enough.

This is why feminists hav been trying to bring the notion of "enthusiastic consent" into such discussions. Because "enthusiatsic consent" involves the woman actively engaging in sex, as opposed to just not refusing.

This is also complete bollocks. I'm sorry but when you have sex with someone you can tell when they're a) so drunk they don't know what's going on or b) not really into it, not actively participating, not saying with their words or their body "I want this."

If you think that alcohol and drugs make consent issues "blurry" or "complicated" all that does is provide the perfect cover for the small minority of men who are actually rapists. Lisak & Miller's famous study of college rapists - I mean self-identified rapists, men who answered "yes" to the question "have you ever taken advantage of someone's inebriation to have sex with them, knowing they didn't really wnat it" showed clearly that these men knew they had a good chance of avoiding any consequences because the victim was so unlikely to be believed even if she did make a rape allegation.

Oh please. Come on. This is just so ivory towered and in the women are exempt from all responsibility for everything.

Right ok, never happens.

Femme_Fatale · 26-08-2013 08:30PM

If you're an escort like Heidi Fleiss, surely you want to have the sex that will earn you big bucks? It's a business transaction, probably not all that enjoyable, but that quoted item deeming all prostitution rape... is going a bit too far, to say the least. It should be accepted that there are women who choose to be sex workers because of the money they make. I'm not talking about women who are coerced into it, or are junkies, or were abused (I hate the way such cases are dismissed, because they DO happen; don't know why some folks want so badly for it to be untrue) but there are the women who see it as a business opportunity. Hard to believe because it's alien to most of us, but like the other side of the coin that is prostitution... it also DOES happen.

GalwayGuy2 · 26-08-2013 09:29PM

I'm not talking about women who are coerced into it, or are junkies, or were abused (I hate the way such cases are dismissed, because they DO happen; don't know why some folks want so badly for it to be untrue) but there are the women who see it as a business opportunity.

Hmmm, I try not to get involved in these gender debates anymore, because, you know, I'm rather awful at them.

But the part in bold...yeah people deal in abuse in different ways. Some get disentisized, some get pleasure out of pain/shame*, some would have a fairly non-fluid notion of consent, and some would have any kind of reaction based on their own individual characteristics.

So, while I don't think it's healthy, I wouldn't be so quick to class it as not consenting.

*Which, and my political correctness goes out the window here, I really doubt it would be healthy in a prostitution environment.

27-08-2013 07:01AM

This is getting in to the realms of philosophical linguistics, what is the nature of consent, can the absents of a no mean yes and so on. If someone is going to use the services of a prostitute I am reasonably sure they either(1) don't care about consent or(2) think that the prostitute has freely chosen to do what they are doing.

fits · 27-08-2013 07:14AM

I just actually cannot get my head around how you can have sex with a person, who is only having sex with you because you paid them.

starling · 27-08-2013 07:57AM

MaxWig wrote: »

Is this 'no choice' thing exclusive to prostitution? Or are there other well documented examples? I'm assuming some people had 'no choice' but to thieve if the example you gave is correct? Can I assume the same goes for drug-dealing? If not, could you explain why? It simply makes no sense whatsoever. The choice to enter prostitution is not a choice taken from a menu of two, or three. It is a choice from any number of decisions.

For some people, it is a choice out of two or three options. And none of the options is good. Some people don't get the advantages that you or I have had in early life. Some people genuinely have no options but stealing and prostitution. In which case they might well choose prostitution, or be persuaded towards it eg by a pimp who promises them "protection."

MaxWig wrote: »

I have to agree with Claire on this - like it or not, alcohol and drugs do make the lines blurry. Two adults who are plastered out of their minds may have sex. One may decide after that they wished they hadn't. But that does not make it rape. What if both decide they really didn't want to, after the fact. Can they both be raped?

People wake up after one night stands and think "That was a mistake" all the time. I never claimed they didn't. However the mistake is linking that with a case of rape. They are completely different situations. If you wanted to have sex when you were drunk, so you did, that's not rape. (In certain places the law says having sex with a person who is intoxicated is rape, but that is not intended to apply to the above scenario.)

Where the situation becomes rape is when one person uses another's intoxication to get around consent. This is exactly what I was talking about before. In your example of a ons one might be drunk and therefore less inhibited (and less choosy) but still actively choosing to have sex. You might have been drunk when you wanted it and not making the best decisions, but you wanted it at the time.

There is a huge difference between that and a rape. Genuine rapists use the fact that someone is drunk or stoned or otherwise incapacitated in order to have sex with them - sex that they don't want knowing that they will be able to get away with it. The situations are entirely different. The person doesn't want sex with their rapist. They don't choose it.

And the danger in conflating drunken one night stand with rape is what we've seen here - when someone makes a rape allegation people think about one night stands, a completely different situation, and assume that the person wasn't raped, just regrets a decision they made while drunk. This makes it harder for them to report and prosecute their rape and creates the perfect cover for rapists.

It makes absolutely no sense to just assume that a person who reports being raped while they were drunk must have wanted sex because they were drunk. Yet so many people just accept it without thinking about it.

starling · 27-08-2013 08:14AM

mariaalice wrote: »

This is getting in to the realms of philosophical linguistics, what is the nature of consent, can the absents of a no mean yes and so on. If someone is going to use the services of a prostitute I am reasonably sure they either(1) don't care about consent or(2) think that the prostitute has freely chosen to do what they are doing.

I'd see it as they're paying for consent to sex - they want sex, they want a woman who won't turn them down, so they pay a prostitute. That way they can tell themselves it's not rape because she consented - and they won't be prosecuted for rape.

That's not to say that everyone who uses prostitutes would commit rape if they couldn't go to a prostitute. For some people the fact that they're using a prostitute is in itself a turn-on. And rape is still depressingly common even when a person could have gone to a prostitute.

Tbh I very much doubt many of them care why she's doing it or why she got into prostitution. Using a prostitute is an essentially selfish act and therefore generally something done by selfish people.

starling · 27-08-2013 08:59AM

Rereg 105 wrote: »

I doubt very much that people who use prostitutes have to " tell themselves it's not rape". I doubt rape even enters their heads.

I might not have worded that the best I'm only on my first coffee :pac:
but yeah no a lot of people think "No I paid her she consented" and never think of it as being anywhere near rape. And if someone said "prostitution is essentially rape" to them they'd genuinely disagree and probably even be shocked - they'd think "she consented" and not look too closely at the question of how the payment influenced that consent, or think too deeply about the idea of "consent" and the question of whether consent with the influence of money is the same as consent for its own sake....basically they want sex, they pay for it and they don't care about the larger questions.

MaxWig · 27-08-2013 09:01AM

starling wrote: »

For some people, it is a choice out of two or three options. And none of the options is good. Some people don't get the advantages that you or I have had in early life. Some people genuinely have no options but stealing and prostitution. In which case they might well choose prostitution, or be persuaded towards it eg by a pimp who promises them "protection."

People wake up after one night stands and think "That was a mistake" all the time. I never claimed they didn't. However the mistake is linking that with a case of rape. They are completely different situations. If you wanted to have sex when you were drunk, so you did, that's not rape. (In certain places the law says having sex with a person who is intoxicated is rape, but that is not intended to apply to the above scenario.)

Where the situation becomes rape is when one person uses another's intoxication to get around consent. This is exactly what I was talking about before. In your example of a ons one might be drunk and therefore less inhibited (and less choosy) but still actively choosing to have sex. You might have been drunk when you wanted it and not making the best decisions, but you wanted it at the time.

There is a huge difference between that and a rape. Genuine rapists use the fact that someone is drunk or stoned or otherwise incapacitated in order to have sex with them - sex that they don't want knowing that they will be able to get away with it. The situations are entirely different. The person doesn't want sex with their rapist. They don't choose it.

And the danger in conflating drunken one night stand with rape is what we've seen here - when someone makes a rape allegation people think about one night stands, a completely different situation, and assume that the person wasn't raped, just regrets a decision they made while drunk. This makes it harder for them to report and prosecute their rape and creates the perfect cover for rapists.

It makes absolutely no sense to just assume that a person who reports being raped while they were drunk must have wanted sex because they were drunk. Yet so many people just accept it without thinking about it.

I'm sorry for conflating the issue, but I don't get your distinction.

The plastered one-night stand, who can't see her elbow, doesn't know where she is etc., can provide 'enthusiastic consent'. If her partner is plastered also, he can't be a rapist? Is that correct?

How would the enthusiasm be measured? Volume?

I don't mean to be crass. The whole area is a minefield. I get that. What I don't get is how one can be so cut-and-dry about certain areas. The whole 'enthusiastic consent' thing, to me, is absurd.

starling · 27-08-2013 09:07AM

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Hmmm, I try not to get involved in these gender debates anymore, because, you know, I'm rather awful at them.

But the part in bold...yeah people deal in abuse in different ways. Some get disentisized, some get pleasure out of pain/shame*, some would have a fairly non-fluid notion of consent, and some would have any kind of reaction based on their own individual characteristics.

So, while I don't think it's healthy, I wouldn't be so quick to class it as not consenting.

*Which, and my political correctness goes out the window here, I really doubt it would be healthy in a prostitution environment.

Well, yeah, abuse can affect people in that way. And no, it's entirely fair to say that while some people genuinely choose prostitution, some go into it for less than healthy reasons, psychologically speaking. Some people who have been abused in childhood or early adolescence have come to see both sex and themselves in a very different way from how someone else sees it, and that lays a foundation for going into prostitution. They're not making the decision on the same basis that you or I might make it, because their beliefs and their attitude have been warped by that abuse. It's not politically incorrect to say that. Though it is problematic to assume that anyone who works in the sex industry got into it for those reasons.

And tbh I wouldn't say you're awful at this kind of discussion. As long as you're respectful and willing to actually listen to others' points you're doing better than most:pac:

MaxWig · 27-08-2013 09:08AM

starling wrote: »

I might not have worded that the best I'm only on my first coffee :pac:
but yeah no a lot of people think "No I paid her she consented" and never think of it as being anywhere near rape. And if someone said "prostitution is essentially rape" to them they'd genuinely disagree and probably even be shocked - they'd think "she consented" and not look too closely at the question of how the payment influenced that consent, or think too deeply about the idea of "consent" and the question of whether consent with the influence of money is the same as consent for its own sake....basically they want sex, they pay for it and they don't care about the larger questions.

This is an incredibly simplistic attitude.

Do you think perhaps there are many, many prostitutes who might disagree with that statement also? Who might actually be offended by the contention, no doubt conjured up in a leafy, third level campus, that she is being raped several times a day.

Again, I understand the compassion, and the general idea, but the explanation is woefully inadequate, patronising, and destructive.

Your inclination is to place the woman/prostitute in the role of victim before you engage in your thought experiment. That's fine, but it simply bears no resemblance to objectivity

MaxWig · 27-08-2013 09:14AM

starling wrote: »

Well, yeah, abuse can affect people in that way. And no, it's entirely fair to say that while some people genuinely choose prostitution, some go into it for less than healthy reasons, psychologically speaking. Some people who have been abused in childhood or early adolescence have come to see both sex and themselves in a very different way from how someone else sees it, and that lays a foundation for going into prostitution. They're not making the decision on the same basis that you or I might make it, because their beliefs and their attitude have been warped by that abuse. It's not politically incorrect to say that. Though it is problematic to assume that anyone who works in the sex industry got into it for those reasons.

And tbh I wouldn't say you're awful at this kind of discussion. As long as you're respectful and willing to actually listen to others' points you're doing better than most:pac:

I think this is much more accurate.
Much closer to a realistic appraisal of where your beliefs come from.

"They're not making the decision on the same basis that you or I might make it, because their beliefs and their attitude have been warped"

This sentence says everything to me. You may speak about your own experience with absolute precision, but you simply cannot ascribe this sense of the world to others. Your statement essentially describes a vast distance between your world and this 'world of the other'. How the hell can you then assume to speak with authority on it. It is patronising.

clairefontaine · 27-08-2013 09:27AM

starling wrote: »

Well, yeah, abuse can affect people in that way. And no, it's entirely fair to say that while some people genuinely choose prostitution, some go into it for less than healthy reasons, psychologically speaking. Some people who have been abused in childhood or early adolescence have come to see both sex and themselves in a very different way from how someone else sees it, and that lays a foundation for going into prostitution. They're not making the decision on the same basis that you or I might make it, because their beliefs and their attitude have been warped by that abuse. It's not politically incorrect to say that. Though it is problematic to assume that anyone who works in the sex industry got into it for those reasons.

And tbh I wouldn't say you're awful at this kind of discussion. As long as you're respectful and willing to actually listen to others' points you're doing better than most:pac:

This will sound like a lie but its not. I know an Americann heiress, worth millions, from a major corporation, whose son is and has been a rent boy in Paris since he was 16. It is just utterly shocking to me how he ended up doing that. I can't even begin to imagine. Obviously not financial. Self hatred is my only guess. Rebellion against a privaledge e upbringing? Hostility to his appararntly indifferent mother on the whole thing? I just can't fathom it, and I kind of hate her for it.

27-08-2013 09:33AM

MaxWig wrote: »

I think this is much more accurate.
Much closer to a realistic appraisal of where your beliefs come from.

"They're not making the decision on the same basis that you or I might make it, because their beliefs and their attitude have been warped"

This sentence says everything to me. You may speak about your own experience with absolute precision, but you simply cannot ascribe this sense of the world to others. Your statement essentially describes a vast distance between your world and this 'world of the other'. How the hell can you then assume to speak with authority on it. It is patronising.

You could look at this two difference ways.

A lot of this depends on your frame of reference, its called reflexivity, on the other hand there has been a lot research on prostitution and why women become prostitutes and while we can never truly know another's thought because no one has invented the thought police yet we can trust research that has been done ethical.

MaxWig · 27-08-2013 09:41AM

mariaalice wrote: »

You could look at this two difference ways.

A lot of this depends on your frame of reference, its called reflexivity, on the other hand there has been a lot research on prostitution and why women become prostitutes and while we can never truly know another's thought because no one has invented the thought police yet we can trust research that has been done ethical.

I guess I'm not hearing referenced studies.

I'm hearing emotive responses. Perhaps understandably. But understandable or not, emotion doesn't help in this area.

For me, I cannot separate the gender issue. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Everything I've heard provided as a reason why prostitutes are vulnerable, victims, without agency etc.. could be applied to most anyone, especially anyone, or nearly everyone, who finds themselves in prison/trouble with drugs/etc etc etc etc....

The exaggerated compassion for prostitutes is misplaced, and I think speaks of something else. For me it is essentially about redefining male sexuality, or sex itself.

For me, it has nothing to do with concern.

clairefontaine · 27-08-2013 09:44AM

MaxWig wrote: »

I guess I'm not hearing referenced studies.

I'm hearing emotive responses. Perhaps understandably. But understandable or not, emotion doesn't help in this area.

For me, I cannot separate the gender issue. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Everything I've heard provided as a reason why prostitutes are vulnerable, victims, without agency etc.. could be applied to most anyone, especially anyone, or nearly everyone, who finds themselves in prison/trouble with drugs/etc etc etc etc....

The exaggerated compassion for prostitutes is misplaced, and I think speaks of something else. For me it is essentially about redefining male sexuality, or sex itself.

For me, it has nothing to do with concern.

When you use one do you make sure to check ID and age? And use Irish ones so you can be sure they are not trafficked? Or under age? Oe reasonably sure?

starling · 27-08-2013 09:48AM

MaxWig wrote: »

I'm sorry for conflating the issue, but I don't get your distinction.

The plastered one-night stand, who can't see her elbow, doesn't know where she is etc., can provide 'enthusiastic consent'. If her partner is plastered also, he can't be a rapist? Is that correct?

How would the enthusiasm be measured? Volume?

I don't mean to be crass. The whole area is a minefield. I get that. What I don't get is how one can be so cut-and-dry about certain areas. The whole 'enthusiastic consent' thing, to me, is absurd.

Okay first of all I'm just going to link this study and this one.
TL;DR: Percentage of rapes that US college students think are false claims: 50%
Percentage of rapes found by studies to be false claims: 2-8%

Now obviously accurate figures are difficult to get in this area and the only people who truly know for sure whether an incident was rape or not are the people who were involved; because sex and rape usually happen in private it's very difficult to know anything 100%.

However the point I'm making is that there is a false sense of the frequency of false rape claims and this misconception has a dangerous effect on both the incidence of rape and the reporting and prosecuting of same. So it's important to discuss consent and combat the misunderstandings that allow rape to flourish.

Okay now as for your question:

We've all been drunk and horny, so just imagine for a second that you're drunk and horny and alone with a woman who is also drunk right now.(for the purposes of discussion I'm assuming you're into women) Okay now here is where (I hope) you'll have to use your imagination: imagine that not only are you drunk and horny and alone with a woman who's also drunk, but - this is the important part - you want to have sex and you don't particularly give a sh1t whether she wants to[/] or not, it's enough for you that she won't stop you. That is the crucial difference between rape and a one night stand, and that is the crucial difference between you and a rapist.

If she wants to have sex she will be actively participating. Like in the quote, she'll be doing sex as opposed to consenting to "let" you have sex with her. That's where people are coming from with the "enthusiastic consent" idea.

I mean can you honestly tell me that you can't tell when someone doesn't want you to have sex with them? I don't think I've ever slept with - or known - anyone that unobservant.

And if you are not a rapist, and you don't want to "accidentally" have sex with someone who is too intoxicated to know what's going on, it's not that difficult to check. Talk to her, ask her questions. "Are you sure?" is a good one. Or, a really good way is to ask her "What would you like me to do?" that way your check can double as foreplay.

As far as the "what if the man is too drunk to consent" thing, this is where the idea in the quote also makes sense to me: if he doesn't want to have sex he won't be having sex. Simple. It's only because we see sex as something that a man does to a woman that we don't all understand that.

It's really not as complicated as a lot of people think.

MaxWig · 27-08-2013 09:48AM

clairefontaine wrote: »

When you use one do you make sure to check ID and age? And use Irish ones so you can be sure they are not trafficked? Or under age? Oe reasonably sure?

Is that emotion I hear, Claire?

Can't say I visit prostitutes. But, as I've mentioned on many occasions here, I do not have a moral objection.

I know many people who have, and those people or not immoral, nor as has been laughably suggested, are they rapists.

clairefontaine · 27-08-2013 09:51AM

starling wrote: »

Okay first of all I'm just going to link this study and this one.
TL;DR: Percentage of rapes that US college students think are false claims: 50%
Percentage of rapes found by studies to be false claims: 2-8%

Now obviously accurate figures are difficult to get in this area and the only people who truly know for sure whether an incident was rape or not are the people who were involved; because sex and rape usually happen in private it's very difficult to know anything 100%.

However the point I'm making is that there is a false sense of the frequency of false rape claims and this misconception has a dangerous effect on both the incidence of rape and the reporting and prosecuting of same. So it's important to discuss consent and combat the misunderstandings that allow rape to flourish.

Okay now as for your question:

We've all been drunk and horny, so just imagine for a second that you're drunk and horny and alone with a woman who is also drunk right now.(for the purposes of discussion I'm assuming you're into women) Okay now here is where (I hope) you'll have to use your imagination: imagine that not only are you drunk and horny and alone with a woman who's also drunk, but - this is the important part - you want to have sex and you don't particularly give a sh1t whether she wants to[/] or not, it's enough for you that she won't stop you. That is the crucial difference between rape and a one night stand, and that is the crucial difference between you and a rapist.

If she wants to have sex she will be actively participating. Like in the quote, she'll be doing sex as opposed to consenting to "let" you have sex with her. That's where people are coming from with the "enthusiastic consent" idea.

I mean can you honestly tell me that you can't tell when someone doesn't want you to have sex with them? I don't think I've ever slept with - or known - anyone that unobservant.

And if you are not a rapist, and you don't want to "accidentally" have sex with someone who is too intoxicated to know what's going on, it's not that difficult to check. Talk to her, ask her questions. "Are you sure?" is a good one. Or, a really good way is to ask her "What would you like me to do?" that way your check can double as foreplay.

As far as the "what if the man is too drunk to consent" thing, this is where the idea in the quote also makes sense to me: if he doesn't want to have sex he won't be having sex. Simple. It's only because we see sex as something that a man does to a woman that we don't all understand that.

It's really not as complicated as a lot of people think.

It is complicated when you consider the effects of alcohol on judgement and also on memory.

Ever heard of revisionism?

starling · 27-08-2013 09:51AM

MaxWig wrote: »

This is an incredibly simplistic attitude.

Do you think perhaps there are many, many prostitutes who might disagree with that statement also? Who might actually be offended by the contention, no doubt conjured up in a leafy, third level campus, that she is being raped several times a day.

Again, I understand the compassion, and the general idea, but the explanation is woefully inadequate, patronising, and destructive.

Your inclination is to place the woman/prostitute in the role of victim before you engage in your thought experiment. That's fine, but it simply bears no resemblance to objectivity

Sorry wait a second, where did I say that I think all prostitution is rape? Can you maybe try respond to what I'm saying, not what you imagine I think?

clairefontaine · 27-08-2013 09:52AM

MaxWig wrote: »

Is that emotion I hear, Claire?

Can't say I visit prostitutes. But, as I've mentioned on many occasions here, I do not have a moral objection.

I know many people who have, and those people or not immoral, nor as has been laughably suggested, are they rapists.

No I just wonder how much you might do to ensure consent is as consenting as possible. Like check ID for age and nationality.

MaxWig · 27-08-2013 09:54AM

starling wrote: »

Sorry wait a second, where did I say that I think all prostitution is rape? Can you maybe try respond to what I'm saying, not what you imagine I think?

"a lot of people think "No I paid her she consented" and never think of it as being anywhere near rape. And if someone said "prostitution is essentially rape" to them they'd genuinely disagree and probably even be shocked - they'd think "she consented" and not look too closely at the question of how the payment influenced that consent"

I read it again.

If I'm wrong, and that's not what you are implying, I'm sorry

starling · 27-08-2013 09:56AM

MaxWig wrote: »

I think this is much more accurate.
Much closer to a realistic appraisal of where your beliefs come from.

"They're not making the decision on the same basis that you or I might make it, because their beliefs and their attitude have been warped"

This sentence says everything to me. You may speak about your own experience with absolute precision, but you simply cannot ascribe this sense of the world to others. Your statement essentially describes a vast distance between your world and this 'world of the other'. How the hell can you then assume to speak with authority on it. It is patronising.

If you read what I actually wrote, rather than looking for a reason to attack me, you'll see that I am saying "abuse affects some people in this way" and that we can't assume that everyone thinks the same way we do. That's just basic, anyone who's even heard of psychology can see that, because if everyone saw things the same way we'd never have needed to invent a field like psychology. It doesn't mean I'm patronising anyone.

starling · 27-08-2013 10:02AM

MaxWig wrote: »

I guess I'm not hearing referenced studies.

I'm hearing emotive responses. Perhaps understandably. But understandable or not, emotion doesn't help in this area.

For me, I cannot separate the gender issue. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Everything I've heard provided as a reason why prostitutes are vulnerable, victims, without agency etc.. could be applied to most anyone, especially anyone, or nearly everyone, who finds themselves in prison/trouble with drugs/etc etc etc etc....

The exaggerated compassion for prostitutes is misplaced, and I think speaks of something else. For me it is essentially about redefining male sexuality, or sex itself.

For me, it has nothing to do with concern.

Those are just your opinions. For my own part I can say that every time I talked about people who are especially vulnerable I wasn't thinking only of women and if you actually read my posts you'll see that I wrote "kids who've run away" rather than "girls who've run away" for example. If you assumed I was talking only about women then you assumed wrongly.

Concern for prostitutes - male and female - is not misplaced. Prostitution can be a very dangerous life. Prostitutes are routinely mistreated and don't get the same protection from authorities as other people. Don't accuse anyone who expresses concern for people who are in a vulnerable position of doing it for ulterior motives. That's insulting. You may imagine that those who criticise the punters are doing so because they want to "redefine male sexuality" but that's just your imagination. Don't put your issues on us.

Ladies your opinions on men using brothels and prostitutes

Comments