nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

People who hire hookers?

yumyum10

Friend hires one a week. Says its cheaper than a girlfriend and isn't tied down. What's your views on people who hire them?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Mister Vain

Roquentin wrote: »

80-150 per half an hour. median price would be about 100 id say.

I could spend 80 euro on a night out if I end up getting a taxi home.

Saralee4

Mister Vain wrote: »

Not entirely true. From what I gather, its the escort who dictates the pace and explains what is and isn't allowed.

within reason yes but compared to a person you are not paying for it with, he has as much control as you possibly can with a willing participant.

Mister Vain

Saralee4 wrote: »

within reason yes but compared to a person you are not paying for it with, he has as much control as you possibly can with a willing participant.

Unless you're Christian Grey.

Roquentin

Saralee4 wrote: »

within reason yes but compared to a person you are not paying for it with, he has as much control as you possibly can with a willing participant.

some of these escorts are very pedantic. certain things will be off limits. They turn away clients who are unhygienic or want too much or are rude. just because you pay them doesnt mean one has complete control over them.

what you get is no strings attached, a good looking girl and maybe other things.

One eyed Jack

Sleepy wrote: »

As The Corinthian pointed out repeatedly already in nicer language, many people are selfish in bed. It's my observation of Irish society that many men are conditioned to feel lucky if a woman is prepared to spread her legs for him and given that his sexual "education" is largely the porn he's watched on-line, he's pumping away at the poor girl like a jackhammer which is hardly conducive to her learning to enjoy sex or want to explore her own sexuality much further.

Now, while a more confident or experienced woman will take that young man in hand and teach him how to please her, many won't (because they've been conditioned to think of sex as something dirty or because they simply don't want to hurt his feelings) and they'll either put up with his lack of technique or make limited efforts to educate him and leave him off into the world thinking he's a stud because he "lasted for ages" or worst of she'll fake an orgasm to get him to finish as quickly as possible re-enforcing his ignorance.

Were he trying to earn a living in such a way, however, his clients wouldn't be long in telling him that what he was doing wrong and demanding what they expected of him.

Now, flip the genders and you'll have why I think an escort is more likely to be good in bed: she has to be if she wants to continue be paid, avoid bad reviews etc.

(I do agree with you on the compatibility thing though, there are some people who just seem to fit together better than others)

Never once did I state that experience was the source of being good at sex (in fact, if you'd read the link I provided in my post, I gave my opinion that what makes someone good in bed is that they're what's referenced as "good, giving and game": i.e. they make an effort to pleasure their partner, they strive to improve their technique and they're game for trying anything within reason.

On the contrary, your whole argument seems to be based on the fact that you're putting forward this idea that frequency is somehow related to quality, as in the more a person has sex, the better they get at it. See even the firsr bolded bit where you suggest that it stands to reason that a person has to be better at sex in order to continue to be paid. You're ignoring the fact that market forces such as supply and demand have a much greater influence on whether a person continues to be paid for their services than the quality of the service they provide. All that's necessary for a business to thrive is knowing their market, and financially successful sex workers know their market.

My (admittedly out-dated as I've been in a relationship for over 7 years) experience is that most people don't make the effort to be GGG. Given that the term doesn't even seem to be familiar to you I'm guessing we're clearly of different opinions on this...

I wouldn't say it's your experience is out of date, moreso your perspective, and given what you've written above about older women taking younger men in hand and so on (the stock and trade of porn fantasy), the evidence suggests your perspective is definitely out of date. The term GGG is new, but the concept is as old as time itself, it's the basis of human relationships and how we went from men thumping women over the head and dragging them back to our cave, to actually having to make an effort with women in order to enter a relationship which is mutually beneficial for both (or more

) parties involved.

Again, I think you're confusing my point with that of someone else. Frequency of experience in no way implies quality of experience. Hiring a taxi every day isn't going to do anything to improve my driving. The driver is likely to get better at providing that service over time though.

I'm sure you're familiar with the expression "familiarity breeds contempt"? It really does. I have a regular taxi driver for business trips. I like to keep him on his toes. I don't need to know anything else about him only that he turns up on time and gets me from point A to point B as expediently as possible. I'm not sure how you think he could improve his service as there are many factors limiting his ability to improve his service. I'm always on the lookout for a better service provider, and the day I find one, I shall switch my custom. It's nothing personal, just business. In the same way, if all you're visiting a sex worker for is the provision of their services, you're always on the look out for a better service provider. Well, you should be anyway, otherwise you are indeed as I suggested earlier - easily pleased.

strobe wrote: »

In summary, the original post of mine paraphrasing my mate can be summed up like this: He believes some hookers are extraordinarily good in bed, as in the top 10% of women in terms of sexual ability, he is willing to pay them for sex as the odds of a girl you meet out one night at random also being in that top 10% is, by definition 10-1. And sometimes he'd rather pay than play those odds.

That is a stupidly long post about whether or not prostitutes are likely to give a good ride.

I'm going to take a shot in the dark strobe and suggest that the odds are that your mate just wants his own way in bed ten times out of ten. I know the 10% is off the top of your head and all, and I don't know where your mate is going or what kind of signals he's picking up on or giving off, but I would suggest that 9 times out of 10, in terms of the kind of girls I meet when I'm out, your mate is wrong, very, very wrong (there's definitely some girls shouldn't be fed after midnight! :eek: :pac:).

Paying, rather than playing the odds simply tells me your mate is clearly risk averse, likes a sure thing. Cool, sometimes I like a sure thing too, because I'm a lazy bastard like that, but more times I like the uncertainty of not knowing what's going to happen next. I'll take spontaneity over routine, same old reliable, any day (well, most days, depends on my mood

Sleepy wrote: »

It'll all depend on our individual experiences and that's going to be entirely subjective and limited by those experiences. I've not been single for a long time, you've been married even longer and I don't know The Corinthian's current circumstances so it's quite possible we're all out-of-date in this regard...

That said, humans while often altruistic, are self-interested in nature. We wouldn't have survived on this planet if we weren't.

My experience of the women I've slept with is that a majority were quite lazy or selfish lovers (or became so over time). The fact that so many threads appear on PI, or that r/deadbedrooms exists on reddit etc. would suggest to me that this is a pretty common observation (and not just limited to women to be fair).

Oh come now Sleepy, you know better than to base your opinion on confirmation bias? The fact that so many threads appear on PI or r/deadbedrooms is only evidence of the fact that unhappy people complain, a lot, to anyone who will give them an audience. What you're ignoring is the 9 out of 10 people who are happy in their relationships. Otherwise, as you quite rightly point out yourself - we wouldn't have survived on this planet and propagated as a species if we were all as selfish as to only think of ourselves and our own needs.

Also, not meaning to personalise the debate but your username and the fact you're married (and therefore statistically likely to be straight) would suggest that myself or The Corinthian would have more a a greater sample size of women to extrapolate from in our experience than you would?

Ahh now Sleepy, that's a bit below the belt surely? Imagine if I were to make assumptions about you based on your username? "Sleepy" doesn't exactly scream "Goes like a rocket between the sheets", does it?

I won't ask you what my username suggests to you about me... :rolleyes: :pac:

Fubrege

Saralee4 wrote: »

No I think you are not understanding what i am saying.

neither one is better. that's the answer. they are not different. the situation is different because the man has complete control.

On what basis are you saying that "they are not different"?

I've had sex with hookers and non hookers and hookers are better on average than non hookers by a significant margin. Have you ever had sex with women?

On what basis are you concluding that "control" is what makes hookers better?

Hookers are better at knowing how to seduce a man and give him pleasure on average. The average non hooker has know idea how to use her hair to seduce a man for example.

You seem to be believing whatever fits with the narrative in your and ignoring the reality and reasoning.

Saralee4

strobe wrote: »

No no, you misunderstand. His opinion was it's a sure thing with the hookers. The amazing sex. Them being extraordinarily good in bed. The odds relate to the odds with a random girl for a one night stand being equally good in bed, being quite low.

Well as I said, I just really like analogies. The guitar one is the most apt of the three I'd say, so focus on that one if you think it might help.

But to be honest I think you are determined to not see his view point, or consider a possibility it may be true, despite you having as far as I can see, nothing to really base your skepticism on. I think may have some ideological or emotive block towards doing so. I think you're taking it a bit personal to be honest when there's really no need. Hookers being unusually good in bed when compared to the general population, if that is indeed the case, says nothing negative or derogatory about you or about women in general. Some people are just better than other people at some things for different reasons. But sure no harm. I just related to story as it was my one experience of talking with someone openly about their use of hookers, didn't think I'd be riling anyone up by doing so or getting into a big discussion about it. Anyway I've no interest in trying to convince you of anything you're not open to considering the possibility of. Believe whatever you are happier believing. It's unlikely to effect you either way sure, so why not.

Peace and love.

peace and love to you also strobe. But don't mistake my argument as me taking it personal. if anything you are making it personal by suggesting so.

just because someone disagrees with your opinions does not mean that you are right.

I am not creating this discussion on my own strobe. I am just responding to other peoples comments that I disagree with or that quote me which is what boards is all about, discussion and opinion.

I find it strange that you can say that I am closed minded just because I don't agree with your views.

Like I have said many times some people are good at sex and some aren't regardless of hooker or not and that is what I believe and I stand by that. You have admitted that you have not been to a hooker and have no desire to, so you could say the lack experience in the situation may have giving you an ideal or fantasy as you have suggested myself having and ideology or emotive block.

nokia69

Saralee4 wrote: »

Like I have said many times some people are good at sex and some aren't regardless of hooker or not and that is what I believe and I stand by that

and nobody disagrees with that claim

what people are saying is that the AVERAGE hooker would tend to be better in bed than the AVERAGE woman, and we have given the reasons why this might be the case

The Th!ng

Baby Jane wrote: »

You... said it was a myth.
How do you know it's very very rare? I know Bacik et al are exaggerating the amount to push their agenda but to say it's a myth or extremely rare (without knowing the facts) just to get one up on Bacik and the like... is pretty... bizarre when there are victims of it, no matter how rare it is.

If anyone wants to get the truth about trafficking I would say your best bet would be the figures from an unbiased source such as Interpol.

Here in Ireland the issue of human trafficking has been hijacked by people with an idealogical opposition to the sex industry in all its forms.

[Deleted User]

The original op said hooker and the same with some posters here, I wonder is there a need to disassociate themselves from the word prostitute.

nokia69

mariaalice wrote: »

The original op said hooker and the same with some posters here, I wonder is there a need to disassociate themselves from the word prostitute.

I think its just an easier word to type

Fubrege

I'll switch to whore if that's better.

Mister Vain

Fubrege wrote: »

I've had sex with hookers and non hookers and hookers are better on average than non hookers by a significant margin.

Some escorts give incredible head, 51 times more explosive than ecstasy.

Fubrege

Mister Vain wrote: »

Some escorts give incredible head, 51 times more explosive than ecstasy.

Top 5 blow jobs I ever got were from escorts, just no comparison.

[Deleted User]

A "friend" eh?

Baby Jane

The Th!ng wrote: »

Here in Ireland the issue of human trafficking has been hijacked by people with an idealogical opposition to the sex industry in all its forms.

I've acknowledged that twice. I just said it's incorrect to say it's a myth. I didn't know whether it was true that it's very rare, but apologies nokia69 as you've since provided confirmation of how it's very rare.

beks101

nokia69 wrote: »

what people are saying is that the AVERAGE hooker would tend to be better in bed than the AVERAGE woman, and we have given the reasons why this might be the case

Someone might have da skillz coz sex is their bread and butter, but it doesn't change the fact that they wouldn't be having sex with you if they weren't getting paid to do so and any remote attraction they may have to you simply wasn't a factor in their decision to have sex with you.

Whatever about 'great head' and all the rest of it, that to me is incredibly depressing.

ALiasEX

beks101 wrote: »

Someone might have da skillz coz sex is their bread and butter, but it doesn't change the fact that they wouldn't be having sex with you if they weren't getting paid to do so and any remote attraction they may have to you simply wasn't a factor in their decision to have sex with you.

Whatever about 'great head' and all the rest of it, that to me is incredibly depressing.

Good. More hookers for the rest of us.

Fubrege

beks101 wrote: »

Someone might have da skillz coz sex is their bread and butter, but it doesn't change the fact that they wouldn't be having sex with you if they weren't getting paid to do so and any remote attraction they may have to you simply wasn't a factor in their decision to have sex with you.

Whatever about 'great head' and all the rest of it, that to me is incredibly depressing.

There's always one that has to bring up the point that they are only having sex with you for the money, no sh1t sherlock.

Nucular Arms

The issue I see arising here is one trying to objectively measure something that is an intrinsically subjective experience.

I would argue that in order to have a satisfying sexual experience, it's down to how well your specific needs were met. So you might have just had the best sex of your life with someone, but it may only have been average for the other party.

Therefore, the more pleasured you are, the better the experience.

It stands to reason then, if only purely by virtue of being able to define the sex in terms of your own enjoyment, that when you go to a hooker you will be better satisfied and would class that as better sex than average.

Put simply, the very fact that I can tell a hooker exactly what I want without respect to her pleasure / enjoyment or state of mind, by definition will make for a more satisfying sexual encounter to me. It's not that she is objectively "better at sex" becasue there is no such thing in my mind.

Fubrege

Nucular Arms wrote: »

The issue I see arising here is one trying to objectively measure something that is an intrinsically subjective experience.

I would argue that in order to have a satisfying sexual experience, it's down to how well your specific needs were met. So you might have just had the best sex of your life with someone, but it may only have been average for the other party.

Therefore, the more pleasured you are, the better the experience.

It stands to reason then, if only purely by virtue of being able to define the sex in terms of your own enjoyment, that when you go to a hooker you will be better satisfied and would class that as better sex than average.

Put simply, the very fact that I can tell a hooker exactly what I want without respect to her pleasure / enjoyment or state of mind, by definition will make for a more satisfying sexual encounter to me. It's not that she is objectively "better at sex" becasue there is no such thing in my mind.

There is such thing as being better at sex, there is a skill to seducing people. Some are better than others at seducing the general population.

Nucular Arms

Fubrege wrote: »

There is such thing as being better at sex, there is a skill to seducing people. Some are better than others at seducing the general population.

Perhaps, but I would argue that there is no seduction with a hooker.. there's a transaction.

Fubrege

Nucular Arms wrote: »

Perhaps, but I would argue that there is no seduction with a hooker.. there's a transaction.

There is pleasure which she gives you, the intensity of the pleasure is variable.

Saralee4

Fubrege wrote: »

There is such thing as being better at sex, there is a skill to seducing people. Some are better than others at seducing the general population.

And the art of seduction is also subjective and down to the specific needs/desires of each person.

Hookers in your opinion may very well be best at seducing you.

Another woman who is not a hooker may have the same effect on another man.

Also a certain man may not intice a woman to seduce him because she is not interested, when he is "seduced" by a hooker, he might come to the conclusion that the hooker is better at it because he never experienced a woman who truly desired him that way and so bought the experience.

The Corinthian

Saralee4 wrote: »

You are being realistic though based on your own experiences. It is not realistic to say that all lovers are selfish and only after their own needs. That is very unrealistic in my opinion.

Much more realistic compared to your own, given you've been happily married for ten years - or did you make many 'mistakes'?

The fact that I am with my partner 10 years and still we are very happy together may seem like a lie to you but that's not my problem.

I never said anything about whether you and your husband were happy or not. I just pointed out that couples will tend to get lazy, not put in as much effort as before and so on over time.

Look, I'm getting a little tired at your misreading of what I'm posting, such as the above, or how "many" became "all" and the umbrage you took at my mentioning that this was my experience with women; other than ignoring the fact that I also suggested men would likely be exactly the same, it doesn't take a genus to realize that as a heterosexual male, I may have limited sexual experience with other males - incredible, isn't it.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to bring up the issue of spousel pay with me again as we have already confirmed that we do not agree on this and since any point I raised was dismissed as irrelevant by yourself I see nothing for you to gain from bringing it back up at any chance you get.

I'm only pointing out a pattern of responses in this thread that could be seen as conveniently self serving were one a dependent spouse.

Nucular Arms wrote: »

Perhaps, but I would argue that there is no seduction with a hooker.. there's a transaction.

There's an element of seduction throughout the service industry, regardless of whether it is a waiter, a tennis coach or prostitute. It's what gets repeat business, tips or recommendations. I would have thought this to be a pretty basic principle of any business.

Of course this does not mean that all prostitutes are better at seduction than non-prostitutes, only that they have more incentive and opportunity to do so and thus are more likely, on average, to be so. Presuming that this does mean that all prostitutes are better at seduction than non-prostitutes smacks of insecurity, TBH.

Fubrege

Saralee4 wrote: »

And the art of seduction is also subjective and down to the specific needs/desires of each person.

Hookers in your opinion may very well be best at seducing you.

Another woman who is not a hooker may have the same effect on another man.

Also a certain man may not intice a woman to seduce him because she is not interested, when he is "seduced" by a hooker, he might come to the conclusion that the hooker is better at it because he never experienced a woman who truly desired him that way and so bought the experience.

From my own experience I've had most permutations. I've had non prostitutes who were hot to not hot and I've had hot prostitutes to average looking prostitutes.

The best experience is of course the hot woman who wants you as much as you want them and who is also great in bed, but if I were to have sex with a prostitute chances are she would be better than the majority of non prostitutes in my opinion and experience.

Saralee4

The Corinthian wrote: »

Much more realistic compared to your own, given you've been happily married for ten years - or did you make many 'mistakes'?

Corinthian, im not sure why you keep bringing my marriage into conversation but no we have not made 'mistakes', we have both been faithful to one another since we have been together.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I never said anything about whether you and your husband were happy or not. I just pointed out that couples will tend to get lazy, not put in as much effort as before and so on over time.

My response was that 'we are very happy' because you made the comment that 'your not married long are you?' which implied that we were not together long and still in the infatuation phase of a newer relationship. You were trying to make a point that a person to have my views could only possibly be in a new relationship when that is simply not the case for me. Without going into to much detail about our relationship, I simply said that we are very happy which I think is clear what I mean there.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Look, I'm getting a little tired at your misreading of what I'm posting, such as the above, or how "many" became "all" and the umbrage you took at my mentioning that this was my experience with women; other than ignoring the fact that I also suggested men would likely be exactly the same, it doesn't take a genus to realize that as a heterosexual male, I may have limited sexual experience with other males - incredible, isn't it.

I am sorry if you feel that way but I have only been responding to posts that you have put up and questions you have asked me. I mistook 'many' for 'all'. Many would mean that you think a lot of women? the majority of women? Im not sure but you have to go with how you read the posts because every single word cannot be analysed and nit picked over. Even if it was 'all' or 'many', I still do not agree that someone can say that 'many' women are selfish in bed (and that perhaps many men are selfish in bed) based on their own experience and I do not take umbrage in saying that. You were the one who mentioned that and brought it into the conversation as what you feel is a valid point. I just replied to it with what I feel is a valid point and my experience. You can say many people are selfish in bed and I can say that many people are caring. It does not mean that either one is true, only true for our own experiences.

LDN_Irish

I haven't seen it said, perhaps the "guarantee" of great sex is from the star rating and user reviews on the sites he uses.

Saralee4

LDN_Irish wrote: »

I haven't seen it said, perhaps the "guarantee" of great sex is from the star rating and user reviews on the sites he uses.

I personally don't believe you can rate people with stars for their sexual performance however for the sake of conversation here, unfortunately there is no star system for 'average' women so it doesn't really come into the argument of whether they are better or not.

A man may have slept with 20 average women and only give each one of them one star and sleep with 20 (already rated 5 star) hookers and he may give them 5 stars however it does not mean that hookers in general are better than average women.

What it simply means is that he chose to sleep with 5 star women by paying for it.

There are equally another 20 (5 star) women who are not hookers. He just hasn't slept with them and they are not as easily accessible to him. The women he considers 5 star may not want to sleep with him. The experience is better for him because he has the ability to get what he considers 5 star by paying for it not because hookers are better but because he is getting what he desires which he cannot get for free.

Also some of the average women he marked as 1 star may be a 5 star for another man.

SeanW

Even if we accept this is subjective, how many 1 star hookers do you think there are? Whatever the proportion, how do they stay in business?