Q: How can you tell if a politician is lying? A: His lips are moving.
Whores are used to being lied about by prohibitionists, politicians and cops, but since we’re the subject of the current moral panic the current crop of lies is even worse than usual, and the most outrageous of these lies are being spewed out by cops and their media stooges. Really, this should come as no surprise; since virtually every statement made by cops about sex workers is a lie, and since they are encouraged to commit the most ridiculous fabrications to paper as “evidence” of women’s “crime” of being sexual, it takes very little provocation for them to come out with tall tales which might be funny were they not used to whip up anti-whore hysteria among the pathologically gullible. So though the popular joke which forms my epigram mentions politicians, on the subject of prostitutes it applies equally well to cops. I’m going to look at two recent examples, both of which were called to my attention by the ever-alert Brandy Devereaux.
I’m sure most of my readers are familiar with the fact that there is a new serial killer in New York, and like so many others of his kind he’s targeting prostitutes. The reason for this should be obvious to any reasonable person: The criminalization of our trade forces us to work secretly and therefore makes us much easier targets. But cops and their ilk are not reasonable people; first the district attorney said it was their own fault they were killed, and now the FBI is trying to call attention away from the fact that the killer is probably a cop by blaming the murder of at least one of the girls on internet trolls. Here’s the April 17th report from that bastion of responsible journalism, the New York Daily News:
Members of an Internet sex forum hatched a “revenge” plot against a Long Island hooker who was later murdered and dumped in a serial killer’s burial ground, the Daily News has learned. Talk on longislanderotic.com shows members were outraged when one of their cronies claimed he had paid Amber Lynn Costello $200 for sex, only to be robbed by men who barged into her West Babylon home. “Tell her we are all coming over there with baseball bats,” threatened one member…
That ominous threat, and more to follow, has opened a window on what probers say is a virtually unregulated sex network of johns, hookers and escort services. “The Internet has really become a highway for criminality,” said Eugene O’Donnell, a professor of law and police studies at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. “In terms of prostitution, it’s moved a pretty public enterprise into the shadows more than ever, and made it more difficult for law enforcement to get a handle on it.” Investigators would not say if any of the online johns are suspects in the probe of a possible serial killer…Still, law enforcement sources say the chilling online thread is the type of internet-based sex crime that attracted the FBI to the case…
A message board member known as “Humiliatrix69” first raged on July 11, 2010, about getting “suckered” by Costello and company hours earlier. Shortly after, a pal called “italyrider” asked for her address: “No one from this board needs to be involved. I have friends who can take care of this s—.” Humiliatrix69 posted Costello’s address, a description of her home, and her phone number. Three days days later, “Morrie” chimed in: “A friend of ours told me today that ‘You won’t hear from those 2 girls anymore!'” Costello, a twice-divorced drug addict, disappeared on Sept. 2, 2010. That was eight weeks after Humiliatrix69 aired his anger on the message board…Costello advertised herself as a “Southern girl” named “Carolina,” who was “short, sexy & a lot of fun.” Humiliatrix69 didn’t have such a good time. “Seemed really friendly,” his angry post read. “Provided the donation. She slipped away and got comfortable, and so did I. Then there was a knock at the door.” Humiliatrix69 claimed two men armed with a baseball bat rushed at him. One claimed he was Costello’s boyfriend…They fought on the front lawn. “I made it clear that it wasn’t over, so after posting this…I gotta go handle this,” he wrote…Humiliatrix69 was hell-bent on revenge, but nervous. “I want to be spiteful and get revenge, but I am going to [private message] the info. I wanna get the exact address. I will go by there tonight. I could seriously do some time for the things I want to do to this provider and her boyfriend.” Then he admitted to having cold feet. Revenge wouldn’t be worth it, he reasoned, claiming he would go “back to attempting to make legitimate porn videos”…
As is typical for tabloids, the article concentrates on the lurid and pitches the story to make the commonplace seem sinister; for example, “a virtually unregulated network blah blah blah…” when the entire internet is virtually unregulated! And if any of my readers has NOT ever seen some big shot running his mouth off on one message board or another as the men in this story did, please comment; I predict no replies. The guy was angry because he got ripped off; so would anyone be. I certainly hope the FBI’s “interest” is just a fabrication on the part of the Daily News, because if the feds are honestly trying to pin one of a string of virtually-identical serial killer cases on angry internet commenters, they must have learned their investigative techniques from watching too many TV cop shows.
I do want to point out one more thing about this story: Professor O’Lawhead’s asinine comments at the beginning of the second paragraph. “Highway for criminality?” WTF? I mean, is this person for real? He claims to be a law professor and yet can’t recognize the difference between real criminality and a status offense? And that stupid comment about prostitution being a “public enterprise” betrays an appalling ignorance of the history of the subject he is presuming to speak about. One has to wonder if he won his law degree as a prize from an iron claw machine on Coney Island.
The second example is far less serious, but IMHO more irritating because it’s a blatant lie rather than a distortion of the truth, and comes directly from the pigs’ mouths instead of potentially being a journalistic artifact. Brandy’s blog of April 18th refers to this story posted on recordpub.com the day before:
An alleged prostitute who advertised her services online and was caught in an April 4 Brimfield police sting operation at a hotel in the township has pleaded not guilty to prostitution, solicitation and related misdemeanor charges. Samantha R. Edwards, 19…was arraigned last week in Portage County Municipal Court…on one count each of prostitution and solicitation, both third-degree misdemeanors, and three counts of possession of criminal tools, all first-degree felonies…Brimfield police allege that Edwards posted a profile under the “Female Escorts” section of AkronCanton.BackPage.com under the alias “Skyy”…A tip led officers to investigate and then send an officer into her hotel room undercover, where an offer for sex allegedly was made and money allegedly changed hands. Edwards was arrested and a Nokia cell phone, Sanyo digital camera and 50 to 60 Trojan condoms were seized as tools related to her alleged activities. Five men, or “johns,” allegedly arrived while police were investigating. Because no offers were made and no money changed hands, Brimfield police identified the men and turned them away…
As Kelly James pointed out, the website misquotes the law; “possession of criminal tools” is a misdemeanor, not a felony. But that’s bad enough; how many of my female readers carry around cell phones? I guess that means you’re all criminals under Ohio law, especially if you also own a digital camera. And I wonder how many condoms you need in your purse before it becomes a “crime”; 40? 10? One, perhaps? When will our amateur sisters wake up and understand that these laws can be (and sometimes are) used against ANY woman? As long as meeting up with a man to whom one is not married can be classified as a “crime” on the basis of motive (and defined by carrying a cell phone) no woman is safe from this type of tyranny. Then there’s one last, small detail which irritates the hell out of me: The police attempt to slut-shame their captive by falsely claiming five men showed up while they were “investigating” (i.e. busting her). Unless they were there for at least 8 or 9 hours, that’s total bullshit in the same class as Pennsylvania cops’ repeated claims that typical escorts make $5000 per weekend; they’re blatant attempts to evoke the “dirty whore” stereotype and disgust housewives by making it look as though we spend all our waking hours pulling trains without washing in between.
You mean you don’t run trains?
Nope. The girls who do are relatively rare and organize them as special events.
I had never heard of that term until today…
See how educational this blog is? 😉
I think you may need a dictionary or something. The April fictional interlude had a bunch of new words for me.
Some of the words from this month’s fictional interlude were a bit old-fashioned, since the story takes place just over a century ago. 🙂
I am reminded of the story of the man who was convicted of possessing what the court said was a “burglar tool kit”. He asked the judge to also charge him with adultery, since he didn’t want anyone to think he didn’t have the equipment for that, too.
That reminds me of the joke about the woman whose husband dragged her along on a fishing trip; he went out early and returned to the cabin exhausted, then fell asleep and began to snore loudly. So she rowed out a little way in his boat so as to get quiet to read, and a game warden soon came by and said he was going to charge her for fishing in a restricted area.
“But I’m not fishing, I’m reading,” the lady said.
“Yes, but you have the equipment for it; as far as I know you could start any minute.”
She replied, “in that case, I’ll have to charge you with rape.”
The warden angrily retorted, “I haven’t raped you!”
“Yes, but you have the equipment for it; as far as I know you could start any minute.”
“blatant attempts to evoke the “dirty whore” stereotype and disgust housewives by making it look as though we spend all our waking hours pulling trains without washing in between.”
hahahahahahahaha….oh shit you’re killing me here…
“One has to wonder if he won his law degree as a prize from an iron claw machine on Coney Island.”
hahahahahahaha……I just might look him up and email him a link to this post…
“When will our amateur sisters wake up and understand that these laws can be (and sometimes are) used against ANY woman?”
sigh. whores are only the first to have rights violated. not so funny anymore…especially as it seems most are too stupid to figure that out until it’s too late 🙁
Sadly true. People never give a damn when other people’s rights are violated because they have childlike faith in the “authorities” never to expand the scope of such violations. 🙁
“His lips are moving.”
Now, now Maggie. Us men have been told for 30 years how we can’t just say ‘he’ in writing because that’s sexist. 😉
Shock horror. Women politicans lie too.
“We had to duck sniper fire”. Hillary Clinton.
In English, when the sex of a person is unknown the masculine pronoun is used.
That is correct Maggie, but PETER would never know or understand that.
Hugs………..JOYCE
Hi Maggie,
“no woman is safe from this type of tyranny.”
Yes. In reading your blog and thinking about this it is necessary to criminalise and demonise prostitution in the west still as the family has not yet been sufficiently destroyed to allow legal prostitution.
Here in Germany the family is an artifact. A nice piece of history relegated to the dust bin. As recently stated by one of the federal ministers ‘a family is a family if they all eat from the same refrigerator’.
This is why prostitution is legal here. There is no chance for the family to challenge the state in Germany.
Prostitutes are going to suffer this same tyranny as fathers until such time as some significant number of people hold the criminals to account. It does not need to be that many actually. We will achieve this in Australia with just a few thousand people.
Well, duuude, I screwed that HTML all up.
When the numbers become large enough and public enough that altering reality to fit perception can no longer be done successfully.
This is how the mind in it’s normal state of cultivated hypnosis works:
It happened to a/n [insert targeted group here]. Sometimes the rules have to be bent to make sure justice is done, besides, I’m not a/n [insert targeted group here]so it’s not like I have any reason to care.
It happened to a civilian I either don’t know or personally care about. Well, s/he must have done something otherwise the police wouldn’t be coming down on her/him like this. We don’t know all the facts so let’s not judge the police – they’re the good guys, so this probably all makes sense.
It happened to a wo/man I’m close to, or to me. This is all a big mistake! Once I’ve explained that I’m a good, law-abiding, tax-paying consumer they’ll understand that this was a mistake and everything will be fixed. (*Five minutes later.*) I shall call the news and tell them the police have made a big mistake and won’t fix it even though they know I’m a good, law-abiding, tax-paying, normal consumer. The news people will air my story and shock everyone, and that will make the cops fix it. (*Five minutes later.*) I will tell the judge- Hold on, why does everyone assume I must have done something to deserve this?
Remember the pig-farmer near Vancouver who murdered, butchered and ground up possibly as many as 50 prositutes? The police marked the fiules NHI.
No Humans Involved.
Any woman in her right mind HAS to be terrified of that. Selling sex makes you, literally, NOT human? That is frightening and one of the main reasons that I stand in solidarity with my professional sisters.
That, plus the fact that I am totally a whore, and I am sick of people calling me that like it’s some kind of insult. It’s time to take back our own name!
(to any random douchebag)
Why, yes, I AM a whore. And it will be a cold day in hell before you can afford me.
(to cute hot guy) You can have me for the price of one appletini!
And anything in between!
Just because you’re a whore doesn’t mean you’re cheap! And just because you’re super cheap and easy to afford doesn’t mean you AREN’T a whore. It’s your body, you set the price.
And every person, no matter how low or high life has brought them, is still a person. When one woman gets classified as NHI, we are all in danger.
Thank You ANDREA!!!!
Excellent post.
Hugs………Joyce
Unfortunately, this “NHI” mentality has gone on for years. Murder victims are personally attacked all the time. Some examples: They got killed because they were: homeless, on drugs, were members of gangs, picked the wrong type of spouse, went to the wrong place at the wrong time, etc. The surviving family members/friends of murder victims (MVS) go through these vicious attacks all the time also. There’s police/detectives/prosecutors that also make these attacks and could care less about the victims. DISGUSTING! Some don’t even TRY to get justice. But, fortunately, there’s also GREAT police, detectives, etc. I want to give credit where it’s due. But, this problem with the bad 1’s people need to do what they can about it. Speaking out about it is 1 of the things that can be done. Becoming a member of groups like Parents of Murdered Children is another way. These vicious attacks have gone on for years and NON-prostitutes are also victims of it. NO ONE SHOULD BE! I keep copies of a few of the written vicious attacks made on my murdered loved 1’s on my computer desktop to remind me to keep going and never quit speaking out/educating. Thanks for being concerned about this issue. That’s a big deal because too many in the world do see people as just trash, etc.
Thank you Maggie for letting us know more of this case.
I say every day COPS or rotten and they lie!!!!
Yeah sure while they were arresting her…5 guys show up…LOL!
How many was she seeing in the 30 to 60 minutes it takes to arrest a girl.
Ignorant cops give themsleves away again. I hope someone did a response wherever this was posted at and asked how could that be true?
Hugs……………………….JOYCE
One difficulty with enforcing anti-prostitution laws (and anti-drug laws, too) is that neither of the two people involved wants to bring the cops in. If you rob me, I want to call the cops on you. If you shoot me (and I survive), I want to see you caught, and punished. Same if I do that to you: you want justice to play out, and to play out on me.
If I want a roll in the hay, and you provide that for me, which of us is going to call the cops on the other? First off, why do I want you punished for doing something I liked? I don’t, of course. Also, I can’t rat on you without ratting on myself. So the cops have to make their case with none of the parties involved wanting to help. This leads to surveillance and stings.
And if the girl isn’t dumb enough to flat-out say, “I’ll have sex with you for money,” then the cops probably can’t make the case unless they make shit up, such as claiming that the girl was dumb enough to flat-out say, “I’ll have sex with you for money.”
With victimless crimes, they also manufacture victims. Stupid. We need to get rid of these laws.
Sailor,
Just a quick question. We all know Prostitution is illega/ a crime, I wish it were not but it is here in the States, except in certain areas of NV. Now, if a man see prostitutes in an unsafe way, infects his wife with HIV, Herpes, hep-c etc…Is that a (Victimless Crime)????
Keeping in mind that not all prostitutes are safe. Some have been arrested knowing they have HIV, but of course they would never tell the guy and vice versa.
Just asking.
JOYCE
As you well know, the STD rate among promiscuous amateurs (for example, university students) is dramatically higher than in prostitutes (as much as 5x as high). So unless you’re going to prohibit ALL extramarital sex (good luck with that), it would be safer for the public to ENCOURAGE prostitution since our STD rates are much lower.
Yes this is true Maggie, for example (I) have never had an STD and I am ALWAYS safe, However, just staying with prostitutes and as you know SOME are doing unsafe, unprotected acts. Men even offer extra money for bare back oral and vaginal sex. Yes most of the men are married or in a relationship that visit us, so I still ask my question of Sailor. Let us exclude the college students and just talking about working girls because Prostitution is as I said Illegal/Crime and he mentioned “Victimless crime”. I gave an example situation.
Anyone can respond. I just want to hear the responses for the knowledge of how people feel about this. People outside of the John Doe Public because that I already know.
Thanks……Joyce(:
An interesting point. This introduces a victim who wasn’t a part of the transaction.
In this case, both the prostitute and her client are being irresponsible. But what makes it a crime is still the exchange of money for sex, not the danger or irresponsibility. Having condomless sex with an infected prostitute is no more and no less a crime than having condomized sex with an uninfected prostitute.
Sort of like selling pure MDMA is no more and no less illegal than selling bad pills.
Criminalization not only manufactures victims (the “trafficking epidemic”), it creates real victims, out of seller and buyer alike. There’s been a lot on this blog about how criminalization makes life dangerous for the prostitute, but it also makes it more dangerous for the customer, and for the customer’s wife, girlfriend, perhaps somebody he hasn’t even met yet.
Decriminalization not only makes prostitution no longer a crime, but makes it more victimless.
So as of right now, you say it is NOT a “Victimless crime”? or it is?
I say if it were made uncriminal, people would feel more free to get tested. Planned Parenthood offers the testing on a sliding scale, but if they cut funding like they are doing then there will be more problems.
Yes I think the wife would be a VICTIM for sure of BOTH parties Mostly the HUSBAND because HE infected her, not the prostitute. Obviously the prostitute should be jailed. I think if a man or woman gives their partner HIV, they deserve PRISON and then the death penalty when the partner gets AIDS and die because of it. Yes I know they call it (Died From Aids Related Complications). It is not fair to infect another person with a disease though. This applys to those NOT in the business as well, such as office affairs etc….
I liken it to the LEN BIAS LAW. If you deliver the lethal dose, you should be guilty of murder!!! I think the law states (First degree reckless homicide). It can carry up to 40 yrs in prison.
Prostitution is NOT a “Victimless Crime”.
Prostitution will never be legal all over the US.
I am not a “neofeminist”, I just like the Facts and honesty.
Joyce
Joyce, I completely disagree with you; it IS victimless because the only parties DIRECTLY INVOLVED are consenting. By the logic you use, anyone who sells any expensive good could be a “criminal” if one spouse spends money with that salesman which is needed for bills. To make an act illegal because someone “might” misuse that act (e.g. buying a gun) is the worst kind of tyranny.
Prostitution is a victimless crime. The wife in this scenario is a victim of recklessness, not of prostitution.
Selling a car is victimless. Not bothering to make sure the brakes work on that car you’re selling is reckless. The recklessness is not victimless, but car selling itself is victimless.
Such recklessness should carry a penalty. Prostitutes should not be excepted. But it is the recklessness that has victims, not prostitution.
Well-said, Sailor! 🙂
Not really!!!
Yes the Wife is the VICTIM and dies because of recklessness that goes with prostitution.
One might die if the brakes on a car are bad, but the forsure die from Aids and NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO INFECT ANOTHER!!!
I am sorry but MILLIONS disagree with you or prostitution would have been legal LONG ago and the prostitutes would have been required to be tested like in other countries.
Yes people die from being over setrved in bars, the bar get sued and loses it license. There is a price to pay for recklessness in all areas.
Turn it around and say your wife or girlfriend did it to you
Joyce
Millions agreed that slavery was a jolly good idea.
Millions agreed women didn’t have the brains, bless their little hearts, to own property or function in society without a man to control them.
Millions agreed the world was flat.
How many people agree doesn’t make the argument valid.
Yes, even though people with AIDS live a lot longer now, it’s STILL a death sentence. A tragic thing! I wouldn’t have any part of an arrangement where you don’t tell each other what’s going on. NEVER! Sailor Barsoom knows if he’s with someone and doesn’t tell me, breaks the rules we’ve set up, lies/hides, etc. I won’t stay with him. The same applies to me if I pulled the same things. There’s too much sick, evil stuff that’s happened from couples lying to each other, hiding things, etc. I won’t be part of it. I broke 1 rule I set for myself a few times when I saw a few married men (and 1 married woman, i.e., a married couple. The only good thing I can say is it was only 1 time I did that) when I had sex only friends and even writing about it now makes me feel sick. Anyway, when people do stuff as Joyce says it CAN hugely affect others badly that weren’t involved to begin with. This is why it’s so important to think our actions out as much as possible.
I think (am not positive) it’s a law in every US state that if a person is obviously drunk in a bar that the bar workers are to call a cab for the person to get home safely.
“Yes the Wife is the VICTIM and dies because of recklessness that goes with prostitution.”
No it’s the recklessness that goes with unprotected sex. HIV is not exclusive to prostitution.
Of course you disagree Maggie.
I work too, but I really choose to face facts, protect myself and others. I cannot make excuses and say prostitution is victimless when it is the way things are now. Try telling this to an infected wife or the FBI
Joyce
Yes Maggie try telling the HIV infected wife that she is not a victim because she was not a party to the consenting..LOL!
That is why and the PERFECT example of all that is wrong in the industry. Statementment like this make society hate us.
I cannot take anymore of THIS board and the excuses made for justifying infecting people with disease, cheating on spouses instead of being honest from the beginning of relationships and the approval of the male hate and agression against women.
Joyce
Dear Joyce, to be honest, you just named 1 of the reasons I personally hate prostitution: taking part in lying. I’m with you 100% on how evil this lying, hiding, etc., is with people in relationships. It makes me sick if prostitutes are involved or NOT. The case you told about with the AIDS earlier shows what can happen with this lying. I’ll never understand why people say they love each other and then are terrified to say to the other: I think about or want sex with others besides you. Also why are they terrified to say they have certain fantasies? Isn’t 1 of the rewards of being in love that you can say these things to the 1 you love? I honestly don’t get these 2 things. I don’t want people on here to think “she thinks she’s so pure”. No, I’m not! When I had sex only friendships I purposely put in my ads “NO married men”. Unfortunately, many answered my ads anyway. I have to give credit where it’s due: at least they didn’t lie answering the ads! I broke my own rule a few times. What’s an irony is that 1 married man wanted an ongoing sex only thing with me! He was wanting what I was wanting. I turned him down and said why. What’s great is he didn’t contact me again. I’m very thankful for that and he was also very nice about the whole thing. Even if he’d had an arrangement with his wife, I would have broken off contact. Writing about all this now upsets me. I feel like crap. But, I haven’t done it again. Anyway, I can’t be part of a job where I’m part of lying to that degree. To me, even if they wives/girlfriends didn’t know about me, I’m still in the wrong. I see it like you don’t plan a crime, but you take part in it (a getaway driver is an example). To me the driver has guilt also since he took part in the crime at ALL. He did wrong also. If I ever place an ad again to truly meet people (not just to see if I get any answers now that I’m older), it’s going to have in it: no married people even IF you have an arrangement. This includes if you’re separated. If you’re not married and don’t have an arrangement, I won’t see you either. Please know that my agreeing with Joyce on this doesn’t mean I’m saying all have to agree, do this, etc. Thanks for listening.
Thank You Laura for all the post.
I appreciate it more than you know and you seem to be the only one able to or maybe WANTS to understand my point.
You can always stay in touch on the email that you have for me.
Hugs and stay just the way you are……………….Joyce(:
It’s not a matter of “excuses”; it’s a matter of adult responsibility. I cannot support a government’s legislating personal behavior because SOME people are careless or stupid; if I agree that prostitution is a “crime” because some people are irresponsible and spread disease, then I would also have to support banning private vehicles because many people operate them irresponsibly and kill others.
Such is the price of freedom.
I think I said VICTIMLESS CRIME. We know it is a crime.
Anyway I do not think we can say this is a good comparision because when we drive cars, we are on the OPEN roads and if we Drink and drive, operate while impaired, speed etc…..the cops can see us. We are also monitored with cameras on the road ways, while with prostitution, it is all behind closed doors. No one is there to see if the act is done unsafely. No none is there to know if one is infected with a disease.
This is why I do not want drugs made legal. (I) personally do not want to be on the road with some idiot freak hopped up on drugs. Now if they want to stay in their home and do it, then OK, but as we know most will decide to venture out on the road way.
Freedom is one thing, but affecting the lives of others in the name of freedom is totally different.
One problem is that you could just as likely be on the road with somebody hopped up on drugs NOW as you could if the drugs are made legal. There probably wouldn’t be any more drug use if it were legal, just as there probably wouldn’t be any more prostitution if it were legal.
Also, many drugs tend to induce a state of mind where the user wants to stay home and watch TV, or dance for hours, but most don’t make you want to drive.
Finally, if somebody gets high at a club or something, today the club doesn’t dare call for a cab because they can be arrested for knowing that somebody is high at the club. Legalization/decriminalization would fix that.
Yes, these people who are infected because of lies, hiding, etc., count also. They count as much as the 1’s who gave them the disease. It’s not popular with many how our actions CAN hugely affect others. This can be in good or bad ways. Personally, I think the people who get the diseases from others deserve better treatment than just “oh, that’s so sad. Let’s just move on”. I think the 1’s who gave them the disease owe them an apology at the LEAST. Actually, this reminds me of a HELL I’ve gone through that’s still causing some HELL in my life. Last year I was the victim of a fire (along with at least 6 other households) that could have EASILY been prevented. It came from the EVIL NEGLECT of a woman with Alzheimer’s Disease (she was my neighbor at the time). To this day, the 1’s who neglected her haven’t said a word of apology to any of the victims that I know of. Isn’t that WONDERFUL? The day of the fire they didn’t say a WORD to any of the victims while we were waiting to hear back on could we go home, etc., etc. They could have cared less. They showed what they were already by this. There were others there who had lost just as much as they had. They didn’t care. The truth is an apology would help the victims mentally. Please don’t take this to mean I’m going to not do what I need to do until I get 1. That isn’t what I’m getting at. I know it’s likely none of us will ever get ANY accountability/concern, etc., from these ###***. But, if we did, that would be wonderful. It would help us feel better at the LEAST. Plus it would be the decent thing to do. Our actions and NON-actions are linked to many others as Joyce has said in MANY cases. In some cases they’re not. With the case of AIDS Joyce mentioned, it could have been prevented if there wasn’t lying, hiding, etc., to begin with.
This makes NO sense, but I will not bother to explain too much.
You say it was the client and prostitute acting irresponsible, well….We know that, but the issue is the now HIV infected INNOCENT WIFE/GIRLFRIEND. If we implement that it is MURDER, and punishable by death of the man and the hooker, it makes it for sure “More Victimless”.
Wow, Joyce, you’re really keen on capital punishment out there in the US, aren’t you? How barbaric.
Have you ever visited any civilised countries? You know, with electric lights and things?
Thank You,
No you will not find a bigger fan of Capital Punishment than myself.
I think infecting someone with HIV since it is a death sentence, also warrants the death sentence.
BTW, Did you know Capital Punishment actually exist here in the US and we have plenty od “Electric lights and things”.
You do not think infecting a person with HIV is “Barbaric”????…Oh yeah, I forgot…… I can see why YOU would not want it to be a Capital crime.
PS…My guess is (I) have traveled far more than you.
Oh yes, we’re very well aware capital punishment exists in the US. Those that do it most get elected presidents and get to kill all sorts of innocent people in foreign countries in illegal wars based on fictitious WMD from your apology for a state department. Or maybe they just didn’t have enough electric lights to read their papers properly.
Please realize there’s MANY in the US who are against the death penalty for ANY crime. There’s at least 1 wonderful message board set up by a group of these people. There’s also many for DP in every case. There’s some you could say are “in betweeners”: I’m 1 of those. I’m what some call a “case by case pro”. This means I’m only for DP in certain cases. Some of the people against DP call themselves “abolitionists” also. Some call themselves “antis”. Some of the people for it call themselves “pros”.
I’m with you here on the evil killing of people in other countries. It’s a disgrace. But, it needs to be said that not every politician is just like George Bush (Dubya). I’m not sure, but have a feeling you’re referring to him with your remarks. There’s also 1’s like George Ryan who put a stop to all executions in Illinois. There’s been 2 other US governors who have done this also in the past. DP is a complicated issue to say the least. It’s not as cut and dried as too many think. I found in my own experience that when you’re literally confronted with it (my family was) you change your tune quick and realize how important an issue it is. Thanks for listening.
You’re in England, right? If so, when it comes to murderers, England has a lot safer system than the US. From what I’ve read about it, there’s hardly any murderers who are paroled compared to the US where many are. 1 thing people can’t deny even if they hate death penalty is that DP is a 100% effective way to keep the murderer from killing again. It’s less risky than life in prison without parole. That has some risk in that they could escape. When you live in a country where murderers are getting parole left and right as in the US that can get you to think more about DP, especially if 1 of these murderers kills again and it’s 1 of your family members and/or friends.
Every country has had its bad leaders. Let’s please not get into an international “my country’s great yours sucks” whirlwind. I can’t think of any way this would be any more productive than the war of the sexes thing.
Unintentional murder doesn’t carry the death penalty, not even in the US. Unless it could be proven that the prostitute intended to infect the client, she won’t get the DP. Unless it can be shown that the client intended to infect his wife or girlfriend, he won’t get the DP. You don’t get it for accidents, even reckless dumbass accidents.
Dear Sailor B, I found exceptions to this. In Texas there can be DP for any murder committed by a person who’s in the process of escaping from prison: http://www.ehow.com/list_6517630_texas-state-criminal-laws.html
Note also what it says about killing firefighters, police, etc. There’s other states besides Texas with similar laws. Here’s a very interesting article about a DUI case in which the DP was asked for: http://www.azduiatty.com/the-death-penalty-for-dui.htm
I might have known. Here in Texas we’ll kill anybody. I still doubt that you’d get the DP for unintentionally and unknowingly infecting somebody, but hell, this is Texas. I wouldn’t bet money.
I haven’t had an STD either. There were a few times during my “wildness” years I didn’t use protection. This still makes me feel horrible. This was during what I call the 1st round when I 1st did all this. But, on what I call the 2nd round where I had only 1 sex only friend on purpose I did things right including being COMPLETELY SOBER (yes!). I’m very thankful I’ve never had an STD and am going to keep the resolution I made during my 2nd round that I’d never not be unsafe again.
Good Deal Laura,
Men should only see ladies that are known to be safe.
As you know, I am a nurse. I once worked in a STD Clinic for the experience. A girl and her boyfriend came in for testing, because the boyfriend had cheated on her when she was out of town, The cheating girl called the girlfriend and told them to go get tested because SHE was HIV postive. The boyfriend admitted to everything, said he was sorry…Of Course. Anyway the Girlfriend tested postive with SWAB on the spot, but the boyfriend did not test postive until 2 weeks later. The girlfriend died within 6 months which is unsual, but does happen. Not sure whatever happed to the boyfriend. As far as I am concerned HE MURDERED HER!!! and may he rot in hell.
None the less, we women must protect ourselves. There are things such as HSV 1 and 2 that you can get just from kissing. An infected HSV 1 person can give you HSV 2 with uncovered oral and no they do not have to have ANY signs of the disease.
Stay Safe.
Hugs…………….Joyce
This is so medically inaccurate.
Fantasy fiction writing of the right wing kind.
This lady not only is pro capital punishment, she daydreams about it as well.
For some reason, the websites for the US Centers for Disease Control match what Joyce was saying about HSV. The right wing…yes…another case of what I call “Internet diagnosis”. You can tell someone’s right wing, left wing, middle wing, etc., from just a few posts of theirs or EVEN 1. 1 reason she’s pro capital punishment is because her husband was murdered. This kind of HELL tends to form peoples’ stands on death penalty which is understandable. This doesn’t automatically mean she’s 1 of the people who cheers outside prisons during executions.
Here is the UK, deliberate or wreckless transmission of HIV is a crime, separate to sex industry laws, and would apply irrespectively to whether the sexual transmission was commercial or not.
Irrespective of ethics and self-preservation, I think sex workers doing ‘bareback’ lose a lot more trade than they pull because it puts a lot of clients off.
I agree and wish more laws applied to herpes and Hep-C.
See my two post above.
Thank you for a response.
Do you think Prostitution is a victimless crime?
Joyce
I do believe that is the case here too (deliberate or reckless transmission of HIV). Whether through prostitution or freebies…
bdevereaux,
It was ONLY about (Prostitution being a victimless crime or not) Of course I know that HIV and the others exist in situations outside the business, I even posted a real situation on this. Maggie responded that college students have more STDs, and ok I know that, but I was just pointing out that prostitution is NOT a victimless crime.
We cannot Skirt the issue or cloud it with other situations when it concerned ONE thing/Issue only.
*mantra*
So prostitution IS a victimless crime IF nobody (including third parties) get an STD?
Prostitution IS NOT a victimless crime if one of parties (including a third person) does acquire an STD?
So does the actual ‘crime’ of prostitution have victims if nobody contracts an STD? Does this not make it a victimless crime?
Prostitution is not a scapegoat for other peoples stupid behavior. IF I were married and my husband had unprotected sex with a prostitute and I ended up with an STD, would I blame prostitution in and of itself? Hell no, I’d blame the stupid son of a bitch that engaged in selfish behavior (then I’d blame myself for marrying the douchebag in the first place).
Geez, I don’t blame McDonalds if I walk in and order a double cheeseburger when I know I’m on a diet….
If NO harm or death comes to an innocent people from Prostitution, then YES it would be a victimless crime, unfortunatly this is not the case, be it stupid irresponsible people or not. THERE ARE INNOCENT VICTIMS of other people’s actions with prostitution.
To hell with your diet, if you go into McDonalds and order a cheeseburger and it is laced with arsenic…YOU ARE A VICTIM and no one can say you are not. If you die, the person that laced it should die as well.
Not all women know upfront that they are marrying a “Douchebag”, but only because HE was not honest in the beginning before he married her. Had he been honest she could have made an informed decision as if to marry him or not. It is her RIGHT not to be decieved….AGAIN…..HONESTY
Here in Britain, we wonder why anyone who went in a McDonalds would want to live anyway….
Obviously any MikkyD’s in Britain quickly goes out of business, because nobody eats there.
I don’t know about McDonald’s, but I know they have Burger King in Britain.
LOL I loved eating at the McD’s in Germany. Same menu (well not exactly but enough) but tasted different than the American version. Great fries, better than the states 🙂
YES! Honesty! What a concept (eyeroll). My sarcasm helps me calm down at times to be honest (wink). Why can’t people just LEVEL WITH EACH OTHER? As I said earlier, THIS is 1 of the reasons I want nothing to do with prostitution. Any job where I have to be part of lies on that scale, no way! Actually, in my work history it’s been very RARE when a boss has asked me to lie about anything! Even when it was rare I hated it. Plus when I was an active alcoholic I lied a lot (a trait of active alcoholics) and am so glad I’m out of that ###***. When couples have all these lies going on, hiding, etc., they hurt each other. I don’t understand if you say you love someone then why are you lying and hiding all the time? It doesn’t have to be about sex either. I’m with Joyce in that the ideal is NO lying, hiding, games, etc., from day 1. If people know they don’t want to just have sex with their spouse, etc., then make the effort to find a person who’s with you on that to BEGIN WITH. I did this and was very blessed to find a man who wanted the same thing. We’re also free to NOT see others. I haven’t on purpose for almost 8 years now. I’m not legally married, by the way. I’m with Joyce in that the lying, hiding, etc., can be very damaging and not just to the 2 doing it to each other.
Of Course guys can and do “Rat” girls out every day and night…Don’t be silly. Many guys just call anonymously as well as have their friends call to report a hooker working out of such and such location, the cops set up on HER. Also jealous girls have been known to do this to other workers as well as agencies attacking the independents.
Guys usually do it because they want her to quit working and be with them ONLY or they feel entitled to a freebie that they did not get. Jealous girls and agencies do it to rid the competition.
Also in FL, for example if the girl comes into the hotel room and sits on the bed, the cop can arrest her for soliciting prostitution. Yes the Judges say she did in fact break state law. Same with the Condom possession thing. Not that the gril has to be stupid in what she says. Just have to know the laws from state to state. Just a few more FACTS
“When will our amateur sisters wake up and understand that these laws can be (and sometimes are) used against ANY woman?”-I’m 1 who’s “woke up”. I started waking up to these laws once I started reading here (a while before I started posting). I 1st started to wake up to how laws can be unfair and/or unfairly applied once I became an MVS. But, that was only in 1 area of life. After 9/11 I had a BIG awakening politically and started to care to learn about how laws are abused in OTHER areas besides with MVS. It was about time! I’d spent too many years in what I call “me-world”. 1 ironic thing is that becoming an MVS (the worst thing in my life to happen) lead to becoming “awake” in 1 area at least. I have a strong feeling I’m not the only 1 who’s woke up to what you’re saying here that’s in the amateur category. I’m hoping that also! But, even if I’m the only 1 who has been, that’s a start. It reminds me of the saying “A long journey starts with 1 step”. I don’t have it exacty right (it’s early!), but that’s the gist of it.
Thank you, Laura; I feel if I can just get people to THINK about what’s going on, especially about the erosion of their freedoms, then I’m doing my job. 🙂
Do I think sex work, or prostitution as you call it, is a victimless crime? Well here outside the USA, in the UK, it isn’t even a crime, so it can hardly be a victimless one. Street soliciting is a crime, but even sex workers in brothels commit no crime unless they’re involved with managing the place. Escorts are legal. But there’s a whole huge raft of laws that make life more difficult and dangerous than it has to be for sex workers, all supposedly to protect them of course. The legal position of benign third parties, such as maids, is parlous indeed.
Indeed, I would submit the UK as possibly the worst country in the world at dealing with the issue. We manage to achieve all the disadvantages of a criminalised system without it actually being criminalised, and at the same time cleverly avoid any single benefit of a decriminalised system.
Furthermore, our system is extraordinarily expensive.
Do study us if you want to discover what not to do.
All this would change if the so-called Swedish Model was adopted, whereupon it would become illegal to be a client (only), and all prostitution would become criminalised.
There is a whole huge list of airbourne diseases which one could transmit merely by walking into a room. Please could we have some sort of context here.
All the evidence is that public health improvements are far more likely to be furthered by decriminalisation, and the General Secretary of the UN, no less, made a speech criticising sex industry laws for their effect on the campaign to arrest the Aids pandemic.
As for ‘lying’ it seems to me to generally though not always be economy with the truth that folks get by on. And truth can do an awful lot of damage if it’s not handled well, and sometimes even when it is.
I would imagine, however, that the masquerade that sex workers are often obliged to maintain could become a significant source of stress at times.
The poor stupid wife song and dance really pisses me off.
Maybe she is stupid. Maybe she did get an STD. That has nothing to do with prostitution. Let’s not blame the whores because her husband is an asshole and she’s a moron.
Here’s my reality. My husband often travels to exotic parts of the world (academic conferences are hardly ever held in Idaho), and he is in the company of young ambitious intelligent women on a regular basis.
He has a pass for what goes on at these conferences, and we have a polite agreement not to discuss any details. He doesn’t have to lie to me, because I don’t ask and I don’t want to know.
I prefer, in no uncertain terms, that he restrict his activity to professional women. The truth is that all sex comes with a price. It’s better if that price is clear. Fucking a grad student is bound to be more expensive than shelling out $200 for an hour with a beautiful brunette.
I resent anyone classifying me as some hapless stupid VICTIM who doesn’t realize her husband enjoys sex with other women. Fuck the fuck off. I am not a victim, I have a right to enjoy my relationship with my husband any goddamn way I please and I don’t need anyone passing laws so I don’t get HIV from those horrible dirty whores.
*roll eyes*
Prostitution most certainly IS a victimless crime. In fact, it’s not a crime at all. It’s a job. Quite possibly a fun job. And it’s really no one’s business other than the people involved.
At Least you are one of the few women have have the open marriage and he has your permission to see others. That is GREAT and the way it should be if he has the desire to see others and you agree to it. I LOVE (HONESTY) Hopefully he would not object to you seeing others or working as in prostitution, but if you agree not to see others and not work, then keep your promise to him and this is in fact YOUR BUSINESS, However,
Just because some women marry a lying cheating bastard by deception , does not make them a “Crying Moron”.
Yes just ask any Attorney, police officer, government agency, planned parenthood etc….if prostitution is illegal in most of the United States and they will tell you that it is. You may not like it, may not want it to be, but IT IS.
I consider ALL persons “INVOLVED” that is with anyone seeing prostitutes or working as a prositute, be it the wife, the girlfriend, the boyfriend or the husband. Those having sex, it is their “Business” because (their) life could be affected.
Try telling the wives that do not have the arrangement that you do, that it is none of their business if their husbands cheats and infects them with HIV, HEP-C or HERPES. Tell THEM, They are not “Involved”. Tell them it is is none of their “Goddamned” business. Start a blog, post it in the paper. See the responses you get, call the local police and tell them your name and tell them that prostitution is not a crime!!!! Go outdoors and scream it out loud in your neighborhood. Do not just post on a hooker board, be a true advocate!!!
It is attitudes of hookers like you that make society hate us and keeps the business illegal and keeps the cops after us. You basically are saying GOD DAMN the law, God damn the innocent, (I) will do as (I) please.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m laughing at you right now. Laughing like hell.
*shakes fist*
Damn you, Andrea! I blame youuuuu!
Your honesty is wonderful. You’ve avoided all kinds of HELLS this way. You’re right in that how you run your arrangement is your business. It’s the same with mine. Honesty CAN be practiced and I commend you and your husband for it.
My post above was to Andrea. I need to put “Dear ___” on all my posts from now on…wink.
BTW
I just left this comment on the following website:
http://mapleleafap.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/the-swedish-model-swedens-prostitution-solution/#comment-20
A Canadian group is promoting this as a solution to the “problem” of prostitution.
@stephenpatterson directed me to it in an earlier comment.
I’m certain she’ll delete it. The truth stings. I was as direct and blunt as I could be: at least she’ll read it and she might think. Maybe I hit “triggering points” that will send her crying or running off to tell others how the Patriarchy is coming after her. How delusional people can be.
Anyway, here’s the comment. At least someone can read it if I post it here.
START
I just have a few simple observations. They’re not huge but they’re salient. They relate to what you’ve written and your comments to this post.
POINT 1: Rape and Consent
– If both parties consent to a transaction- whether in marriage, as in a married couple, or men with prostitutes, then the sex is utterly identical: consenting.
It’s not rape.
Husbands and wives often don’t want to have sex “right now”, but consent because of emotional attachment, one partner’s stress, timing, frustration or just having been badgered into it. Is this rape? It’s consenting. Many prostitutes choose to have sex much more avidly and willingly and even aggressively than wives and husbands with more eager partners.
Calling sex with consenting prostitutes “rape” is actually shockingly disgusting, from a feminist sandpoint. How you can so belittle women is beyond me.
It’s so enormously insulting to women who have been forcibly raped I can’t believe you can call yourself a feminist. By definition, rape victims do not consent; prostitutes did. Prostitutes *seek out* clients. Prostitutes often badger clients into paying more for more services. That’s not consent? In what twisted ideological world is this not considered consent?
And you have the aggrandizing audacity to compare that to a woman held down at knifepoint and forcibly raped?
Do you actually hate and abhor rape victims so much you can make such insulting comparisons? Comparing actual, real rape victims to prostitutes is such a heinous crime against women I wonder what torturous intellectual process you use to justify this. Any ideology that manages to twist this into some semblance of acceptability is so unrelated to actual human life as to be utterly meaningless and devoid of anything approaching human understanding. These sorts of comparisons can only come from the fevered delusions of the ideologically blinded. You might want to step outside your bizarrely painted world from time to time and realize how demeaning these claims you’re making really are.
Point 2: Infantilization
It treats women like children. If a woman consents: A woman consents. Period. That’s the entire debate ended.
Either 1) she’s an adult fully able to make every single decision pertaining to her life or 2) she’s a morally incapable child unable to make decisions about her life.
I was born believing that men and women were equals. We deserve to be treated as equals; our choices deserve to be fully respected as full equals. This means that we are entirely allowed to make any choice – even those regarded by anyone else as mistakes. Full stop.
I don’t know if you realize how utterly demeaning you’re being to the very concept of “free will” as it applies to women as human beings. It’s as *anti-feminist* as it’s possible to get while still being a woman. Apparently, you have extremely little respect for female humanity.
To pre-empt a comment about patriarchy: Don’t give me some farcical notion about “patriarchy” and “no free will in a society dominated by men”. In all societies we’re confronted with choices, and we all exercise free will. Germans who consented to the wholesale slaughter of Jews or who partook in it don’t get a free pass because it was “hard to make a choice”. They’re guilty as sin.
If you want to make this case about “patriarchy”, then by extension I can dismiss the choice any man or woman ever makes by saying “in a capitalist society, it’s hard to make these choices and we’re not really free”, or “in a communist society, I had no choice because the Majority Community made the decision for me”, or “I needed the money so I had to rob the store and kill the store owner so I wouldn’t get caught – it’s because society doesn’t like the way I look so I couldn’t get a good enough job.”
The moment you insult women – patriarchy or no – by taking away their full and complete free will, to make whatever decision they ever feel like making, is the moment you turn women into little babies or prisoners or wards of the state without basic rights or freedoms as autonomous human beings.
Your philosophical outlook is so inimical to our basic humanity as to be a vital and significant threat to the gains women have made through feminism. That you likely can’t see this is a bitter and crying shame.
Women are the same as men. They have the right to make any demeaning choice about their own lives as any man.
Men often take on dangerous jobs – like coal mining or deep-water fishing or construction work – that involve brutal hours, little pay and dehumanizing conditions. They do this because they need the money. They often have few, if any, choices. It’s often a terrible life and they suffer. Is it fair that another man gets a nice, safe office job with good money? No. Yes. Either. Anyway, the men need the money so they do the work. It’s possible that many of these jobs are also far, far, far worse and more demeaning than the lives of the vast majority of sex workers. Have you ever considered this, even for a moment?
Have you considered what it’s like to be a minimum-wage-slave working 12-hour shifts in a fast-food restaurant? How about being forced to then pay massive taxes on this miniscule income? Have you considered that people who do these jobs are faced with the same terrible, onerous choices as prostitutes, and that some of the women who find themselves in these situations often willingly choose sex work instead?
Have you considered that the vast majority of people everywhere on Earth would never choose the job in which they find themselves wasting their lives?
Many prostitutes have few choices when they decide to do this demeaning job. But endless women and men make personally demeaning choices when they do the jobs they do. So should all demeaning lines of work be criminalized? Consider this carefully.
Why don’t you get out there and – shock and horror – *ASK* sex workers if they want you want to criminalize their industry. You’ll be shocked at what you hear. Virtually no sex workers will agree with your plan. And that finding is consistent and cross-cultural.
You may not like their choices: But it is that: A *choice*.
What does that say to you? You may despise their choices – but life’s like that. It’s their choice; they made it. You might want to re-examine the concept of “free will.”
One of your prime ministers said it best. “The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.” I think it was Pierre Trudeau. As soon as you start regulating the choices people make, at some point, that philosophy will come back and it will bite you, too – and it always bites hard.
POINT THREE
Trafficked women addicted to drugs and used like slaves represent a nearly non-existent, negligible proportion of sex-workers anywhere in the developed world. Every single study has borne this out. The absolutely vast majority of sex-workers are independent escorts. They number in the tens of thousands and largely service married men.
Sports events attract criminal rings and sex slaves? Absolutely false. Every corroborated study has demonstrated this is completely untrue. Prostitutes complain that demand for their services often drops. Neither the Superbowl or the World Cup generate any greater profits for sex workers than they otherwise would have had.
A recent raid in the Netherlands, where window-prostitutes were investigated, found – of over 150 cases – zero evidence of trafficked women. Each and every one insisted they wanted to do their job and wanted to be left alone. They all fully voluntarily returned to it when released. The police raid accomplished nothing and the women *WERE NOT* grateful.
The real objection to sex workers would seem to stem from married women who want to make sure there’s no-one for their men to visit. This is the position of most sex workers.
I find it immensely hard to believe that those advocating the “Swedish Model” have anything like concern for sex workers at heart, especially given proponents’ rank hypocrisy, overweening quasi-patriarchal paternalism and moral sanctimoniousness.
POINT FOUR
While working in South Korea, I worked on a documentary project that involved interviewing sex workers. While many of these women lived very difficult lives, the large majority of non-street workers lived relatively normal lives.
What was true was this:
– The majority wanted government to get out of their business.
– Most of the women had no substance abuse problems.
– Most of them were utterly normal women, in almost every respect.
– Most of them worked for a “phase” as a sex worker; it was almost never a permanent occupation.
– The majority chose their line of work. When asked if they enjoyed it, they often said “Better than working 12 hours a day in an office” and “Who enjoys their job all the time?”. Some said that it was occasionally quite interesting.
– Most said that busybodies made their lives hard, not men.
A lot of them said that what would make sense – given the incredibly huge and seemingly universal demand – was *protection for their industry by the government*. This included:
– Red light districts where the police couldn’t harass them
– Medical care
– Indoor-sex laws so they could practice in safe environments
– Leaving their customers alone
For this they were willing to register and pay taxes, so long as they were guaranteed not to be harassed and they could be left alone to pursue their trade.
What they didn’t trust were moral busybodies and the voting anger of middle-class women with axes to grind, pretending to “help them”.
FINAL POINT
Contrary to your very strongly held opinions, whenever measures like the Swedish ones are enacted, the sex workers *DO NOT* welcome them. Go read the blogs in Sweden. See if the sex workers are all for it.
*** Are you going to give these women jobs that *PAY AS WELL*? ***
*** Will you provide ongoing job training and development? ***
*** Will you provide women who would otherwise work as prostitutes with work they’re WILLING to do for the same remuneration? ***
I’d like to see the employment agency you’re going to set up. Maybe you can launch high-priced escorts into management positions in large corporations, with guarantees of no overtime and retraining requirements.
ADDENDUM: DATING
Your stance seems to be quasi-moral. Let’s examine the so-called “non-paying” world of sex for a moment.
Will men who seek out women for “compensated dating” be punished? This accounts for a huge proportion of regular dating among non-prostitutes, including cases where men put up women they like and pay their bills.
How about women who marry men for their money – and money only? Are they whores and prostitutes for exchanging sex for financial security? There’s a lot of these women, by the way, way more than there are self-identified whores. The actual difference is a legal mumbo-jumbo.
How about women who exchange presents and gifts for sex, with men they’d never marry? What if the price is very low – say, a good meal in a restaurant? What if it’s high – say a nice piece of jewelry? Or a handbag? There’s so much of that, much of the dating world in New York or Tokyo or London would vanish overnight if you cared to look too closely with your “Swedish model”. And yet you decide to punish self-declared prostitutes.
How about women who accept “help” from boyfriends who, again, they have no future-term relationship with, but who provide sex on demand for men who have means?
There’s a hell of a lot of that kind of “dating” going on. In fact, much of the “dating” world resembles prostitution in so many ways, in 2011, it’s hard to separate out the “prostitutes” from the “needy girlfriends” in the under-30 population.
The only way to effectively enforce the type of moral absolutism you’re proposing is to create a truly vicious and all-pervasive nanny state with its spies and cameras in every bedroom in the country. It’s frightening and repulsive at the same time.
Are you going to criminalize all out-of-wedlock sex? Because this is the only rational, philosophically consistent way to approach this debate. Once you start regulating who can and can’t do what in the bedroom, you start sliding down a slippery slope greased with puritanical tyranny and lined with razor blades.
As it stands, college women and men these days are so absurdly promiscuous it’s often little more than a piece of legal chicanery or a technicality whether or not a given woman – or man – is a professional sex worker or not.
CONCLUSION
I’ve never paid for sex.
I don’t go to strip clubs.
I have no intention of enjoying these services.
But it terrifies me to the very bone that, under the guise of “protecting women”, you’re so willing to dismiss female volition and to outrageously insult victims of male aggression and sexual assault, and yet still maintain the notionally absurd fiction that you’re trying to help anyone.
I strongly suspect that you’re going to delete this comment. That’s neither here nor there; but as a woman, and as a thinking human being, but most especially as a woman who values her core humanity–
You and your fellow advocates should be ashamed of yourself.
I can only conclude that you’re either sufficiently deluded as to think that you’re pro-woman, or you have some other agenda that you’re not honest about – honest with yourself or others. I have some idea of what that agenda might be. And for that, you and your ilk are truly despicable.
Any self-respecting woman should recoil in abject horror from the mere mention of your odious philosophy.
Well done. A little OTT for my tastes, but I love the “slippery slope greased with puritanical tyranny and lined with razor blades” – I imagine many a BDSM dungeon could do with one!
I think they’ll publish, they published mine.
We’re in danger of hijacking threads here. We could do with some kind of anti-bullshit notice board where sex worker rights activists could go to network neofeminist rants, so we know where to go and bat…
OTT is not uncalled for in this situation. I wrote this on the fly – it’s late over here (4:20 in the morning -Korea), and didn’t edit it. It might have used some.
But I tried to be direct, to the point and straightforward, without being insulting. I was accusational. But that was appropriate.
Anyway, maybe it’ll generate a response. I suspect not.
Discussing efforts to promote sex worker rights is definitely NOT hijacking in my view. As for the other…we’re working on it. 😉
It hasn’t posted there yet, but you KNOW it’ll be read here. Gorbachev, thanks for standing up for our rights and for respecting our competence. 🙂
I don’t kiss up to anyone, ever. I still don’t like the idea of paying for sex. My cultural programming tells me it’s dirty.
On the other hand, life experiences and personal knowledge also tell me that when it comes to what anyone else does, my entire obligation is to shut the hell up and let people do what they do. And personal contacts (some intimate, as I’ve mentioned) have taught me that my own moralizing or presumptions don’t mean shit. My personal feelings aside – what two people do on their own time is entirely their own business and nobody else’s.
Too bad more people don’t know this.
(BTW, having dated a working girl, as a BF more or less, was a monumental educational experience; it opened up a world of human experience I’d have sadly missed out on otherwise. I never realized what a dick I could be until she so blithely and elegantly put me in my place; all the while, she was also enjoying every second we spent together. Both non-judgmental, she was, and with profound humility. I still maintain, the only “whore” I’ve ever known in person was one of the best people I’ve ever known).
Just want to say that as a “wild woman” who was promiscuous (gasp!…eyeroll) for several years that you can be wild and want NO part of prostitution. The thinking that you might as well charge, what’s the difference, etc., doesn’t sit well with me. I purposely kept my sex only friendships as FREE as possible. Like I’ve stated before (how many times?…wink) that there are women who break the evil dating game rules. Please realize not all in college are promiscuous. I’m proof of this and so is Sailor Barsoom. I really wish if wild women would GET MENTIONED MORE. I’m thinking when I start my website (want to meet that goal by the end of this year) maybe it should be a topic for me to cover. There’s more categories of women than prostitutes and the 1’s who follow the dating game EVIL rules.
I wasn’t promiscuous in college because I was poor and didn’t have any special charisma that made women disregard my lack of wealth. I’d’ve cheerfully done Saffron and Tran and Sheneka and Tracy and Pakeim and Debby and Tina and Lisa and Shelly and …
@Joyce,
Expecting full honesty from everyone is unreasonable.
No human is ever fully honest. More importantly, humans are frequently dishonest with themselves. This makes them dishonest with each other.
There are vast and complicated and contingent reasons for both honesty and dishonesty.
Expecting every man to be honest about affairs or sex is to forget what it is to be male. The same works the other way around, too.
It’s just not reasonable to expect complete honesty.
Hence – systems of trust. We build them up, along with expectations. It’s when expectations don’t match systems that we get a problem.
Actually, full honestly has been shown in 1 case (Jesus). He never lied. Please note I’m going by the Biblical record on Him only here. Yes, I know many are convinced He’s God and how can we have that standard? I say this: how about you try your hardest to HAVE that standard? Why not try? I get so tired of: well, people just can’t do that. It’ll never work. The standard of the world doesn’t fit that. I’ll be seen as strange, etc. ###*** all that! How about you resolve to have a certain standard and then work your hardest to meet it? If you don’t meet it, then at least hold yourself accountable and be accountable to others. I’m NOT saying everyone can BE just like Christ was in this area. It doesn’t work that way. People have to put effort into it. How about trying it? Why not? Why give into the defeatist thinking? Men can’t do the honesty thing? Really? I know 1 very well who’s disproven that 1. I’ve known others also and have read about some too. It’s a cop out to say: well, I’m a man or I’m a woman so that automatically means I can’t be honest about sex. That’s like saying: I was abused so that means I can’t ever trust anyone again. You won’t trust anyone again if you don’t choose to fight it/change it and then at LEAST try to change. No one is perfect, yes, but because of that do we just say don’t bother? Even when people lie, they CAN own up to it and make it as right as possible later. People can also BREAK patterns of lying. This has been proven by many past alcoholics. I think it’s wonderful that Joyce is saying there IS a different standard out there. Yes, some never break their patterns of lies. But, that should never stop those who set a different standard and then practice it. Thanks for listening.
Laura Thank You,
Gorb definitely has a (Different standard).
He posted “Expecting full honesty from everyone is unreasonable” He then goes on and say we cannot expect men to be honest about affairs and sex….LOL! No just let them put us at risk of death because HE is a MAN…..Not sure why his post are allowed, but I think I am catching on.
He only proves he is dishonest on this board.
Would you not love to be the lucky lady he is marrying????…LOL!
Hugs………..Joyce
His posts are “allowed” because they are reasonable and do not attack people. I don’t generally censor posts, but I DO delete ones which violate my rules (see “house rules” link in right column), and one of those is that I won’t tolerate ad hominems and accusations. I don’t have to agree with a post to allow it; I disagree with a lot of what Laura writes, but she’s respectful and doesn’t call names so I’ve never deleted even one of her posts except the time she duplicated one by mistake.
Joyce, I’m not sure is reading comprehension is difficult for you, but –
I pointed out that full and complete honesty from anyone – male or female – is almost never possible.
People do things for all kinds of reasons. Simplistic honesty may be nice, but I’ve never known one woman who could be honest with herself or others all the time; neither have I known a single man who was capable of this.
Your moralizing seems to be black and white: Two-Dimensional.
Good/Bad.
If you reflect on your own life experiences, and the experiences of those you know, you’ll find: situations can radically alter moral circumstances.
Just because YOU’VE never known these people doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Yes, some in the world DO see some things as good/bad. THE HORROR! Eyeroll…we don’t want any part of the “situational ethics” ###***. I could write a LOT about the damage that stuff has done. Actually, just read about serial killers and other types of murder cases and you’ll see what I mean. It isn’t just with murders either that thinking/practice can and has REALLY hurt people. It’s really disgusting how people who believe in moral absolutes and practice that as best as they can get a lot of ###***. Something else that’s not pointed out enough: you can hate something and STILL BE FOR DECRIMINALIZING IT. An example is Congressman Ron Paul. He personally wants nothing to do with drugs and prostitution (I’m the same way). But, he’s FOR decriminalizing BOTH. I’m with him on this also. Also, Paul is a Christian. But, I thought they all hate prostitutes personally, etc.? RIGHT! Some want to have a different standard and they ARE out there.
Laura, please. You know full and damn well that circumstances can alter the rightness or wrongness of a particular action. For instance, you and I would both agree that lying isn’t moral, but there are times when it is. The classic example is “if the Nazis asked you where Anne Frank was hiding.” Even something as drastic as deliberately killing another human being is situational: if some bastard attacked you, don’t doubt for a second that I would kill his ass dead to protect you. Furthermore, that would be the right thing for me to do. Not just that I wouldn’t go to prison or get the DP for it, but it would be my only moral course of action. The real world is a complicated place.
OK, I know I could have been clearer here: when I was talking about the lying thing, I was talking about it in RELATIONSHIPS. I wasn’t talking about hiding people from Nazis OR murder cases, even self-defense 1’s, OK? I’m an inter-family MVS and you’ve learned how many ###*** me and others have to deal with a lot of the time who do OVER simplify our cases, recovery, etc. This goes for EVERY OTHER category of MVS also. Also, please note that in cases of TRUE self-defense (like the type you described) that MANY prosecutors through time have shown themselves to be reasonable. I could scream my head off at the ###*** that’s very popular these days: all the prosecutors are just in it for their egos, power trip, etc. They don’t truly care about each case and the components of it. NO! There’s at least a few who are wonderful people who are in it for the RIGHT reasons. I’m sorry I wasn’t clearer. I’m with you on the Nazi thing by the way. 1 thing I love to read about is the people who did hide people from them PLUS any who worked against the Nazis and also against their love/practice of ###*** eugenics. I’d fight for you also if someone attacked you. You know I still have that bad habit at times of not being as clear as possible in my posts. At least it’s happening less! My goal is for it to never happen.
I know you’re on the side of the angels, baby. You just need to be reminded some times that your horse is getting high.
Um… that didn’t come out right. I guess your horse is for decriminalizing Mary Warner, lol.
Joyce,
You have an unsophisticated and far too simplistic way of viewing the world. The world doesn’t accord to simple rules and people are infinitely variable. Each and every situation is unique. At best, “moral rules” are guidelines that direct us to observe good behavior. But like all rules, they’re very easy to bend out of shape; sometimes, people fail, sometimes situations push people past threshold points.
Two situations:
Friend’s wife stopped having sex with him and focused wholly on children. At 33, his sex life was over. He endured this for two years, then got a lover. His wife never found out. We all know. He saw her for 5 years. His wife barely ever has sex with him – and thinks it’s okay. In fact, she basically uses him as a wallet and doesn’t really interact with him as a human being, though he tries pretty damned hard. He’s arranged holidays, couple-only time, etc. – she’s not really keen but goes along. For her, nothing in the world exists outside of her children. She never talks about any subject other than her kids. She’s uninterested in anything – even from her husband’s life – but her kids. Nothing else figures for her.
So he cheated on her.
She’s said that if a man cheats, he’s an asshole and a monster. Any woman should divorce him and throw him to the dogs, take him for everything he’s worth. AND YET she’s utterly uninterested in her husband – or in anything else, for that matter.
They saw a counselor for a year. The counselor basically blamed my friend for everything. He needed to try harder, do more – he’s been lamenting his wife’s near-total fixation on one thing for years. She complains that he won’t help out at home – but when he tries, all she does is accuse him of being incompetent. You didn’t do this right; I have to do everything myself.
OKAY
So he cheated.
But the wife is basically neglecting him completely. They have, after years of marriage, no relationship except what they share with their kids. And the guy loves her. He’s devoted, otherwise. But sexually so frustrated he doesn’t know what to do. And HE HAS SPOKEN WITH HER ABOUT IT.
She’s said this to him on every occasion: She has no idea what the big deal is. Their marriage is great!
You tell me how much blame this guy should get. You tell me.
Joyce: Situation 2:
Man and woman get married. After about 3 years, he loses interest in sleeping with her. Their sex life stops, more or less. They have sex maybe 4 times a year.
She cheats with a series of men. The list is so vast, it’s actually hard to calculate. One of them was me. It was on-going.
Is it her fault her husband wont’ touch her? I can vouch for her attractiveness.
Joyce; Situation 3:
Woman was very attractive. From 25 to 35, she put on about 80 lbs. Her husband was very good about looking after himself. She just let herself go.
He honestly tried to be sexually interested in her, but even i had to agree – she was no longer attractive, *at all*. Dont’ talk to me about how we need to accept fat people – or about True Love – or anything like that: His physiological response to her, programmed into his brain, *would not comply with his wishes*. His penis would not play the game.
They had no kids.
So: he started an affair with a much more attractive woman who was not as attractive as his wife had been before she became obese. It continued until his wife got frustrated and left.
IRONICALLY
After divorce, she went to a gym, looked after herself and got back into shape. Shockingly, *ONLY THEN* did men show interest in her.
And yet, to this day, she calls her ex husband a jerk, an asshole and a Size-ist monster for rejecting her sexually.
So is it his fault or hers? Or just something that happened?
Not so easy, is it?
Gorb,
I never mentioned ANYTHING to you about fat women or anything else. Are you on CRACK???? You are very sick!!!!
In the case you mentioned above…IF IT IS TRUE, which you admit you are not honest anyway and cannot be expected to be, why did he just not divorce her BEFORE dipping his wick???
I have seen many case of the reverse, but at least the most of women stand with him and help him loose the weight or they divorce him before they cheat.
See FOR ME it is in fact VERY EASY!!!
Now leave me alone. I did not post to you. I was looking for the other post to respond to …Laura and Sailor. Laura I agree on the DP, if they can prove 100% through confession, video, DNA, Witnesses etc…then yes excute them for certain crimes. Yes no one really knows the pain until it is THEIR family.
Sailor…You want drugs legal too? On your post…There are millions of OWI arrest on the roads every year. My brother got nailed several times and thank God before he killed himself or some innocent person. OWI…Operating while imparied can be on a scooter or mowing your own lawn with a lawn mower. I personally do not care as long as they stay home and do not harm another. I do not care if they OD and die, THAT IS IN FACT (THEIR) BUSINESS, but when they take out into public, on foot, or peddle car, it affects others and becomes everyones business. Making drugs legal only means more innocent people are harmed or killed.
Maybe because of people like you the cops always scream DRUGS AND PROSTITUTION!!!! I have never used drugs in my life and have no desire too.
Cops watch this board just as the do othre boards. They get ideas and strategy from the postings.
It has gotten so crazy on here that I will not be back on. Each time I get on email my inbox is full of this insanity.
I finally got everthing printed off to save so I see no need to continue with this.
I wish all of you the best, sorry I could not find all the post that were directed to me to reply to.
Again , I offer that Prostitution is NOT a victimless crime, Prostituion can be be deadly and is a crime in most of the united states. I hope everyone will use caution and remember HONESTY!!!!
The country is broke, we cannot take care of our elderly, our homeless, our orphans, our vets etc…And here you people sit…GORB, talking about evil women, how you never had to pay for sex and how abused men are…GET A FUCKING LIFE Dude. Some people do not care about your 4 page post on simple lies and the other BS. You will change NOTHING, You will affect NO ONE.
No responses because I cannot recieve them, nor do I want to.
Blessing to you Laura, the one of very few sane ones that post here.
JOYCE
Yes, you CAN divorce BEFORE you’re with someone else! WOW! What a concept! But, the 1’s with the instant gratification mentality and entitlement mentality don’t want that. It’s ME 1ST and that’s how it is! Others be damned: I want what I want when I want it and ###*** anyone who stands in the way or speaks out against it. Do these people think they’re going to self-destruct or something if they don’t get all they want right when they want it? It’s like the mentality of I won’t wait to have sex until I’m on birth control. I want to do it NOW! Then, 9 month later…
I totally disagree. People who refuse to divorce are not usually the “me first” type, but rather the opposite. There’s a reason the US has the highest divorce rates in the world, and it certainly isn’t because most of us are so very unselfish.
I could have been clearer. Sorry I wasn’t. I was talking specifically about the cases that Gorbachev brought up and was agreeing with Joyce on her take on 1 of the cases. I personally hate this divorce for any reason ###***. Too many couples don’t even try. They have 1 fight and run from the commitment. Very sad. They don’t even consider any form of counseling. I think the US divorce rate has a huge amount to do with plain selfishness. However, there’s also cases where the couple HAS tried everything, including counseling, and it’s just not working. The stick with the person no matter what thing in SOME cases leads to violence. I know this 1st hand.
Apparently, Joyce will never read this, nor post here again. This is too bad, because when she wasn’t TWE (typing while enraged) she had some good points to make, and some questions to make a body think. Since some of the above was directed towards me, I will answer, both on the off chance that she does read it and in case anybody else cares to know my answer.
I certainly think that driving, operating heavy machinery, etc. while under the influence of drugs should remain a crime, and should carry heavy penalties. I never said otherwise. Just because I think that drugs should be legal doesn’t mean that I think running people over while driving in a purple haze should also be legal. Laura would call that an ASS-umption, so hey.
Seeing as there is an entire political party (Libertarian) largely built around the ideas that taxes should be low and that both prostitution and drugs should be decriminalized, I seriously doubt that any cop is reading any post I’ve made here and saying, “Oh my God! both drugs AND prostitution!?! I never thought of that!!”
Maybe the reason he didn’t simply divorce her was that he was afraid of being taken to the cleaners by a court system which still hasn’t figured out that women can earn their own money.
Is there anyone physically restraining these people from getting a DIVORCE? Are they tied up or handcuffed and can’t get outside? Seriously? If people don’t have a lot of $ there’s organizations that can help them get a divorce. They could also stay with family/friends while they save up $ for a divorce if needed. “Shockingly, *ONLY THEN* did men show interest in her”. Is this how you think it is with women AND men who are big? If so…my experience and that of other big women contradict that.
Laura, you know divorce isn’t that easy, nor is it desirable in all cases. Very common situation: A couple who gets along in every way BUT sexually, so the man sees whores to let off steam. Nobody knows, the wife gets the amount of sex she wants, the kids are happy and the couple gets along socially. But you’re saying they should subject the kids to divorce, enrich lawyers, wreck their finances and give up their whole relationship just because he wants more sex than she does? That’s as ridiculous as selling a car you love at a loss because the seats need reupholstering. 🙁
Maggie. You’re so reasonable.
What’s interesting about all of your positions is your general tendency to accomodate.
Accomodation is a concept foreign to those with no moral ambiguities.
Thanks, Gorbachev! Accommodation is the pragmatic approach, and I’m nothing if not pragmatic. 🙂
Pragmatism is the key to being decent.
Ideologues of every stripe need to remember this.
BTW, I have an interesting note. In Korea now; I just had dinner tonight with my ex of many moons ago. The one who was to get married to the Aussie dude.
They got married a few months ago. He’s moving to Korea. Not only does he not find her former line of work not shameful, he’s told his small extended family and they couldn’t care less. She’s amazed at the cultural flexibility of Westerners
GREAT blanket statement! I could name at least a few examples of people who practice moral absolutes in some areas of their lives but don’t in ALL areas. I’m 1 of them. WOW! But, I thought this would be a foreign concept to me? For some reason it hasn’t been for a lot of years. It reminds me of another great blanket statement of yours: fundamentalists are working hand in hand with the government. Really? Funny, but why are there at least a few Christian preachers who don’t do this at all? In other words, they don’t have any political involvement of any kind. Some of them speak AGAINST having any political involvement. They don’t want any part of it. There’s also Christians who speak out AGAINST the 1’s who do want to work politically TO run peoples’ lives unfairly. Yes, there are some preachers who have worked to be politically involved in a bad way (Jerry Falwell and Tim LaHaye are 2 examples. LaHaye is still misleading people, unfortunately, and not just with the political stuff). But, not ALL of them. Statements like “fundamentalists are working hand in hand with government” are so broad it’s not fair to those in that group who DON’T do that. Congressman Ron Paul is a great example to bring up again here. He’s been in Congress for a long time and he’s FOR decriminalization of drugs and prostitution. He’s a Christian in his personal life. Since he’s already in government, he’d have the perfect setting to work with the 1’s NOT like him, wouldn’t he? He hasn’t changed his stands on decriminalization despite this. He’s also for gay marriage. But, I thought the fundamentalists are always out gay bashing, slandering gays, saying God hates them, etc.? HHHMMM…Paul isn’t and neither are many others (like me). These kind of statements remind me of 1’s like “atheists don’t have morals”. That’s a GREAT 1 also! So broad it’s unfair and plain WRONG in at least some cases. Unfortunately, the atheist people get this stuff also.
Laura, I think the phrase “no moral ambiguities” was pretty clear. “No ambiguities” means “none”, not “some”. 😐
Here’s 1 of my faults that still needs work on display. Thanks for the correction. I apologize. He did say “no”. This fault of mine is I read things early in the day and should read them twice BEFORE answering. Again, sorry about this. I still have short-term memory and concentration problems from PTSD and because both of these things are better I get complacent sometimes and don’t read stuff twice when I’m not 100% alert.
Careful with that horse, Babe. He’s starting to worry me.
See apology and explanation above. Thank you for keeping me straight when I need it. I don’t ever want to make a fool of myself to the degree I did online a few years ago with the board I was on staff on. I let the ###*** on there get to me way too much and they reveled in it. I gave them what they wanted. Thanks again.
It’s OK. We all need a rudder from time to time. Sometimes I’m your rudder, sometimes you’re mine. Actually, a few times I’ve needed a rudder, a couple of ailerons, maybe some…
You’ve been my whole atmospheric control surface system a couple of times, haven’t you Babe?
OK, I should have been clearer here also. I’m talking specifically about the cases Gorbachev brought up. From what I got reading about them it looked like the couples had done all they could and it wasn’t working.
The above was my answer to Maggie, re: her post starting out with “Laura, you know divorce isn’t that easy…”
Joyce:
And on men and women. You seem to think that men are dogs and women are little angels.
It is to laugh.
And as far as cheating goes, I agree, women may do it less than men–
But women who cheat are absolutely not rare. I’ve been the man they cheated with on any number of occasions.
And when women cheat, it’s usually much more serious. A man can have sex with a woman and it can mean nothing – nothing at all. Physical release, fun, etc. Women CAN do this – but by and large, when *women* cheat, it means the end of a marriage. And it’s almost always the woman who leaves the man – not the other way around.
Men and women are similar – but also different.
When I was with married women, I noticed a huge difference between what men would do (generally) and what the women were saying to me.
Men, when pressed, will admit what they did was wrong or they’ll say whatever: but they’ll rarely justify it. They say: I shouldn’t do it, I need to keep it a secret. I’m Bad. I can’t help it. I’m a Bad person. But, anyway, they usually accept the guilt.
By and large, every married woman I’ve been with (and this is substantial) has morally excused herself in some way. They never took responsibility for their own decisions. The difference was so absolute – so stark, so clear, and so universal – that it’s hard for a man sleeping with a married woman not to notice it right away. Women make up excuses for themselves and seem to rationalize this behavior almost universally.
When a man cheat, it’s his fault. And when a woman cheats, other people look over and say – what was wrong with the man?
This is a cross-cultural phenomenon. I noticed it in Korea, much more traditional, and France. I noticed it in the US and China.
Men who cheat are bad. Women who cheat have some excuse.
I can detect a lot of the same general tone in what you write. I suspect you’re not conscious of it. You should step outside yourself and read what you write as if you were a neutral third-party.
In bed, to me women have said: My husband is too busy; my husband is boring; my husband is uninteresting now; I married my husband for the wrong reasons; my husband is blah blah blah. When with a woman who was cheating on her BF or husband, not once has a woman said:
“I really shouldn’t be here, I’m a bad person for cheating.”
But when I’ve cheated I’ve said this. I’ve ALSO usually owned up to it to my Significant Other: I don’t believe in lying, largely because it makes things more complicated.
On the other hand, I’m not going to judge others for it, either.
I’ve cheated on GFs before. When I was married, I didn’t cheat; my wife did. Lo and behold, the cheating wasn’t her fault. She got “wanderlust” and was curious. She was tempted. But it wasn’t her fault. She went to great lengths to excuse her own behavior. Other people asked me why my wife cheated. How the hell should *I*know? As if there was something wrong with ME that caused her to cheat. It’s not like I was boring or bad in bed: My wife admitted long after our marriage dissolved that I was likely her best lover, ever, to a neutral acquaintance. But still, people ask if I left her or she left me. She cheated on me. So they ask: What did you do wrong?
In fact, I did nothing wrong. But somehow, virtually everyone wondered : what did the MAN do wrong?
When I cheated on a long-term GF, I admitted to myself that it was *entirely* my fault. I chose to do it; I owned the choice. It had nothing to do with her. When I told her what happened, I said as much. Believe it or not, she accepted this. We ended up breaking up for other reasons, but my being honest made a big difference.
What was shocking to me was how the women I slept with who happened to be taken (or married) could rationalize everything.
I’m NOT saying men are morally superior: men cheat a lot. Seriously, monogamous men are almost non-existent. Any man who actually has options is almost incapable of not exercising them. If you think otherwise, then you have no idea what men are all about. It takes great fortitude or – FEAR of the consequences – for men with any kind of sex drive to not act on good options when he has them. This is a hard fact of biology.
And sex for men is a compulsion. It’s not some fun thing to do from time to time. My sex drive is powerful and my SO loves it: But it’s very clear that I’ve got the more powerful sex drive. She would be happy with half the sex we have right now. One ex was happy with sex once a month. Almost NO MAN I HAVE EVER KNOWN would be happy with sex once a month.
I’m just pointing out that my personal experience of men and women is pretty broad.
it’s taught me one thing:
I no longer believe our culture when it comes to male and female realities. There are big differences.
If you want to be able to appreciate men and women for what they are, you should try to step outside your bubble from time to time and see the world for the diverse place it really is.
Joyce,
and one final note:
There must be some reason prostitutes exist. If all men are Amoral Jerks and Can’t Be Trusted, then perhaps – just perhaps – there’s something wrong with our one-size-fits-all morality.
Let me put it to you this way:
When it comes to sex, men and women have to
stop telling each other what to do.
In fact, when it comes to pretty much everything, people have to stop telling each other what to do.
And if you’re a woman (which you are), and you think you need to have control over your man’s sexuality, you’d damned well better be able to match and deliver it.
There’s nothing more frustrating than being in a relationship when your partner is a sexual mismatch. And this is true for both men and women. Lots of women I know are deeply frustrated that their men have lost interest in having sex (with them). And hordes of men are frustrated because their wives are no longer attractive to them.
In a way, biology is a cruel social mistress. Men are attracted to youth; women to status and power. This isn’t absolute; a hot body is awesome for men and women. But women are more likely to be attracted to older men than men are to be attracted to older women. Men are more physically activated by sex; by and large, women can be attracted to otherwise physically unattractive men who have powerful compensating factors (like money; status; deep charm; intelligence; etc.).
I’m sorry to say it, but when it comes to The Penis, it’s a much more simple process. Youth and beauty.
So when a man marries a woman his own age, and they start to get older, it’s like a cruel joke biology plays on them both: he wants to be attracted to her. But in his 55 year-old brain, HE STILL WANTS NUBILE 22-YEAR OLDS.
She might be quite satisfied with a 55-year-old who loves her.
These are not absolutes, and people vary widely; love is no small thing. But when we’re talking about male sex drives, and female sex drives, the ratio of what makes one tingle is different.
I love beautiful women. I love beauty. But the woman in my past who I lament the loss of most wasn’t the most beautiful. That said, my raw physical reaction to, say, my 23 year-old lover (when I was 34) was intense. It was physically overwhelming. Almost overpowering.
Women experience this, too. But statistically, the averages are different.
So human sexuality is: Not equal; highly variable for each individual; variable over TIME for each individual; variable by circumstances.
How the hell are you going to come up with a consistent morality that serves something so intractably capricious and yet systematically consistent as human sexuality?
You want one rule to govern everyone all the time?
Give me a break. Humans aren’t wired that way.
I know women who fuck like wild dogs and can’t resist the slightest temptation. I know men who are the same. Honestly I know more men like this than women, but individuals vary widely.
I also know men and women both who are basically uninterested in sex at all.
I know women addicted to female porn (romance novels) and men addicted to male porn (visual stimulation).
Men are usually more sexually voracious than women. But the working-girl I dated for 5 months was a sexually voracious young lady: despite her work, she was always more than happy to have sex. She loved it. More than any woman I’ve ever been with, she had absurd stamina.
But she was an exception.
Most of the men I know complain about insufficient sex in relationships. This is true for almost everyone I’ve ever known.
It makes me wonder: Perhaps I should have gotten over my prejudice and held on to the little firebrand I had in my hands years ago. One thing for sure: The bedroom would never have been dull.
But it’s not that simple, is it?
Laura and Joyce,
I’ll credit you both with one thing: Despite the fact that you morally disagree with something, you don’t want it criminalized. This is the only thing that really matters.
You’re willing to let other people lead their own lives.
But Laura –
Just get a divorce?
Please. Life is incredibly complicated. Emotions are incredibly complicated. It’s not as simple as saying “If X then Y!”
Life is almost never like that. Ever. For anyone.
If you think it is, then either you haven’t seen much or you’re deliberately fooling yourself.
Humans are vast complexes of conflicting emotions, motivations, desires and needs. How anything is going to work out in any individual situation for a particular individual is perhaps predictable statistically – but for a unique individual, you have no idea where in that statistical trend they’ll find themselves.
One thing that is quite predictable:
Men and women will always be cheating on each other. Some people are unsuited to monogamy. Almost no-one can be honest about this. Many of the people unsuited to monogamy are female, not just male.
Then there’s serial monogamy. A lot of people aren’t monogamous even though they seem to be. They have many lovers over time – just not at the same time.
For some arbitrary reason, you think that having 20 lovers in a lifetime is fine, so long as they don’t overlap. Another person might have only 3 – but they might be concurrent.
For you, in your absolute moral mindset, one situation is acceptable, while one is not.
I can come up with dozens of others.
My point is:
Your morality is arbitrary and based on nothing more than someone else’s. There’s no “greater truth” in yours.
When you start to judge everyone without taking into account their specific, unique circumstances, you lose all sense of justice.
Morality is nice, but humans are complex and rarely fit into any one system.
Think about it.
Both Laura and I are fine with three concurrent lovers. Neither of us us currently has such a situation, but it’s well withing our agreement.
THANK YOU! You beat me to saying this and thank you for that! It’s truly funny that this ASS-umption was made because I’ve posted over and over (on purpose) how I saw others for sex only friendships for years. You also met 2 of my friends where I had sex with you and them in the same few hours (gasp!). Sounds like I didn’t want to be with you plus them in the same time period (eyeroll). I remember Joyce pointed out at least once that she’d had arrangements and/or currently had 1.
You’ve been breathing some fire lately, Honey Bun. You do sort of come across as a, well, not your real self when you do that.
I’m not the only 1 who breathes fire on here…wink. Actually, I see that as mostly a positive. This place could be filled with people who are willfully ignorant and don’t care about ANY issues. I work with at least a few of those, unfortunately. If anyone on here thinks I’m being outright mean to anyone, they’re welcome to confront me about it.
Oh dear baby jesus wtf is up with all the running in circles. Firstly, unsafe sex, period, is not victimless. Hell, even safe sax is not always victimless. Life, dear people, is not victimless. And at the risk of sounding like a complete ass, DEAL WITH IT!
People make stupid choices all the time. They drive drunk, they play with guns, they experiment with drugs, they try to fix their hot water heater without turning off the electricity. EVEN IF the only person that was directly injured was the person committing the act, and it cost them their life, it is still not victimless.
So Joyce, and this comment is especially for you since you are truly being a loud mouthed fool, SHUT YOUR IGNORANT PIE HOLE! Hundreds if not thousands of people are injured or killed every day doing normal routing things, like getting showers for instance. If someone getting injured or killed is the criteria by which we are label something a crime and sentence someone to death, then we will start with you. As I assume you drive a vehicle, which poisons are fresh air and water with cancer causing agents, and you use electricity(most likely non-green), which further pollutes and poisons the community air, and you also probably use lots of plastics and reems of other things to numerous to list that have resulted in people being diagnosed with cancer, heavy metal poisoning, radiation poisoning, or other death sentences. You should be the first to die.
Just to see if you can stand up to your own hypocritical brand of loud-mouthed ignorant justice.
To everyone else, have a nice day 🙂
Just wondering: do YOU drive a car, use plastics, use electricity?
We all do, and that’s the point. If you are going to start demanding the DP for anything that could end up getting somebody killed (that airplane I’m getting on, it could crash on top of somebody), then we should all be executed. Which would be silly.
Of course I do. Hell, I discover the oil that you put in your car. But then again, I am not the one making the call for the death penalty for making a mistake. The point is, Laura, that nearly every human action has consequences that have the potential to negatively impact another human life, even silly little day to day things that we give not thought to what-so-ever.
When was the last time you considered that your diet would lead to diabetes or heart disease and that your friends/family deprived of your existence could be considered victims of your lack of foresight? Your enjoyment of a doughnut and coffee is not a victimless crime.
The only difference between Joyce’s example and the example of your doughnut and coffee is paperwork. That’s it. One has been put on paper as illegal, the other has not.
Lack of foresight, according to Joyce, is what the boy and girl in her example should be be given the DP for. My point was to illustrate the sheer lunacy of that by pointing out that by those standards, we all deserve to die, which, not so incidentally is a very Judeo Christian mindset. We are all sinners and “..the wages sin pays is death.”
Dear Tony, yes, there’s many things we do that HAVE risk in them. But, what about doing things in our personal lives to avoid hurting others as much as possible? That’s 1 thing Joyce was talking about. An example is you CAN have a relationship WITHOUT lies and hiding. Yes, there are risks with many things all of us do every day. But, when we do things where we have to make a CHOICE before we do them, what about a different standard? Like think of the others involved?
PS Sorry if that came across as a rant, but as an American that routine globetrots for work, I have become increasingly intolerant of the attitudes pervading America like the one that Joyce was espousing. So, I apologize if my remarks seem out of line.
If prostitution and drugs were legal, the government would be able to help regulate them. It would not be 100% effective, but nothing ever is. It would lead to an environment that would be safer for the women, safer for the clients, and safer for the spouses of the clients.
As long as humans are susceptible to diseases, and as long as they are irresponsible about who they sleep with, using protection, and getting tested on a regular basis, this will be an issue. Which is to say, it will be an issue forever.
Incidentally Joyce, if the girl that the boy in your example with had been tested with false negative results prior to sleeping with him, and the boy, as you mentioned tested false negative, and only the girlfriend tested positive and died 6 months later(unlikely), how can you hold the boy and girl responsible if they did not know. By the way, from the way you told it, I would be much more inclined to think that the girl that died within 6 months actually transmitted the disease to her boyfriend and then from him to the girl he slept with, not the other way around. AIDs I do not recall ever seeing a case study of an AIDs patient dying within six months of catching the disease.
http://www.aidsmap.com/New-criteria-proposed-for-late-HIV-diagnosis/page/1437561/
Thank you for the link. It was an interesting article. However..
You are actually making my point for me Laura. The article you linked was referring specifically to [b]late diagnosis with high risk of death within 3 months.[/b] This supports the theory that the girl that died was the most likely transmitter of the disease, that she gave it to her boyfriend, and that he in turn gave it to the girl he cheated with. If that were the case, then the girl Joyce would have been guilty of sending two ‘victims’ to their death because of her zealot attitude.
“In an article published in the online edition of AIDS, the researchers suggest that [b]patients who have a CD4 cell count below 350 cells/mm3[/b]– the current threshold for starting HIV treatment – [b]at the time of their HIV diagnosis should be defined as having a late diagnosis.[/b]
[b]The presence at diagnosis of factors associated with a high risk of death within three months[/b]– a CD4 cell count below 200 cells/mm3 or an AIDS-defining illness –[b] should, the investigators propose, be described as presentation with “advanced HIV disease”. [/b]”
Dear Tony, you’re welcome on the link. I put that up to show there have been people with AIDS who died less than 6 months after diagnosis. I didn’t read it as carefully as you did. Thanks for pointing out what you found from it!
You should of course know that the college he is a Professor at is John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York which has a long standing relationship with law enforcement which might explain the quality of his ignorance.
(Know it’s an old post but just wanted to get that out there)