Unless we include a job as part of every citizen’s right to autonomy and personal fulfillment, women will continue to be vulnerable to someone else’s idea of what “need” is. – Gloria Steinem
I always find it fascinating when women in professions which are only barely different from prostitution (such as stripping or domination) or historically connected to prostitution (such as acting and massage) get all holier-than-thou, proclaiming themselves “better” than we are or even attacking us as “criminals” or “degenerates” or whatever. Some of them even become actively involved in prohibition, in an obvious attempt to distance themselves from us and pretend that their jobs are not remotely similar. Recently, A.K. Smith called to my attention this example from the June issue of Massage Today; though I can completely sympathize with any profession wanting to prevent credential fraud, the author’s wounded, self-righteous tone reveals this as a mere cloak for an anti-whore philippic.
For decades, the massage profession has battled the stereotype that it is a front for prostitution. While the occasional bad apple can still be found in the bunch, the profession has made significant strides in recent years to combat this false belief. Hospitals and health care centers nationwide have begun to embrace massage as a compliment to their traditional medical practices and most states have established licensing criteria for professionals who have the proper education and skills to become legitimate practitioners.
Right, and in civilized countries nursing homes have begun to embrace prostitution as a means of satisfying the needs of their patients for sex and companionship, and many of those countries have licensing criteria for prostitutes as well. So by the author’s own logic, that makes our profession every bit as “legitimate” as hers. I might also point out that if our profession were decriminalized, nobody would need to use hers or any other as a “front”.
Nevertheless, criminals have continued to sully the profession’s good name and in California an investigation by the state’s certification board has uncovered their latest tactic: phony massage school transcripts. Amazingly, prior to the investigation by California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC), it was legal to sell a fake transcript in the state. Transcripts – along with criminal history records – are key credentials in the state’s massage therapist certification system that allows therapists to practice legally. The investigation began when the CAMTC discovered patterns in which certain “schools” seemed to have large numbers of graduating student[s] with prostitution arrest records. Armed [with] this and information from other sources, the CAMTC brought in an undercover investigator who would discover that these “graduates,” mostly women of South Asian and South American descent, were part of a vast network of human traffickers profiting from prostitution.
Since it’s no longer fashionable to attack whores as criminals merely for being whores, the author dresses them up as “human traffickers” instead. And not just plain old garden variety “traffickers” either, oh no! They were “part of a vast network”! You saw it here first, readers; the California Massage Therapy Council did what the FBI couldn’t: uncover PROOF of a “vast network” of traffickers! Maybe we should put the CAMTC in charge of federal criminal investigations, since they’re so good at it.
The undercover investigator found that human traffickers were selling phony massage school transcripts so prostitutes could pose as legitimate therapists and work or operate massage parlors that are nothing more than fronts…”Police departments who work with us, gave us every prostitution arrest along with the name of the schools they claimed they had gone to,” said the investigator. Information was also obtained from the National Certification Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork, as well as states like Texas that maintain close records of prostitution arrests.
The horror! The horror! We’ve gotta keep them dirty whores out of every other profession…oops, I mean rescue them from human trafficking by preventing their holding down other jobs in the future…oops, I mean rescue them from enslavement by keeping them out of trained jobs so they can only work the most menial…hmmmm…what do I mean?
At a visit to one of these “schools,” the investigator was taken to the back to meet with the Assistant School Director. “This one in particular looked nothing like a school. It was an ordinary house. Not to be stereotyping, but she looked like a madam with very provocative clothing and makeup. I told her I was interested in (buying a transcript) and she said ‘yes, no problem’ and asked me to come back in a few days with a check,” said the investigator. “Some operated that way, at others, I was in and out with a transcript in two hours”…The investigator told Massage Today that in one waiting room, there were “many young women of Asian descent dressed provocatively.” The investigator also said several of the bogus schools that came under scrutiny were also clearly houses of prostitution. “At this one place, it was pretty obvious they were conducting prostitution on the premises. The men who ran the place were lecherous and disgusting and had no qualms about commenting on my appearance,” the investigator said. “In one of the schools, I was in an office with a sliding door to the exterior. Men kept coming in that way saying they were there for massage appointments, but they looked and acted like johns,” the investigator said…
My jaw literally dropped on reading this section; I’m picturing the writer as a 90-year-old schoolmarm clutching her pearls. The pervasive racism of the entire article, the obsession with the women’s clothing, the use of tortured phraseology (“conducting prostitution on the premises”), the incredible subjectivity of the “investigator’s” statements (“the men…were lecherous and disgusting”) and the asinine 19th century stereotypes (how does she know what a so-called “john” looks or acts like? Personal experience perhaps?) would make me think this whole article was a bad joke if it hadn’t been published in an actual trade publication; I honestly had to check to make sure I wasn’t reading The Onion. But what do I know about prostitution? I obviously can’t be a “real” madam, because I’m not Asian or South American and don’t wear “very provocative clothing and makeup.”
Excellent as always, Maggie.
In my opinion, government licensing is completely illegitimate. Anyone should be able to hang out a shingle to perform any type of service. Of course, fraudulent representation of credentials is and should be a crime, but if someone wants to represent him/herself as a surgeon with no actual training or experience, very cheap, let the buyer beware!
Government licensing is a front for protectionist policies that serve to insulate fat lazy existing practitioners from competition. Begone!
Very true. After the first nineteen or twenty patients die after what should have been basic surgical procedures, everyone will know not to go to that surgeon any more. Well, except for people new in town.
Even newcomers will do their best, often successfully, to determine who is a hack and who provides good service. The very first words one might utter upon arriving: “I’ve got a terrible toothache. Saw a sign from somebody named Dredge; is he good?” The local might respond, “Avoid Dredge like the plague! There’s a better dentist, Jones, on 4th street.”
It’s imperfect, of course: the local might BE Jones or an ally of Jones. Or might falsely believe that Jones is particularly competent when he is not. But word does tend to travel quickly, and the odds of being better informed after even a brief conversation are pretty high.
The horror! The horror! We’ve gotta keep them dirty whores out of every other profession…oops, I mean rescue them from human trafficking by preventing their holding down other jobs in the future…oops, I mean rescue them from enslavement by keeping them out of trained jobs so they can only work the most menial…hmmmm…what do I mean?
Felons too. Prison is a business. By ostracizing those with criminal backgrounds, not only do we lock out a large number of black democrats from voting poles, we also insure that the criminal “justice” system stays profitable, and grows.
Prison is a racket, and it is designed to encourage re offending by making it legal to discriminate against anyone with a criminal record both in employment, as well as housing.
Interesting point is that prostitution is one of the few misdemeanors that I am aware of that has repercussions on ones future employment and housing, similar to that of being a felon.
When someone makes a mistake, violates the law, they are given a sentence. Once that sentence is complete, why is it any employers business? Why can’t they just acknowledge that person has paid their debt to society? End of story.
Not until another criminal charge is filed should it ever be noticed again.
Color me surprised: Prohibitionists worried about things not related to the welfare of prostitutes.
Massage therapists are scared IMO. They don’t want to compete with women who don’t require draping and may give the guy a happy ending. I’ve gone backwards, from full service escort to now the body rub market and in so doing have realized many things. There are men who OMG would NEVER hire the services of a hooker but getting a body rub and a little tug is different don’t ya know?
I had plenty of clients who literally JUST wanted a massage; they would specifically ask if I really knew how to massage because they were hurting and wanted someone pretty who would come to their hotel rooms, didn’t require draping and had no weird Puritanical restrictions about touching their butts or inner thighs.
This is similar to the phenomena of strippers in topless joints calling the girls who work in the full nude places skanks and whores.
Yep, pretty much. And also like the shenanigans of Mira, Demi and Ashley.
I always find it fascinating when women in professions which are only barely different from prostitution (such as stripping or domination) or historically connected to prostitution (such as acting and massage)
You forgot to add housewives to that list. Sure, sure love and emotion and all that, but you dont see homeless bums getting sex now do you?
@lujlp and maggie,
Why the denigration of housewives?
What denigration? I’m a housewife, and was once before, and so are some of my friends and several regular readers. Remember, “prostitute” is not an insult to us; it’s merely an observation of fact.
An escort is “a trophy wife you rent by the hour”.
Well, point of fact Maggie didnt put wives on the list to begin with, secondly as she said ‘prostitue’ isnt an insult.
And if you think adding wives to the list is denigrating then what exactly is your opinion of actreses, strippers and massage therapists that you didnt feel the need to try and defend them as well?
And finally, I notice you werent able to actually argue against my point about resorceless men not getting any.
Dear lujlp, when I had sex only friends, I never had the standard of “you have to make X amount of $ to go out with me”. I did this on purpose. From the time I was a teenager, I saw how too many women treated men as “banks”: using them for free meals, gifts, etc., with NO intention of having sex with them and/or having a relationship with them. I was totally disgusted that they’d BRAG saying: I don’t even like him, but I’ll go out with him to get a free meal. They weren’t even embarrassed. I resolved that when I was ready to have a relationship I wouldn’t do this. I wanted my sex only friendships to be the same. All I asked for was basic manners, NO lying, no standing me up and other things like that. They didn’t have to pay for everything on the 1 date I’d go on before having sex. If they did want to pay that was fine and if I wanted to or we did Dutch treat was fine also. A lot of it depended on our financial state at the time of the date. They were also guaranteed to have sex after our 1 date. There was only 1 time this didn’t happen and that was because I started to not feel well during the date. The man was very kind about this and wasn’t hostile or anything when I said I didn’t feel well enough to have sex. Another 1 of the reasons I’ve done things this way is to give the men who are poor, etc., sex as they’re as deserving as the men with money. Please note there were at least a few I met who did make way more $ than me, but I didn’t turn them down either. I just never had some minimum $ requirement for anything and still don’t. Please note I’m not ordering anyone else to do things this way. But, I did want to speak up as someone who HAS helped our the poor men sexually and did that on purpose. I hate how too many think women like this don’t exist at ALL. Yes, we’re a minority, but we count as much as any individual does. Also want to say when I started to look for a relationship, the amount of $ the man had wasn’t part of my search. How he was INSIDE and how he lived his life WAS. Thanks for listening.
Laura, its been my experiance very few people, even inherently good people are rarely ever able to rise above the mercenary cost/benifit analisys function nature has bread into us.
And belive me I meant no disrespect but most women wont sleep with guys who cant afford to care for them in one way or another, just like most guys wont sleep with women who could stand in as a stunt double for a walrus.
Its human nature – nothing inherently ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ about it
Dear lujlp, thank you for talking to me decently! However, some of us (including some men) want to BREAK the “rules” of the evil world system. When I say evil, please note I’m not saying all things within the world system are evil, but too many are for me to just accept and practice. 1 big 1 is the evil dating game “rules”. I set out to break those way before I was well enough mentally to have a relationship and sex only friendships. ###*** the system and ###*** nature is the way I see it if people aren’t being treated fairly and equally, etc. I say fight it and don’t give into it. Speaking of walrus, I am big (my preferred term instead of “fat”). I’m smaller than I used to be (on purpose) and when I had personal ads to meet sex only friends, I had so many answers there was no way I could have met all of them unless I wasn’t working! THAT taught me that there’s at least a few men who don’t mind if you’re big. It was a HUGE revelation to me because part of my low self-esteem for years was no one would ever want me for anything because of my size. I completely bought into the ###*** evil LIE that most men hate you if you’re big. Are there some men who hate you, look at you with disgust and arrogant contempt if you’re big right when you meet them? YES. Also women who are like this (at least a few). But, there’s also many who will give you a chance, want to have sex with you, etc. This was a HUGE thing for me to learn. Also, not once did I lie about my weight in my ads. That was on purpose plus also to me lying about my size was plain wrong. Anyway, some people won’t go along with some things in the evil world system. I say ###*** being like most women when you say most won’t have sex with the type of men were talking about. I don’t WANT TO be like most. I want to fight these “rules” and “gloom and doom” thinking in these areas that many revel in. I also want to point out that even though I’m still big (and am getting smaller still) that I’m not 1 of these people who thinks being big is OK, no problem to your health, etc. Those into that I think are very sad figures in denial, etc. Thanks for listening.
Yes, Laura, you are a big girl. But I’ve seen walruses, and you’re not up to their standards. Not by a long shot. I think you need to consume another 1500 – 2000 calories a day, preferably in fatty fish, if you want to join the larger pinnipeds. But if I were you, I’d give up this dream of walrushood. You don’t have the teeth for it.
An interesting bit of trivia: pinnipeds are the only mammals whose milk does not contain lactose.
Most men don’t think prostitutes are contemptible; a majority of men have been to one at one point or another. In fact, most men I know, especially less weedy and more alpha guys, have some respect for whores.
Men who are in the business of prostrating themselves in front of women or pleasing them tend to look down on prostitutes. It’s just their way of ingratiating themselves on their womenfolk, who hate the idea of prostitutes (as well as hate prostitutes specifically).
The stereotypes of prostitutes are largely untrue. The chain-smoking, drug-addled crack whore on the side of the street isn’t what I’m talking about.
In every major US city, and every city in Europe, there are whole condo complexes with women who work out of these and elsewhere. They tend to be well-off. They don’t have regular jobs or their jobs are incidental. Where do they get their cash?
They work occasionally as escorts. Their numbers are big. In places like Tokyo and Seoul, it’s hard to separate some escorts (who see a few clients) from actual girlfriends for married guys.
“Compensated relationships” in which the man buys things for the girl are common; the quid-pro-quo is obvious. This is prostitution in all but name. In NYC,
You are dogging the obvious. Lujlp above denigrated housewives and I’ve seen that here before. Prostitutes spit invectives onto housewives..
I’ve never seen prostitutes as a group attacking housewives as a group; in fact I’ve seen plenty expressing sympathy for women whose husbands cheat on them (as strange as that may seem to you). However, I’ve seen plenty of housewives who attack whores under the mistaken impression that if we didn’t exist their husbands would be rendered unable to stray, which is of course absurd; men who don’t pay whores fool around with sluts and floozies who may endanger the marriage by calling, making time demands, behaving indiscreetly, etc.
The only whores I’ve ever seen attack housewives are those who have been themselves attacked by specific housewives and respond in kind, or those who have been burned and make “sour grapes” type comments toward wives.
@lujlp, I am “able to argue” just fine. it’s too trivial of a point to address.
My point is that I’ve seen housewives denigrated here several times , and wonder why.
JZ, I’m honestly not sure what instances you’re referring to. I and others have often referred to housewives as a kind of whore, but as I said above that isn’t an insult to us, and it isn’t like plenty of other people haven’t made that observation throughout history (take a look at my quotes page for several).
Because we are talking in Whore but you are listening in Repressed Christian Archetype.
Dear emilyhemingway, and you know what this person is “listening” in that easily? Do you even know if this person has any religious beliefs? Many of us Christians are really tired of what I call “Internet diagnosis”. “Internet diagnosis” is when you say someone is “___” (fill in the blanks) from only 1 post on the Internet or only a few posts. Christians are very tired of hearing they’re all repressed (an evil stereotype that I can disprove with just my own life), have boring sex lives (another 1 I can disprove with just my life), are literally ordering everyone else around all the time (another 1 I disprove with my own life), etc., etc. I’ve met many other believers and also read about many who don’t fit what you’re saying. You don’t like it when people say things like “she’s a prostitute, so she’s automatically speaking in drug addict languge”, do you? The WONDERFUL “Internet diagnosis” and other stereotyping can go both ways. Do you like it done to you or anyone else like you? “Internet diagnosis” always reminds me of how blessed I was in that the doctors I’ve seen didn’t diagnose me UNTIL I saw them in person for at least 1 visit. Can you imagine what kind of care you’d get from a “doctor” who said “you have ___wrong with you” from just 1 thing you said? The thought of that is very scary and it’s also not right or fair to treat a potential patient that way. The same goes for “Internet diagnosis”. Christians are so tired of this stuff and we should be. Actually, 1 of the reasons I came here was to refute as much as possible the stereotyping like “all those Christians are repressed”, etc. Thanks for listening.
That’s not what Emily said, Laura. She was merely pointing out, and rightfully so, that the “dirty whore” stereotype is intrinsic to Judeo-Christian thought (for reasons I discussed in my column of October 16th) and was unquestionably introduced into American culture via Christianity. It does not matter that you or any other individual Christian does not feel that way; the fact is that the stereotype DOES exist and is deeply embedded in Christianity, whether you agree with it or not.
Once again, you must remind yourself that the existence of exceptions does NOT disprove rules. Some people survive gunshots to the head or falling out of planes without parachutes, but I doubt most people would disagree with the “blanket statement” (as you call it) that such things are deadly.
Why can’t credit EVER be given to those Christians who don’t GO WITH what you’re saying? They COUNT. Yes, you’re right in that on prostitution in the Bible, we’re told not to do it. But, that doesn’t automatically mean that ALL Christians are out there literally ordering YOU or anyone else around. Do you realize that because the Bible also says you’re never to lie ALL the Christians could be out there literally screaming at/ordering around people who lie regularly or even used to? Think about it. There’s PLENTY we COULD be doing against people, NOT just prostitutes. I’m convinced 1 reason you have such a fear of exceptions is this issue and 1’s like it. It’s plain easier to NOT give credit where it’s due and say THERE ARE SOME Christians who don’t go along with the stereotypes. You can NOT be for something morally for yourself, BUT that doesn’t automatically mean you hate all who are, etc. I prove that and many other Christians do also. It DOES MATTER greatly that ME and OTHER Christians feel this way. Even if it was only 1 person it would matter. Actually, 1 of the things I love about Christianity is how much the individual COUNTS. That’s wonderful and needed. Speaking of stereotypes, you’re against the 1 that says all prostitutes are on drugs. I notice YOU don’t accept it. You fight it. That’s what I do also with Christians. Why don’t you say: the stereotype that all prostitutes are on drugs has a long history and is embedded in society whether you agree with it or not. You’re fighting that and that’s great. You don’t just accept it. I’m doing the same with the stereotypes about Christians (just like the 1 about all prostitutes are on drugs). Please realize that at least some things that HAVE and ARE part of Christianity not all Christians just accept, don’t have a struggle with, etc. I have BIG struggles with: why did God ultimately allow the murders in my family to happen? Why doesn’t God just destroy Satan and the demons NOW? Why are there people who from childhood are attracted to their same sex only (gay, etc.)? Why doesn’t God heal ALL from ALL diseases, addictions, etc.? Also, there’s a lot more Christians out there who don’t fit the stereotypes about them and the prostitution issue than you think. I know it’s easier to ignore that. It’s like it’s easier for me to ignore that there really are more people for death penalty in every murder case who ARE basically reasonable about their stand than I’d like to admit. Sometimes we don’t have as many “enemies” in a group than we think. I’ve had this proved to me over and over again in my life (especially with the death penalty issue). Thanks for listening.
Laura, you’re flying in the face of reality. Exceptions certainly exist, but they DON’T DISPROVE RULES. What you’re saying here is tantamount to “why can’t credit be given to drunk drivers who don’t wreck their cars?” or “why not pay attention to honest politicians?” or “why don’t we hear more about people surviving gunshots to the head?” The reason is because A) they’re EXCEPTIONS, and B) the norm is too dangerous to ignore. I have nothing against mainstream Christians who live their own lives and let others live theirs, but that’s why I don’t sling the term “Christian” around without prefacing it with the group I mean (usually “fundamentalist Christians”).
I’m a white middle-class American woman, but you won’t catch me pretending that white middle-class American women as a group don’t have a highly-overdeveloped sense of privilege. Similarly, anti-trafficking activists who honestly don’t care about what consenting adults do in private need to recognize that the’re in the minority, and non-fundamentalist Christians need to recognize that the fundies give all Christians a bad name and speak out against them rather than defending them.
Dear Maggie, I’ve been speaking out against/following the trends, etc., of the horrible fundamentalist Christian preachers and their followers for years. Many Christians like me feel literally sick over much of what’s happening in the Church. Even though all this was prophesied by Jesus, that doesn’t mean we like it and/or agree with it. We’re saddened by it like Jesus was. There ARE preachers and non-preachers out there exposing these things and have been for years. I started following all this in the 1980’s and found out since day 1 in Christianity there’s been reformers (thank God for them) because from day 1 there’s been infiltrators in the Church. This was prophesied also by Jesus, St. Paul, etc. The Catholic Church as an institution has been 1 of the worst. I say institution because there’s also a history of some in Catholic Church speaking out and there still are. I ran into some Protestants handing out tracts not long ago at the train station and told them about how tracts by a certain author are full of ###***. Some of them hadn’t heard about this person. We all learned from each other with this conversation. I love having these conversations with other believers and to find the others who are working for reform also. So these anti-trafficking people you’re talking about are a smaller group. They count also. I say good for them! They’re doing needed work. Even 1 person doing any kind of needed work counts. Yes, I’ve heard about how some of the ways I do things/think about them, etc., fly in the face of reality. That’s how I want it. I don’t want to be part of at least a few things/mindsets in the world system. This is 1 reason I point out the HONEST/GOOD politicians there are to fight the popular “all the politicans are ###***, liars, etc.”. That’s taking the easy way out and going along with the “gloom and doom” mentality in the world system. Even 1 honest politician counts. As far as drunk driving goes, I did that a few times during my drinking years. I didn’t wreck anything. I quit doing it, though, because of the risk and it bothered me so much. How about pointing out the positive in a mostly negative situation? Like it was wrong for me to do it to begin with but the good part of that is nothing/no one was hit. The positives that aren’t part of the norm (like the politicians) deserve exposure also. They need more exposure because being cynical, saying everyone is pretty much SCUM and we’re all really animals (I love that 1), etc., etc., is very in. The views that aren’t as popular deserve equal time. They give hope and I know this 1st hand.
I want to clarify that when I say I want to fight reality, I don’t mean fighting it in that I’ll jump out of a building to “prove” gravity doesn’t exist on earth. I want to fight some of the actions/mindsets that are popular in the world system and that’s the form of reality I mean. Sometimes I’m not as clear as I need to be.
Laura. Darling.
It isn’t necessary that people fall over themselves to make sure that you know that they know that exceptions exist. When somebody says, “Because we are talking in Whore but you are listening in Repressed Christian Archetype,” it really isn’t necessary for that person to surround the statement with two hundred words of qualification to the point that of course some Christians aren’t repressed and the Christians who aren’t repressed aren’t the problem here and yes some Christians are repressed but not all! but the Christians who are are the ones that I’m talking about right now but of course I do realize that some or even many Christians are not actually repressed and by the way did I make it clear that not-so-repressed Christians do exist?
It’s kind of expected that we already know this.
You remain made of awesome. You win a shiny internet, and Laura is a lucky, lucky gal. Go have hot greasy sex, you unrepressed nice people for whom I feel an inordinate fondness.
@Emily: 😀
@Emily:
Yes, ma’am!
You have just done what jz had done. You take a word or phrase out of context of the big picture and since it offends you in some way, you are now defining it as an attack when in truth it was a statement to get a concept across.
Dear Brandy, I’ll always be offended by stereotypes. I’m SICK OF THEM. When they’re towards Christians, yes, it bothers me. A big reason: we’re sick of them. They don’t apply in every case and many are fighting that. It’s 1 reason I’m here (1 of many). Would you like the statement: They’re talking in ____ (fill in the blank), but because it’s whores who are listening don’t even bother to try to get through to them. Isn’t that the same as saying they’re all listening in Repressed Christian Archetype? That’s ASS-uming all the whores listening don’t even want to understand. ASS-uming all who listen are in the Repressed Christian thing is just as bad. Like I said, Internet diagnosis. You’re not for something that automatically means you’re _____. Isn’t this something whores are very sick of also? If you say ____ even 1 time online, you’re gay! That’s another 1.
No, it isn’t the same at all. Christianity by its nature teaches that there is only one truth, and that sex outside marriage is sinful; Christians who don’t accept those beliefs are not following the party line of their own belief system and are therefore EXCEPTIONS. Prostitution is not a religion; there is no prescribed dogma we are all expected to believe. It is a profession, not a belief system; the two are as different as chalk and cheese. People who choose to subscribe to a belief system (whether it be Christianity, feminism, Marxism, Buddhism or whatever) must recognize that others will judge them by the publicly-stated principles and publicly-demonstrated norms of that belief system; if they don’t like that they need to find themselves a different belief system to adhere to.
There’s also a huge cognitive difference between expecting that a majority will act like a minority (i.e. expecting all Muslims to be terrorists) and expecting a minority to act like the majority (i.e. expecting a fundamentalist Christian to be anti-sex), and it’s disingenuous to pretend otherwise.
I would just like to take this time to point out that Alan Rickman is a sexy beast.
As you were.
*eats popcorn*
That was cool. Thanks for the humor as sometimes I can be TOO serious for too long of stretches of time…wink.
@ maggie, I wrote “denigrate” . You switched to “attack”
Why the denigration?
Definition of DENIGRATE. transitive verb.
1. : to attack the reputation of : defame
Also, could you use the reply button on the left side of the screen to all the replies follow in one thread so the conversation isnt split is to sperate sections?
And another thing, if you are able to disprove my point, wouldnt acctually disproving it take less time then claiming to be able to disprove it, but that disproving it isnt worth your time beacuse disproving so it too easy?
@Maggie,
you call housewives whores.
Simple enough.
Only because they are. “Whore” is not a denigration to me. Methinks you need to discuss this with regular reader Andrea; she’s usually on in the morning and will probably respond to you in the next day or so. She’s a housewife, has never “officially” done sex work, and will tell you quite vociferously that a housewife is a kind of whore.
Spousanomics recommend couples trade sexual favors for chores…
I was married, and my opinion is that a housewife is a type of prostitute. In fact, I believe that many states recognize that a housewife is a type of whore when they specifically write into the prostitution statutes that it is illegal to exchange money, or items of value for sex, except between a husband and wife.
So why then would the states feel the need to specify an exclusion to the criminality of prostitution between a husband and wife if the state did not in fact recognize that prostitution is commonplace between a husband and wife?
Dear Maggie, others don’t think housewives are some kind of whore. They have the right to believe and practice that also like you do to express your views on it. Some people don’t like or want the title of whore. An example of this is the word “fat”. I personally hate that word and don’t want it applied to me. That’s my right. I don’t mind the word “big” used towards me. Big has a lot less demeaning history to me. Doesn’t everyone deserve the right to say which labels, etc., they want applied to them or NOT?
No, not really. Labels are not for ourselves, they are for those who use them. A cat is just as happy being called chat or gato or katze or whatever, because it’s not concerned with labels. That’s why gay people accepted the word “queer” and many prostitutes “whore”; letting labels hurt one gives power over one’s feelings to others. Allowing every single person a voice in what he wants to be called by strangers creates a euphemism treadmill which leads to the nonsense you see in the U.S. today: a tendency toward cumbersome passive-voice constructions like “Americans with disabilities” and ever-escalating polysyllabification which eventually creates euphemisms so long that they must be abbreviated to collections of letters for ease of use. Thus good, descriptive honest words like “truck”, “Negro” and “shell shock” become the vague and inconveniently-long “sport utility vehicle”, “African-American” and “post-traumatic stress disorder”, which are then abbreviated in popular use to the ugly letter-strings “SUV”, “AA” and “PTSD”. No thanks, I’ll use real words. And how does one know which euphemism is preferred by which person? PC people love to use the absurd and broad “Native American”, but every Choctaw, Cherokee, Creek and Seminole I know (and there are quite a few where I live) prefers plain old “Indian”.
So they can like or dislike whatever title exists in the world, and even ask their friends to oblige that preference. But expecting every stranger one encounters to cater to one’s own individual whims is highly unrealistic and sets oneself up as a permanent victim.
Labels are also used by children and young adults as instruments to hurt others. Another thing that was effectively done by ‘queers’ and ‘whores’ was taking away the weapons that society uses to beat us down.
Dear Brandy, labels are used by people of all ages to hurt. Queers and whores aren’t the only 1’s beaten down. There’s also Christians, Muslims, Republicans, Democrats, etc., etc. It’s very sad there’s so many. The stuff said about Muslims since 9/11 is just rampant online and off and is disgusting. The Muslims who don’t fit this ###*** (like “they’re all terrorists”) are already doing work to educate and break this ###***, thank God. Another thing about labels: some are lies. People could say about me: you’re an MVS and if you know anything about those MVS…(this is 1 of my favorites!) and it doesn’t apply to me at all and never has. Really sad, isn’t it?
Housewives are the worst type of whore. They want the money but rarely put out. And they get fat.
I think the problem with many American wives is that they’ve bought into the whole “marriage is only about love” mythology, instead of recognizing it as an intrinsically economic arrangement which is made more pleasant by love. In other words they think that love is the cake, when in actuality it’s only the icing.
Both times I’ve been married I always kept the economic character of the arrangement in mind, and treated my husband as I would treat an employer (first time around) or prostitution client (second time). Both relationships (employee-employer and whore-client) are useful models, but the latter is closer to the mark and therefore IMHO better. I have often thought that modern marriage would be a lot healthier institution if most women spent at least a few months as prostitutes before marrying; it would teach them a great deal about men and thus benefit both parties immeasurably.
That’s part of the idea behind Spousanomics…
oh, yes, well said Maggie! I believe that husbands would also be better husbands having spent significant time with prostitutes. It works both ways.
It is funny, because leaving my marriage to become an independent provider was in fact liberating. Prohibitionists act like I should feel used, unloved, and violated as a whore, but honestly, I felt those feelings more in my marriage.
Leaving the marriage, I met men that respected me, my boundaries, I am much happier now. Escape Prostitution? Forget that, Prostitution allowed me to escape an unhealthy marriage. Which was much more devastating to me as a woman than the interactions that I now have with men.
Now, if we can get society to rectify the injustices lavished on whores during divorce, or any other aspect of life, we will be on the right track.
For me, marriage was not better. I have no desire to ever feel owned again. I much prefer to feel rented.
“I have no desire to ever feel owned again. I much prefer to feel rented.”
OMG LOL! I love that! Talk about a sentence having the potential to open a nasty can of worms in this day and age. All the modern day slavery hysteria! Yes, I too – when married felt ‘owned’ and is that not what slavery is?
Oh I understand now! You think when we say whore that it’s a bad thing! No no, as I am sure that you have also read here, we have quite a bit of respect for whores and we have never (to the best of my knowledge) put down whores in any way. Therefore, it would stand to reason that if we refer to housewives as whores, it is not meant to denigrate. We LIKE whores here.
But I can see where you are confused. Society has treated whores as something to run away from – never embrace. We are believed to be unintelligent drug addicts with no options in life. We have no standards and will have sex with anything that walks as long as they have cash.
If you have actually read this blog, you will realize that obviously the stereotype that society would have you believe is wrong. Which is one of the reasons why hookers blog in the first place. If you still have ill feelings about being called a whore, blame the ignorance of the public – not us.
What we have here is something Emily wrote about in an email a while back; she correctly pointed out that while we think of “whore” as a positive word, some readers would be insulted by it and take it as mud-slinging. As she put it, “You’re speaking in Prostitute, and doing so very eloquently, but the problem is that people are listening in Repressive Christian Archetype.”
You could tell them that sex is the covenant act of marriage… that it serves the same purpose in marriage as communion does in baptism.
But I think many of the more Low Church traditions wouldn’t get it since they don’t view marriage as a mystery or sacrament.
Dear Jason, there’s many in Christianity that view marriage as a mystery and/or sacrament. It isn’t just the Catholic Church as an institution that does.
When else is a couple allowed to kiss in church?
Dear Sailor B, over the years I’ve seen some couples hug/kiss each other in church and they weren’t there that day to get married. These weren’t people getting ready to have sex right there (it wasn’t on that level), but not once did I see anyone order them to stop, etc. Also, there are Christian churches specifically FOR gay, bisexual, etc., people and I imagine there’s also people there who do this at times. If any Christians have literally ordered these churches to shut down, I haven’t heard about it. But, I thought if you say in any Christian church you’re gay, bisexual, etc., you automatically get screamed at, ordered to leave, etc. RIGHT! I know better from my own experience and that of at least a few others. Please don’t make things out to be worse than they are in this area.
I wasn’t commenting on prejudice against homosexuals, or even really about sexual repression in the Christian religion.
I was just pointing out that marriage sanctifies sex in the Christian religion, makes it not dirty, and that the most sexual thing you will ever see in church follows the statement, “You may now kiss your bride.” Sure, couples may hug and kiss a little, but like that? And right in front of the whole congregation? That’s a level of PDA a lot of people don’t like to see at Denny’s, much less at the local First Baptist.
Me, I rather like PDA. Denny’s, church, the side of a library, wherever. I think it’s sweet.
I’m afraid my inner nun does not like any PDA above the level of hand-holding; it makes me feel like a voyeur.
Dear Sailor B, I brought up the gay issue because it’s VERY related by many to the no one ever kisses/hugs in churches unless they’re getting married thing. I’ve seen many start in on the gay thing when the kissing/hugging thing is brought up: Those horrible Christians not only JUST kiss/hug when getting married (NOT true in at least a few cases), but if anyone says they’re gay, bisexual, etc., in a church they automatically get screamed at, told to leave, etc., also! RIGHT! My experience totally contradicts that on the gay issue along with at least a few others. Yes, I agree some don’t like to see that level of PDA in church OR a Denny’s. But, I have seen it myself at least a few times in church. It’s OK with me. If they started having sex, yes, it would bother me, but it would bother me also in ANY public place (church or not). Yes, you like the PDA (wink).
Yeah, there is that. Despite the fact that they obviously don’t mind somebody seeing them, I feel like it’s rude to blatantly stare, but if I try to see without looking like I’m trying to see, I feel like I’m being sneaky and somewhat dishonest. And if I have to try not to see, well, then I’m being imposed on. I should be able to point my face in any direction I like in a public place.
Of course what I should probably do in that situation is look right at them. If they object, then I can look away, with or without pointing out that you shouldn’t perform in front of an audience if you don’t want the audience to watch. In a few very blatant cases I have looked right at them, like that one time at Itzacon. Two pretty girls sat down in the middle of the floor and started making out. It was obvious that not only did they not mind if people watched, but that’s what they were going for. So I watched, and I wasn’t the only one.
That’s different, though; putting on a show can’t really be called demonstrating affection, and a con, though public, is sort of a special environment. It’s more things like snogging in the street that I consider rude.
Yeah, that gets us right back to the “what exactly am I supposed to do?” situation. So while I find PDA both sexy and sweet, it makes me uncomfortable at times, too. I find the sweet/sexy to be a bit stronger than the uncomfortable/annoying, but I can easily see how somebody else might find the scales tilted in the other direction.
And yeah, an obvious “hey, look at us” sort of thing at a con is different. I love going to con.
lulu,
you are being intentionally obtuse.
not worth my time.
Seriously, are you incapable of seeing the reply button? Its on the left, just next to the date/time stamp
The bad apple spoils the bunch.
Maggie, I see you changed your comments format… do you think it would be possible to add a Preview button?
I didn’t change the format, WordPress did, and in fact I find the new form rather irritating. It’s not as bad as all the changes they’ve made behind the scenes lately, though. I’m actually a creature of habit, and don’t like people changing stuff I’m used to without my permission. 🙁
I’ve never paid for sex. I have, howveer, slept with a legal whore. In fact, I “dated” her for several months/ It was exactly like every other relationship I’ve ever had except she was more honest and easier to deal with, by and large. She was a pretty decent person. She was also stupidly well-off.
Her housewife friends and she were largely indistinguishable: They talked about their husbands like a client would talk about a patron: as a support, as etc., but as a life-partner and love mate? Rarely. This was Korea, so it might have been different – but not all that much.
Most women – especially houswwives – are looking for a meal ticket. It’s a rare and very admirable woman who is in life for her own ambition, to create something new and novel, or working at something for its own sake.
There are too many options for women to use: And getting some man to pay for access to their pussy is just too easy. If men could get away with this, they would. As it is, they need to dance to impress women to get access to their wombs and their pussy.
If you think it’s profoundly different, on a philsophical level, to be a whore or a housewife, think again. The only difference is legal sanction.
Getting laid is pretty damned easy. But if it was acceptable to have kids without getting married (and thus constrict your sex life, often drastically) – then most men would do it.
You fool yourself if you think otherwise. All women are basically whores. Some are legally sanctioned. Some are not.
It is becoming very acceptable to have kids without marriage. At least here in Vancouver BC. In the US it is different being the most religious conservative country in the west.
Vancouver here, too. Ayup, women delaying children until over 40 is common now.
Come on, Maggie. These guys looked like johns: male, not traveling in the company of a woman, probably working-class (you know what they’re like), not flamingly gay, old enough to have a little disposable income but young enough to still get it up (and what is it with men wanting to get it up so much? don’t we tolerate enough of that to get a new generation?).
Also, they acted like johns: traveling without female accompaniment, looking at attractive women, probably smiling from time to time. Where do men get off smiling, anyway?
Really, Maggie! I shouldn’t have to explain the obvious stuff to you.
I guess it’s because I don’t wear enough makeup to be a real madam. 😉
@LAura,
basically this is what you’re saying:
– You accept that prostitution should not be illegal: Women have that choice.
– You feel that to be moral, sex should be free. Prostitution is still bad, but it’s a choice.
– You feel upset that people might put openly promiscuous behavior in the same category as prostitution: you want to make sure that “those” women (prostitutes) are differentiated from women like you, who are openly promiscuous (sex-friendships).
– You feel that we should never be annoyed at “Christians” because *some* Christians choose not to judge others unfairly, even if the actual Christian religion is very anti-sex generally.
You feel insulted when others compare being a housewife to being a whore. Look: Even neofeminists realize that the institution of marriage is essentially Money for Sex, on its basic level. You don’t want to admit that housewives are a different kind of whore because you want to make sure “your” kind of woman is insulated from the “whore” stigma.
Well, if I’ve gathered your points correctly, I have this to say:
Too bad for your personal feelings. You can’t use half-logic and dismissal to re-define everything so that YOUR PARTICULAR BRAND of pro-sex ideology is acceptable but carefully maintain that you’re nothing like “those women”.
I hate to break it to you: You’re exactly like those women, except that you don’t take money. There is no difference – not in philosophy, not in spirituality (no matter what airy fairy notions you ascribe to sacred sex – whatever), not in practice or in function.
Face it: you’re exercising rank sophistry and hypocrisy in order to elevate yourself.
There was a time when I was non-monogamous (well, including now, more or less) and dogging it around with a harem of women; I was a total lothario. I was the male equivalent of a complete slut. I didn’t lie to women – but I did lead them on. Why? I had come out of a broken marriage where my wife left me (cause: I was the “perfect mate” – obliging, supporting, caring — just not bad boy enough. She left the marriage and did very badly afterwards, and at 38 is single and childless; I had a sexual-romantic free-for-all). I must have been with 60 women in the span of 3 years, many of them in longer relationships, many not, including the Japanese airlines stewardess who I hooked up with on 5 occasions and the married French woman I practically lived with in Paris, not to mention the German woman I almost monogamously dated for a year.
never for a moment do I think I’m better than the slimy pickup artist or do I think I’m worse than the one-woman married guy: I just had opportunity.
My suggestion?
Try to do this:
Don’t sanitize human nature, other people’s or your own. This is what you’re trying desperately to do. It’s not believable.
Whether or not you like it, you and other women and I and other men are the same biological animals: All the false distinctions in the world aren’t going to make you any purer than a call girl or escort.
For me to call a whore a derogatory name is absurd, given my history. I realize that. It took dozens of conversations with a whore to convince me of this, and it took caring for her and dating her – and respecting her as a human being.
Own your promiscuity. Own it and be honest about it.
Stop pretending to support one thing while being morally superior in the next breath. You are not morally superior.
Dear Gorbachev, the ASS-umptions are so many here how do I begin? An FYI, I haven’t been with ANYONE but my fiance for over 8 years now. WOW! I haven’t been with anyone else for at least a few reasons. So, my status for the last several years is to NOT see anyone else. I have to admit: if I had met any of the famous men I admire, I would have been with them, but since I haven’t met them…HHMM. Wait, I just remembered: those of us who don’t buy your gloom and doom mentality, that’s just how the world is and don’t ever fight it, try to change it, etc., cynicism and defeatism, stand up for the rights of conservatives to be how they are (instead of downing them every way possible like you do repeatedly with outright lies like religious people don’t use their reason), etc. we don’t get the effort made to even find out about us as individuals. It’s hilarious you project on me how superior I think I am when you don’t say a WORD about the 1’s who literally called me dumb because I don’t charge for sex PLUS keep it as free as possible. But, if the 1’s like me said that against the women who do charge, OH MY GOD! The ASS-umptions would be plenty again! An FYI, I never intend to say that and never will. A big reason is because it’s a horrible, patronizing insult. Please note as I’ve said before not ONCE have I said on here that those who choose to charge are literally dumb. I’ve said this before, but since it’s likely you never bothered to give it a chance: why don’t you ASK ME OUTRIGHT all my reasons for practicing my own form of free love? 1 hint: it’s not all that you THINK it is. At least some of it has nothing to do with me being a Christian. WOW! Some of it does. I happen to LOVE the view in Christianity that things should be as free as possible. For me, this extends to sex also. Sex is 1 of the things I feel the strongest about it being as free as possible. Other things I feel as strong about: food, shelter, medicine, medical/dental care, clothes and any work that supports/helps those in crisis, have been traumatized/victimized in any way. I just remembered another 1: having as many free ways as possible for people to find jobs, like being able to use the Internet at unemployment offices for free in order to apply for jobs, etc. You think whores are the only 1’s with stigmas? Wait, I just remembered: you have a HUGE bias in favor towards those who do charge and a HUGE bias against the 1’s who don’t (like me). I said THIS before, but…will try again: the women like me we also get a lot of ###*** from some. A lot of it is the SAME as the stuff the prostitutes get. To me this proves the point these 2 groups have more in common than is let on at times. If you really think that the women like me don’t get ###*** this just isn’t how it is. Actually, you do it yourself with the remarks like “loose morals”, “running around naked and drunk”, etc. On the Christian thing: not ONCE on here have you ever said anything positive about any Christian. But, you love not giving any credit where it’s ever due when it comes to the 1’s who don’t fit your mold. All you’ve ever said about them is negative. The Muslims get the same treatment, just not as much (i.e., not as many remarks about them). Something for you to think about: you choose to be a Buddhist. I’m just saying this as a hypothetical. Would YOU like it to never see anything positive about Buddha, Buddhists, etc., said and instead only negative things said? And at least some of those things are outright lies, unfair stereotypes and blanket statements? That’s how Christians feel when all this stuff is said about them. Also, please don’t make your projection on me about Christians worse than it is. Not once have I said no one should EVER criticize Christians. Earlier today I posted how many Christians including me are exposing the false preachers, etc. Sure sounds like I don’t want to expose the bad 1’s! RIGHT! What I get so tired of is the CONSTANT negativity, like YOURS. You never say anything good about certain groups. I got the be open ###*** again: I explained before that I’ve started to be open about sex only friendships in the past few years. Sure sounds like I’m hiding, doesn’t it? A big reason I came here was to come out MORE. I think I’m so pure and above it all? Really? Earlier today I said if I wanted to do that I would have never told that I compromised my standards a few times when I had the most sex only friendships. WOW! I also would have never come here to begin with and stayed if I think all the women who charge or who once did, etc., were literally scum, dirty, etc. Sorry, but I don’t buy into the we’re all animals; people can’t REALLY change; that’s how it is and that’s how it’s going to be and don’t even bother to change it, etc., mindsets, OK? To me, all that is just another rationalization for cop-outs like: it’s too much to even try or want to have a relationship with NO lies and hiding in it. Just can’t work in the real word. Sound familiar? An FYI, I’ve never been a housewife. The “horrible” thing I did earlier today was say some housewives don’t think they’re whores and they have the right to that as much as the 1’s who think they are whores do. That ties in with the “everyone is a whore” mentality. Some people aren’t, don’t want to be, etc. Some do want to be, are into it, etc. You’re always talking about leave people be. You sure don’t want to do that with my type. I notice you don’t order anyone else on here to admit what they REALLY are, etc. HHMM…It’s sad and funny you say it’s wrong for you to call whores names, etc., but the women like me and the college sluts (eyeroll) they get all kinds of ###***, don’t they? Like we think we’re more pure, etc. RIGHT! Something else that doesn’t add up with your ASS-umptions: if I’m such a man-hater, why in the world have I had sex only friends? I still have an arrangement I can act on and won’t ever change that on my part. My fiance doesn’t want to change it either on his part. What woman who hates men has a fiance plus sex only friends? On the I hate criticism thing: RIGHT! An FYI, someone like me who stayed in counseling to the END to fix as much as possible the effects of severe trauma and abuse knows from day 1 in counseling you are literally opening yourself UP to criticism. That’s a big part of good counseling: being confronted on what you need to fix to have the best life possible. Sailor Barsoom on here is my fiance and he’ll tell you how many times since we’ve been together I’ve literally asked him and others to tell me if I’m doing wrong, need to be better on something, etc. I practice the same at work. There goes your ASS-umption on that 1. Speaking of pretending, why don’t you quit pretending you don’t have a huge bias towards prostitutes and a huge 1 against the women like me, the college sluts, etc. I wouldn’t say this if it weren’t for the fact you’ve shown your bias over and over. But, it’s not OK for me to talk about my beliefs, practices, etc. that I have a strong bias towards? HHMM…
Dear Gorbachev, 1 last thing: 1 of my skills is typing. It’s been a big part of most of the jobs I’ve had including the 1 I have now. I’m blessed in that I type at a high speed with few errors. I use this skill to help other MVS (my name for the surviving family/friends of murder victims. I’m 1 of these people also.) and I’ve never wanted a cent for what I do. That’s on purpose. I had a piece published in a book where all the profits from the book went to the wonderful group Parents of Murdered Children. That doesn’t bother me in the least. What I call “getting the word out” is the highest priority along with supporting/answering questions, etc. for the MVS. ###*** asking for any money for these things is how I see it. It’s a distraction I don’t want when it comes to this plus sex and other stuff like I said in the post before this 1. I wanted to show that I’m not just this way about not wanting $ for sex. It extends to the MVS stuff I do also. I know the group Parents of Murdered Children takes donations. Please know I don’t literally condemn them for this. It’s their right and that group has done a ton of good and still are doing so. But, I thought I’m “above it all” with this mentality of mine and think the people who take donations, etc., for stuff they do (sex or not) are literally “lower” than me, scum, etc. HHMM…really? I’ve belonged to POMC for nearly 20 years and if I “hated” them for taking donations, etc., then why in the world am I still a member? HHMM…just another example to blow apart your wonderful ASS-umptions about me. If my practicing my own form of free love has interfered and/or taken away any business from any prostitute I sure don’t know about it. I’ve not once literally ordered any of them around, told them to stop, said THEY’RE literally stupid for choosing to charge, etc. To give credit where it’s due, not 1 of them ever ordered me to stop what I was doing, kept me from sex only friendships, etc. Just thought I’d point that 1 out also.
Dear Gorbachev, I’m not going to answer you again on this stuff. I answered it less than a month ago (you brought up pretty much the same things). The way we were going on upset some on here. That’s 1 reason this is the last time I’m going to defend/explain myself on these things. We just may not ever agree on much of anything. That doesn’t mean I wish you any bad. I wish you well and no, this isn’t some sarcasm or to “look good”. I’ve made the mistake WAY too many times before online of going on and on with people who likely would never agree with me on much of anything. I’m working on doing that less and am making that goal over time plus the ultimate goal is to never do it. I apologize if I upset anyone on here by answering/defending myself about pretty much the same things a 2nd time.
Perhaps it would be best if the two of you agree to disagree. I value both of your contributions to the discussions, and sometimes people just rub each other the wrong way due to the way their idiosyncrasies clash. 😉