Here are three propositions from the stance of a Devil’s Advocate. 1) A sex worker puts on an act to please her client; might he not then think that all women are acting when they’re being nice to him? How can he tell reality from acting, and does it matter? 2) If women could make as much money doing other kinds of work, there would undoubtedly be fewer harlots. So, harlotry needs women to be impecunious, and men to have money. If there was real equality or equivalence, would harlotry become an historical oddity? Is it therefore in the harlot’s best interests to maintain the patriarchy? 3) Sex workers see men at their best and worst; wouldn’t a retired courtesan therefore make the best partner for a man?
1) It’s certainly possible that a man could become paranoid in that way; in fact, it’s the plot of Jacques Brel’s song “Next”, which I featured in my very first hooker songs column. However, I’ve never actually heard a man complain about that in real life or online; while clients do indeed seem concerned about telling the difference between a professional’s behavior and genuine romantic interest, they seem less worried about amateurs’ behavior and more concerned about not being able to enjoy themselves fully because they know it isn’t “real”.
2) You’re making several assumptions here which are simply not true. The first, which is a very common one, is that men have more disposable income for some external reason (“patriarchy” or whatever), when in fact most of the reason is that men and women have different priorities. Men will always make more than women on average, because a lot more men are willing to sell their souls, give up personal time and drive themselves into an early grave in order to succeed. Furthermore, only a certain segment of whores do the work because they are in dire need; a lot larger fraction (especially in the West) simply prefer the work to the alternatives. Take me, for example; don’t you think I could succeed in some high-paying conventional career? Of course I could, but I don’t want to; being a whore is for me much easier and much more pleasant than the other options which bring in the same level of income. I’m not remotely alone in feeling that way, and that won’t change no matter how much artificial “equality” the social engineers inflict on society. That’s one of the main reasons the neofeminists hate us and want our profession violently suppressed: whores will never be good little collectivist worker bees in their totalitarian dystopia, so they want us to have no other option. In short, the so-called “patriarchy” will maintain itself without the help of harlots and in spite of neofeminist attempts to reprogram human nature to fit their psychotic delusions.
3) My husband certainly thinks so, and I’m sure he’s not the only one.
(Have a question of your own? Please consult this page to see if I’ve answered it in a previous column, and if not just click here to ask me via email.)
“I could succeed in some high-paying conventional career? Of course I could, but I don’t want to”
I agree. After the 12 on and 12 off (plus watches) world of he Navy and a couple years in the cubicle world. I find that I prefer my life as a part time instructor, even at a greatly reduced pay rate. I like the control over my schedule and the personal gratification I get from my work
“men and women have different priorities.” I’ve often thought that the difference between tactics and strategy is readily described by our approaches to sex. Men have reproductive tactics (short term plans of action) so an investment of discretionary income makes sense; women have reproductive strategies (and must look at the long run). Providing men a release for their sexual needs fills a very real niche.
Escorts DO act – but I can tell.
I don’t really think it’s a big deal …
However, with a so-called “free” woman …
Well, it’s hard to pick one up unless she’s “in” to you. If she is “in” to you, she will just surrender to you. There’s a big difference between her and an escort, in my humble experience. I have to do most of the work with the “straight” girls, and – quite frankly, that’s the way I like it. “Straight” women get “wet” and some of them quite so. Escorts do too – but not to nearly the same extent. The straight women like a lot of foreplay, in my experience escorts will rush that in order to get to the main event.
Escorts will also do things to get you to finish quicker – if she thinks you’ve gone too long or if she’s trying to “pace” a multi-hour session. A favorite trick, I’ve found, is they like to do RCG – because they know the sight of it will often set the guy “off” almost immediately. I don’t like women on top positions – but RCG is my kryptonite – I can’t last long with a woman doing that to me. You don’t see a lot of “free” girls jumping into this position – I don’t think it’s the most comfortable position for women to get into. The free girls I’ve been with complain that it’s painful, especially with a regular sized guy – or bigger – who tends to point “upward” when erect.
I actually enjoy sex with “straight” women more than I do with escorts.
However, escorts are discreet – and they won’t come knocking on your door like “free” girls will.
And – there is something to be said for simply laying back like a king and having sex for your own sake alone.
I was a client of an escort before we started dating. I could tell something was going on with her. Well I should have known sooner because she would actually kiss me – and these were the days of no GFE – no kissing. But I was young and dumb – and just figured I got lucky and found one that kissed. However, I could always “feel” a connection with her … well, after the first or second time with her I could. I don’t feel that same “connection” with most escorts.
Allow me to take your cherry on that one Maggie.
Kinda sorta at least.
I’ve got family members who are former sex workers. I’ve lived with current and former sex workers. I’ve worked alongside sex worker collectives. Some of the closest friends of my life have been sex workers. I’ve been speaking out for sex worker rights for most of my adult life.
But I’ve never employed a sex worker (unless you count some teenaged visits to strip shows).
Why?
I have Aspergers (well, not anymore really. they abolished it a few months ago) and have a lot of trouble reading how others actually feel. So I am always pretty insecure in intimate relationships.
I’ve got a really strong instinct that if I ever struck a sex worker who put on a convincing act that I knew I was paying for I would become even more insecure. It’s one thing to know in theory that women are capable of fooling me that way but to experience it as a confirmed fact would be another thing entirely.
And of course that wasn’t helped by some of the banter about clients I’ve heard between sex workers of my acquaintance.
Whoa, major nostalgia! 😉
Look, when escorts brag they can “fake it” without a guy knowing – what they’re talking about is the physiology. Yes, a woman can fake an orgasm and you won’t know.
But what she cannot “fake” – is the emotional connection. Now, some guys don’t know how to read women and they mistake the physiological response for emotional connection. These are the guys that end up stalking escorts.
The Feminist myth that society is a conspiracy of men to keep women in a position such that they must sell sex has always conveniently ignored that the fallback career of a no-skills man is usually cannon fodder. This deliberate ignorance is so pervasive that they gripe about women not being allowed into combat. I have shocked a number of Feminists by suggesting that, since women mostly sat out the Revolution, the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam that they should be drafted as the mainstay of the next nine wars, while the men are allowed to volunteer (or not) for support positions.
Careful buddy, I resemble that remark! 😛
All female military? The end of civilization as we know it. Women SUCK at teamwork.
They might make good drone pilots though.
Hold off, women don’t such at teamwork, we suck at following rules.
There is a huge difference.
Totally agree. Especially arbitrary rules.
No – what you’re saying IS true but that’s not the reason.
Now – let me preface by saying that the women on my Aegis Cruiser were stellar … and they did some jobs better than men, and I’ve commented on that before. And – I never had to bail out a female from jail because of a DUI, drug use, domestic violence, etc. So there’s that too.
But when it came to “teamwork” … no.
Women are the vindictive creatures of the species. They take offense quicker … they demand unqualified respect. It only takes a small slight – and it may even be unintentional – but the woman will remember it for life – and you’re in her little black book of revenge. They do not work well with other women over them AT ALL and always prefer men as superiors.
The prettier females – are constantly bullied by the others – because the ugly bitties always outnumber the hot ones – and they’re always resentful of the good looking ones. I remember one time a gal came to me to bitch because one of the gals (a smokin’ hot one) always exited the shower and walked to her bunk to get dressed in the morning … NUDE. The other women – apparently put a towel around themselves. Well, Petty Officer “Smokin’ Hot” didn’t and when I got this complaint – initially I wanted to ask the other girl if she was as good looking naked as she was in uniform. I resisted this though – and put a female Senior Chief on the problem to resolve it – I refused to get involved in female bunkroom disputes. I had ZERO disputes in male berthing. Hell – those guys played WWE Wrestling and even drew blood – but they never told anyone wearing khaki’s about it. What happened in male berthing – STAYED in male berthing. Pecking order – you see?
Get a group of men in a room and if they are there for any amount of time an uncontested pecking order will evolve. The betas will move to the back and the alphas to the front – and it’s an organic process. Women – no … the pecking order is always in dispute and no woman is ever satisfied with her position within it until she’s the lead bitty – and she’ll undercut everyone to get there.
Women – are individuals. Men are the naturally team oriented.
I disagree completely. I have found that women tend to want to do things in groups more then men (take the go to the bathroom in groups example, but also the way women tend to potluck dinners and do group crafts and shop in groups, ect) – The reasons for this are decidedly social, but once a hierarchy has been established, women can work in groups just as well, if not better than men, its just a different kind of group (not based off of silly rules that make no sense :-P).
Now, not all women can work with groups of men, but that is entirely different.
Seriously – did you just compare warfare to going to the bathroom and potluck dinners?
You’re talking SOCIAL interaction where there IS no pecking order. Go to a knitting club – most of the women are working independently anyway. I’m not saying that women have no capability of working on a team – I’m just saying they suck at it.
Real teamwork involves some hardship and pressure. It’s the fourth quarter with 3 seconds left and the opposing team has the ball on the one yard line. You’re the linebacker – you better NOT let ’em though your zone. Pressure to perform – where is that in a potluck dinner?
I mean … I spit out my coffee when I read that – seriously?
*sigh* girls play sports just as well as boys do. Have you ever seen a field hockey game?
Look, I really don’t understand where you are getting the idea that girls suck at team work, its simply not true. And your kidding yourself if you think there’s no pecking order in social groups, regardless of what they are doing.
No, she didn’t. She was talking about teamwork. There’s more kinds of teams than submarine crews. There are team projects other than warfare.
I’ve been watching the Olympics, and a complaint I’ve heard from some men about women in team sports is that they tend to pass the puck to set up an easy shot instead of trying for the spectacular shot. I’ve heard this sort of thing even more when it comes to basketball. That’s teamwork instead of trying to be the star.
Women can be terribly petty and vindictive. So can men. When we do it, though, it’s liable to lead to fighting, real fighting, with pain and the risk of losing. So men constrain themselves, and only get that way if we’re thinking that it might be worth fighting over. Women sometimes fight too, but the truth is they can have a whole lot of the cattiness going on without going to Fist City. So the women constrain themselves too, but have a much higher threshold for that sort of thing.
The problem is when the two sexes interact, and try to argue. The woman will go and say something to the man which, if another man said it, would get said man a knuckle sandwich. But then “don’t hit a girl” kicks in, and the man is left fighting by an alien set of rules. Does he say something just as bad? Usually he restrains himself from that. If he does let that restraint go, he’s still not very good at it, because he isn’t practiced at it. So much of the time, the man loses that fight, just as she would have lost had it been a fistfight.
My advice is to go for a walk. If she’s really, really wanting to “fight,” taking the fight away from her is probably the meanest thing you can do to her and not get arrested anyway, and she can’t complain about it without seeming an even bigger bitch. “He wouldn’t yell at me and say ugly things to me! That asshole!!!”
That’s fine, men can be support positions in the next nine wars, but they also need to give up the right to vote, the right to own property, and the right to run for office. 😛
Why? None of the women alive today were ever denied those things. What’s with the “archaic identity” … it’s like Sheila Jackson Lee standing on the floor of congress … “I stand here a freed slave” …
Uhm … no you don’t. You are not a slave, you have never been a slave – you have no identity even remotely connected to the slaves – even though your skin is black. You don’t understand the slave experience any better than I do and perhaps you have a poorer understanding of it because you falsely identify with it.
Fuck, my ancestors were killed and enslaved by the Romans – do I have an appreciation for that? Is there something coded into my DNA that has passed down the horrors of all that? No.
“Men used to deny women the right to vote and own property”.
No we didn’t – some dead guys did … I never did … no one alive ever did. Oh wait? We’re guilty of it anyway … somehow throught he process of being born … well then …
The fact of the matter is – I know just as much about women suffrage as any woman does. I can identify with it as well as any woman can – because no woman alive today has any first hand experience. Therefore – what we know we learned in books and in school – and I can read and listen to a teacher as good as any female. 😀
Yeah, well, I was not actually trying to be serious, I was replying to I was replying to this:
I agree with the clean slate mantra- I personally firmly believe that anyone can do anything, regardless of sex. The hitching point is that girls and boys may have to do things differently to achieve the same results (I need a stool to reach the top shelf that my husband can reach without one, I fit in tight spaces that he would need to excavate somehow, I need to think in analogies, my coworker needs to think in flow charts, ect)
I think one of the main reasons women are such a minority in the military is that the military is set up to be very inflexible with how tasks are achieved, and the standardized how is very male oriented, leaving only a minority of women who can achieve results using those standard methods.
Can you be more specific on the “inflexibility” of the military with regards to how tasks are achieved and how the methods are male centered? I was in the military for 24 years and I missed that i guess. When a better way came along – we usually tried to adopt it – unless it was too expensive.
Or unless some arsehole with too much jewellery on his shoulder had a stake in doing it the bad old way.
And hey, I thought the military was more likely to adopt things if they’re too expensive. Sure seems to work that way here.
That’s not what I was talking about. Yeah, it’s true – we called it the “brother-in-law” paradigm – where a piece of shit equipment is procured and kept for no good reason – so we figured … “Someone’s brother in law must have made this shit.”
The OMEGA NAVIGATION system was one example that angered me.
But that’s not what we’re talking about here. What I SUPECT that SD is talking about are things like uniform regulations … physical fitness standards … good order and discipline things like marching … unit PT … bans on fraternization … etc.
Hey, if the gals have suggestions – good for them! But they need to be GOOD suggestions and not ignore 5,000 years of learned military science.
Coming from econ, “if there was real equality there wouldn’t sex trade” is an example of a common logical fallacy, namely that trade requires inequality.
As David Ricardo showed in the 19th century, all that trading sex for money implies is that women have a comparative advantage in sex, not that they have an absolute disadvantage at other trades. Although the example he used was the wine trade, that’s just a different thing busybodies try to ban.
Essentially, if women are choosing to sell sex, it means the ratio of “amount of money I can make as an escort” divided by “amount of money I can make doing whatever else” is higher for women than men. It does not mean “amount of money I can make doing whatever else” is lower for women. Women could, and I’m going out on a limb here, just be better at selling sex than men are.
I’m sure you’ve had clients who had lower incomes than you did, I’d think that isn’t even that uncommon in escorting. So yeah, there we go.
If women were wealthier than men, if women were better than men at everything, if every single woman was better than every single man at every single thing, there would still be a trade of sex from women to men. Also, the legalization of prostitution would fairly obviously cause an increase in women’s wages relative to men.
Anyway, came here from a link from popehat and have been reading voraciously. Wit, charm, and a downright patriotic dislike of petty tyrants- this blog is great.
Thank you! 🙂
3) A courtesan knows sex can be sold but love must be given.
You have very good taste in art.
Thank you. 🙂
2) is an obvious fallacy. Talents of all kinds seem to be passed out randomly, but even if all women were better than any man at *everything*, in sex they will always have a huge comparative advantage as the economists call it (at least until they come up with the perfect robot, and maybe even then).
@Storm Daughter: “anyone can do anything” — this is certainly true of most occupations, but demanding to be that last half-percent “equal” has caused major problems. Not being in the military I can’t judge the effect there — but we’re certainly having more people die in house fires now that the strength tests that ensured a firefighter could pick up and carry most adults to safety has been abolished as “sexism.” That’s a price we should be refusing to pay.
Whoa, I’d like to see some sources that claim that fire deaths have gone up because of women firefighters (and you’ll have to factor out the difference building materials have made in the ferocity and frequency of fires in the last 30 years).
I’d like to see a source that more people are dying in house fires. This would be quite at odds with the trend of fewer people dying from other causes (car crashes, murder). If true, I’d definitely like to know the reasons WHY more people are dying house fires. Female firefighters, differences in building materials, budget cuts at fire departments, whatever, that needs to be fixed… IF more people are dying in house fires.