What DO you think

jaffacakesyum

I would never get in a relationship with a man who uses prostitutes. I have no problem with prostitution being legalised and if the women is safe and happy than knock your brains out, but it's just not something I could ever respect in a man.

I've gone long spells without sex that have drove me crazy but I would rather die a virgin than pay for sex. I'm not saying everyone should be like that, I'm just saying my potential partner would not be someone who pays for sex.

MaxWig

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

I would never get in a relationship with a man who uses prostitutes. I have no problem with prostitution being legalised and if the women is safe and happy than knock your brains out, but it's just not something I could ever respect in a man.

I've gone long spells without sex that have drove me crazy but I would rather die a virgin than pay for sex. I'm not saying everyone should be like that, I'm just saying my potential partner would not be someone who pays for sex.

As far as you'll know

jaffacakesyum

MaxWig wrote: »

As far as you'll know

Obviously

username123

I'd really have to judge each situation on its own merits. It wouldn't necessarily be an automatic deal breaker. It would depend very much on the why, how, who, when of it all. And the mans attitude to women in a broader sense also.

eviltwin

I couldn't either, I've nothing against it but its just one of those things I would have a hard time accepting from a partner. Maybe that makes me a judgemental hypocrite but so be it.

YumCha

I will say I used to be far more black and white on this than I am now. My position at the moment is it depends, as I'm slightly undecided about situations where the guy has a particular fetish, or as someone else mentioned - the case of disabilities.

On the fetish side - there are a few female dommes in Ireland and they explicitly don't offer 'sexual' services in order to remain operational - would people here generally lump that in with prostitution?

ash23

YumCha wrote: »

I will say I used to be far more black and white on this than I am now. My position at the moment is it depends, as I'm slightly undecided about situations where the guy has a particular fetish, or as someone else mentioned - the case of disabilities.

On the fetish side - there are a few female dommes in Ireland and they explicitly don't offer 'sexual' services in order to remain operational - would people here generally lump that in with prostitution?

If you're paying for sexual gratification then to me, it's the same as prostitution. In fact I would find a fetish more off putting than someone who went to a prostitute for sex (unless it was also of the kinky variety). I'm not really into fetishes myself so I can't see how I'd have a healthy relationship with someone who was.

Kold

I'll share my opinion but I fear it will be completely lambasted.


First of all, I don't use prostitutes. However I have lived in areas where prostitution is endemic and I would not judge a man who does go to them as long as he treats them with respect and I also don't judge prostitutes as long as they aren't thieves.

The problem with a lot of Asia is that there isn't much in between the 'proper' girls who you have to see for ages until you get a whiff and then they expect marriage and kid and actual working girls. I've been rather sexless for a little while as I try to seek a girl who likes to keep things casual and on top of all my other criteria for a suitable partner, this is difficult. I have friends who often go with customers to make a little extra money but the fact is, in almost every case the girl can say no. You need to realise that being a working girl is actually easier and more lucrative than working in a rice field, a restaurant or whatever. Often these girls are actually looking for a western boyfriend because a) they have money and b) they often treat girls much better than the locals.

So a lot of the time, it's easier for a man to see a working girl than to court a young lady and then get seen as a scumbag when they don't put a ring on their finger. Personally, I don't really like that option as it's so short term and blowing my load once mechanically is not the sexual relief I'm seeking.

I'm not saying all but a lot of Western women are so hung up on prostitution but have no problems with getting their smelly feet soaked and massaged, or buying knock off clothing and handbags made in sweatshops. It's all exploitation. I think it boils down to a sexual politics thing, the fear of rape, or else women think men need to earn sex. The men do earn sex. Only whereas at home they might earn it from charm and good looks, over here they earn it from having money. Although money matters at home and charm and good looks also gets you far over here.

People complain about the old men who come out here and take advantage of the young girls (and boys). I've met a lot of punters, arseholes exist, but I've also met lots of lovely older men who worked all their lives, never married, come out here and maybe find a wife 10 or 20 years younger and I honestly see no wrongdoing. By Western standards this man is a loser, well f*ck judgemental sheltered people who point the finger. If a man provides, respects and is good to a woman, let him eat cake.
Fairy tales rarely exist out here.

MaxWig

ash23 wrote: »

If you're paying for sexual gratification then to me, it's the same as prostitution. In fact I would find a fetish more off putting than someone who went to a prostitute for sex (unless it was also of the kinky variety). I'm not really into fetishes myself so I can't see how I'd have a healthy relationship with someone who was.

Far be it from me to judge, but are you looking for a replicate of yourself?

username123

ash23 wrote: »

I'm not really into fetishes myself so I can't see how I'd have a healthy relationship with someone who was.

I think this is another one I'd have to judge on specifics, for example, if my husband had a fetish that meant he couldn't reach satisfaction unless I wore red silk gloves during the act, I'd just wear them, no big deal to me. But if he wanted to do something that I viewed as unpleasant to me, I'd have to say no. It would really depend.

ash23

MaxWig wrote: »

Far be it from me to judge, but are you looking for a replicate of yourself?

No but having similar sexual tastes are important in a relationship. I wouldn't be one for entertaining fetish as I'd feel like a muppet and I wouldn't find it sexy or appealing.

But nor would I be ok with him getting his jollies on with another woman who would be interested while I wait at home.

Compatibility is pretty important. No point either person either depriving themselves of their desires or forcing themselves to do something they aren't comfortable with in order to keep their partner happy.
Much more likely to have a good sex life when both parties are into it and comfortable with what they are doing.

MaxWig

ash23 wrote: »

No but having similar sexual tastes are important in a relationship. I wouldn't be one for entertaining fetish as I'd feel like a muppet and I wouldn't find it sexy or appealing.

But nor would I be ok with him getting his jollies on with another woman who would be interested while I wait at home.

Compatibility is pretty important. No point either person either depriving themselves of their desires or forcing themselves to do something they aren't comfortable with in order to keep their partner happy.
Much more likely to have a good sex life when both parties are into it and comfortable with what they are doing.

Hence the massive and varied prostitution market

ash23

username123 wrote: »

I think this is another one I'd have to judge on specifics, for example, if my husband had a fetish that meant he couldn't reach satisfaction unless I wore red silk gloves during the act, I'd just wear them, no big deal to me. But if he wanted to do something that I viewed as unpleasant to me, I'd have to say no. It would really depend.

Well as it was asked in the context of having to attend a dominatrix, I was taking it to mean a more specialist kind of fetish, something kind of extreme.

username123

ash23 wrote: »

Well as it was asked in the context of having to attend a dominatrix, I was taking it to mean a more specialist kind of fetish, something kind of extreme.

Again, I'd have to judge it on specifics. Sometimes you do things for someone you love that you aren't mad about doing yourself. So long as its not painful or awful, I wouldn't really mind.

Emme

mariaalice wrote: »

The way it seemed to work was the woman would move in with him for a week for a certain amount of money, if he got fed up or did not like her he found another girl who would do the same. The woman were doing it for money so it was prostitution even if he did not think It was.

This speaks volumes about the guys attitude to women. He probably treats women from the dating site in the same way. He was telling you in not so many words that he only stays with a woman until he gets fed up with her and then moves onto the next one. I daresay if you went on another date with this guy he would expect sex. There's nothing wrong with that but I don't like his attitude to women, he seems to see them as commodities.

vitani

MaxWig wrote: »

And I'm not judging you for that either.



I am curious as to the values you are ascribing?

Genuinely

It indicates that he doesn't respect women, as far as I'm concerned. And it shows an attitude to sex itself that I'm not comfortable with.

I'm not a prude, but I believe sex should, at the very least, be something that both parties enjoy. If a woman is only doing it because she's being paid, then regardless of why she chose to participate, it bothers me. It may not be a traumatic experience for her but it does indicate that a man who pays for it thinks that his 'need' for sex is so important that it comes above having a completely willing partner.

Kold

vitani wrote: »

It indicates that he doesn't respect women, as far as I'm concerned. And it shows an attitude to sex itself that I'm not comfortable with.

I'm not a prude, but I believe sex should, at the very least, be something that both parties enjoy. If a woman is only doing it because she's being paid, then regardless of why she chose to participate, it bothers me. It may not be a traumatic experience for her but it does indicate that a man who pays for it thinks that his 'need' for sex is so important that it comes above having a completely willing partner.

Why can everything else in this world be a commodity except for sex?

MaxWig

vitani wrote: »

It indicates that he doesn't respect women, as far as I'm concerned. And it shows an attitude to sex itself that I'm not comfortable with.

I'm not a prude, but I believe sex should, at the very least, be something that both parties enjoy. If a woman is only doing it because she's being paid, then regardless of why she chose to participate, it bothers me. It may not be a traumatic experience for her but it does indicate that a man who pays for it thinks that his 'need' for sex is so important that it comes above having a completely willing partner.

Sp you have decided to relegate the 'woman' to a completely passive aspect of the transaction.

Being paid = unwilling????

vitani

Kold wrote: »

Why can everything else in this world be a commodity except for sex?

It can be a commodity. But not to someone I'd want to be in a relationship with.

Kold

vitani wrote: »

It can be a commodity. But not to someone I'd want to be in a relationship with.

Why would it be any of your business? Do you check up every partner's history?

jaffacakesyum

Kold wrote: »

Why can everything else in this world be a commodity except for sex?

Cigarettes are a commodity yet plenty of people choose not to be in relationships with smokers. Why can't sex be the same?

eviltwin

Kold wrote: »

Why would it be any of your business? Do you check up every partner's history?

Don't most people ask their partners what their previous sexual history is??

l

Kold

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Cigarettes are a commodity yet plenty of people choose not to be in relationships with smokers. Why can't sex be the same?

I would say that it's quite irrational to choose to not be in a relationship with someone who used to smoke.

Kold

eviltwin wrote: »

Don't most people ask their partners what their previous sexual history is??

l

Um. No? I don't think so anyway.

ash23

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Cigarettes are a commodity yet plenty of people choose not to be in relationships with smokers. Why can't sex be the same?

For me personally I think the past should be in the past. So if I'm entering a new relationship their past relationships don't bother me. All I care about is how they treat me.
If they were a smoker then that is current and impacts on me. If they were an ex-smoker it wouldn't bother me.

I like to take new boyfriends on their current behaviour. I appreciate that the past matters to other people but it's one reason why someones sex life wouldn't bother a new partner where smoking would.

ash23

eviltwin wrote: »

Don't most people ask their partners what their previous sexual history is?? l

Sexual history wouldn't be important to me. Relationship history would though.

meeeeh

eviltwin wrote: »

Don't most people ask their partners what their previous sexual history is??

l

And I'd say most people lie. Or at least don't tell everything.

I actually think it's naive to think you know everything about your partner's past. Prostitutes are prime example, anybody with a bit of brain would not disclose that at the beginning and not at all if their partner is against it.

eviltwin

Kold wrote: »

I would say that it's quite irrational to choose to not be in a relationship with someone who used to smoke.

I wouldn't be in a relationship with someone who had used drugs in the past. Or someone who used to have a drink problem. I wouldn't get involved with someone who had done time in prison for murder etc or who had been violent to an ex. I don't consider that to be irrational, there are just some things I don't want in a potential partner, those and the use of prostitutes are just some of them.

eviltwin

meeeeh wrote: »

And I'd say most people lie. Or at least don't tell everything.

I actually think it's naive to think you know everything about your partner's past. Prostitutes are prime example, anybody with a bit of brain would not disclose that at the beginning and not at all if their partner is against it.

I don't know everything but I trust my instinct and having been with him a long time and knowing him I trust him not to be the kind of man who needs to pay for sex. Of course you can never know 100% but you can't make a decision on something unless you know it actually exists in the first place.

jaffacakesyum

Kold wrote: »

I would say that it's quite irrational to choose to not be in a relationship with someone who used to smoke.

Fair enough, I was talking about current smokers. Ex-smokers I would date but there are still many reasons why one wouldn't date ex-smokers or ex-drug addicts or ex-alcoholics. Wouldn't call it irrational.

Kold wrote: »

Um. No? I don't think so anyway.

Really? So your partner could have had unprotected sex for 20 years yet you would be in a relationship with them and not know.