Paying for sex

Feisar

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

... as long as that woman is not your sister or daughter!
I would agree with what Baracus said. The women involved in porn, which is of course prostitution, are far from the 'empowered' women we are lead to believe.

I think anyone involved in porn is missing something mentally.

NaFirinne

Making it legal doesn't help women that are being enslaved into a life of prostitution against there will. However criminalizing doesn't really solve the problem either.

I think it's should be legalized but any person going into the profession requires a license by the state....and to acquire the license them must go through an interview process to determine that they are doing it of their own free will and are given all the necessary health training and advise.

However having sex with someone for money as in (intercourse or oral) is banned with fines for offenders starting at 1 grand upwards to be payable to the person whom you visited.

Also anyone married must have full partners permission before engaging with anyone. If found out without partners permission then said partner gets all rights to all of their assets.

Ironicname

Feisar wrote:

I think anyone involved in porn is missing something mentally.

Interesting. Why so?

Ironicname

NaFirinne wrote:

However having sex with someone for money as in (intercourse or oral) is banned with fines for offenders starting at 1 grand upwards to be payable to the person whom you visited.

What?

NaFirinne wrote:

Also anyone married must have full partners permission before engaging with anyone. If found out without partners permission then said partner gets all rights to all of their assets.

Again.... What?

victor8600

Ironicname wrote: »

What?
Again.... What?

Are you opposed to any specific details, but agreeing in principle?

Loafing Oaf

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I would agree with what Baracus said.

I pity the fool who wouldn't:p

Ironicname

victor8600 wrote:

Are you opposed to any specific details, but agreeing in principle?

All of it.

You need permission from your partner to visit a prostitute? Ridiculous and impossible to police.

There is a fine of 1k for having sex? Again, ridiculous and impossible to enforce.

NaFirinne

Ironicname wrote: »

All of it.

You need permission from your partner to visit a prostitute? Ridiculous and impossible to police.

There is a fine of 1k for having sex? Again, ridiculous and impossible to enforce.

These are specific suggestions and open to compromise



However do you agree with the first part



"Making it legal doesn't help women that are being enslaved into a life of prostitution against there will. However criminalizing doesn't really solve the problem either.

I think it's should be legalized but any person going into the profession requires a license by the state....and to acquire the license them must go through an interview process to determine that they are doing it of their own free will and are given all the necessary health training and advise."

victor8600

Ironicname wrote: »

...
There is a fine of 1k for having sex? Again, ridiculous and impossible to enforce.

You are trying to misquote. It is not a fine for having sex. It is a fine for buying sex.

And this "ridiculous and impossible" proposition is actually the law in Ireland now:

... a person who pays, gives, offers or promises to pay or give a person (including a prostitute) money or any other form of remuneration or consideration for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity with a prostitute shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of up to €500 for a first offence, and a fine of up to €1,000 for each subsequent offence.

jaxxx

"I think", "I think", "I think", "I think", "I think", "I think", "I think".

So many people thinking, without any real solid base from which to stand on. Here's an idea, why not listen to what the sex workers themselves think? I've included a short video below from one of the leading campaigners for sex work in Ireland, Kate McGrew, she herself a sex worker.

I said this already, and I'll say it again. Sex work (pure 100% choice) and human trafficking (no choice) are not the same thing. So many people have these disgusting old stereotypes that sex workers are poorly educated, riddled with sexual diseases, drug addicts, etc. From the articles I've read through these last few years and videos I've watched, that is just complete bull. But undoubtedly there are some that probably will fit these old stereotypes, but is it a case that the majority of sex workers are like this? I don't believe so at all.

Being forced to have sex with strangers for money, with all the money going to pimps/traffickers/etc, is perhaps the most disgusting act mankind has ever conceived, certainly one of at least. No matter what laws you make or what you make illegal, those that cause this brutality will always find a way to remain undetected, and remain forever undeterred as a result. I don't have the answers, I wish I did, I wish someone did. The fact remains that there isn't a single foolproof answer to stop human trafficking. And this law has not stopped the purchase of sex in this country, nor has it done so in Northern Ireland where it was made illegal just before it was here.

But certainly the way to go forward is to work WITH the sex workers themselves instead of casting aside their opinions like rubbish. They're the people with the experience. They're the ones in the know. How does it make any sense to make a law about sex work when the decision making doesn't take into account the very opinions of those it directly affects??

An interview with a Swedish sex worker and activist, where it's been illegal since the early 2000's:

Ironicname

victor8600 wrote:

And this "ridiculous and impossible" proposition is actually the law in Ireland now:

You said that the 1000 should be made payable to the prostitute.

Feisar

Ironicname wrote: »

Interesting. Why so?

It's not based on any science or study, just watched a few documentaries on the topic. Most seem to be lacking mentally. I don't mean slow but missing a certain something. Maybe they are hardened (no pun) to an industry that uses them as meat.

Jonybgud

You pay for it one way or another, nothing wrong with a straight up deal for the act itself.

CalamariFritti

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

So if your father/uncle etc is going to to Spain or Portugal (or shudder - Thailand) to play golf then there’s a very good chance he’s also being persuaded by his mates to give the old nosebag and sex for money thing a go.

bullsh1t. Some people like golf you know.

position 1: "sex, including as a service, should be a matter between consenting adults"

position 2: "trafficking"

position 1: "i literally said consenting adults"

position 2: "trafficking and rape are wrong"

position 1: ".......agreed?"

position 2: "all bought sex is harmful and rape"

position 1: ".......what?"

position 2: "sex is straight up harmful outside of christian marriage and women cant be trusted to make their own bodily autonomy or economic decisions when it differs to my opinion on morality "


just waiting for that last statement tbh. keep it up all the position 2's, you're right on track

the idea, essentially, that ~sex~ *must be* the most intimate or personal act for person x because *you view it that way yourself* is a fallacy and needs to be challenged the same way the policing of any adult person's behaviour ought to be.

the "for their own good" bar is set extremely high in most control cases, and where it isnt you very often find a highly dubious morality campaign of shaming and agenda-driven accepted fact.

if someone finds something wrong with a sex worker making their own choice to provide their chosen service for the chosen customer at the agreed price, they should admit their moral agenda and not hide behind generalities that would be laughed out of any reasonable debate like "everybody knows sex with strangers/unattractive people hurts your mental health"

lads and ladies, if that were true coppers wouldve had a luas line to the CMH two decades ago.

the debate is so obviously led by fundamentalism its laughable

victor8600

Ironicname wrote: »

You said that the 1000 should be made payable to the prostitute.

To quote you: What? I have said no such thing.

Woke Hogan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

position 1: "sex, including as a service, should be a matter between consenting adults"

position 2: "trafficking"

position 1: "i literally said consenting adults"

position 2: "trafficking and rape are wrong"

position 1: ".......agreed?"

position 2: "all bought sex is harmful and rape"

position 1: ".......what?"

position 2: "sex is straight up harmful outside of christian marriage and women cant be trusted to make their own bodily autonomy or economic decisions when it differs to my opinion on morality "


just waiting for that last statement tbh. keep it up all the position 2's, you're right on track

How long have you been hearing these voices in your head?

Berserker

Jonybgud wrote: »

You pay for it one way or another, nothing wrong with a straight up deal for the act itself.

I hate this line. How do I end up paying for sex with my wife?

cj maxx

Like everything else it depends on the participants. Both parties willing I don't see the problem selling or buying sex

Ironicname

NaFirinne wrote:

However having sex with someone for money as in (intercourse or oral) is banned with fines for offenders starting at 1 grand upwards to be payable to the person whom you visited.

What does this mean then if not that the prostitute receives the 1k?

Ironicname

victor8600 wrote:

To quote you: What? I have said no such thing.

You didn't but when I said the the posters idea was unenforceable, you said there was a similar law already. There isn't.

corner of hells

Bridgewater wrote: »

It is often the case that wives control their husbands by controlling when they have sex. If they fight it is more likely that the husband will acquiesce, as he needs sex more than she does.

Often the case ? , I take it you're not married.

Ironicname

Bridgewater wrote:

It is often the case that wives control their husbands by controlling when they have sex. If they fight it is more likely that the husband will acquiesce, as he needs sex more than she does.

Hahaha...Jesus.

Wayne Jarvis

I haven't read the whole thread but if any female boardsies have admitted to being a prostitute please PM me.



Thank you.

corner of hells

Bridgewater wrote: »

It is often the case that wives control their husbands by controlling when they have sex. If they fight it is more likely that the husband will acquiesce, as he needs sex more than she does.

This is comedy gold , AH at its finest .

Ironicname

Bridgewater wrote:

It is often the case that wives control their husbands by controlling when they have sex. If they fight it is more likely that the husband will acquiesce, as he needs sex more than she does.

I didn't know you could get the internet where you lived.

Wibbs

Ironicname wrote: »

I didn't know you could get the internet where you lived.

though to be fair it can be a "thing" like he describes, more usual that sex dries up on one side(like one chap described in his own life). That said it's nearly always the woman referenced and blamed for that, but I've known quite a few women in largely sexless longtermers where it was the man who wasn't up for it and it affected their sense of self and well being and feeling of being a desirable person just as much. If not a little worse in some ways, because it tends to be much less talked about. And the idea that men are always up for it, which must make a woman in that situation feel even worse. Why isn't he wanting me kinda thing. I mean the "frigid married woman" thing is a near meme, so at least there might be a sense of "well, sure I'm not alone in this" for the men in such setups. That 80's US comedy show Married With Children used the sexless husband as a theme, but that's about the only one I can think of in the media?

Ironicname

Wibbs wrote:

though to be fair it can be a "thing" like he describes, more usual that sex dries up on one side(like one chap described in his own life).

I'm sure it can. But a blanket generalisation deserves no further investigation. It's silly. But we all know that.

myshirt

I am too lazy to read the whole thread but I hope that someone has mentioned that "free sex" is actually the most expensive.

On a serious note, don't regard myself as a prude or anything to that effect, but certainly something unsettling about sex as a product. We have wives, daughters, sisters, friends. Where is the respect and decency gone?

I am not Jesus Christ levitating on the cross above you all though. I live in the real world. If a girl wants to do this, more power to her elbow, but there's something that's just unsettling about it for me. I hope she's ok, but I somehow just don't know if she is. Maybe I'm wrong. Hopefully I'm wrong. Just not for me.

Austria!

Mad_maxx wrote: »

No person choses a path like that willingly

What about Kate McGrew brought up in this thread? What about Belle du Jour?

Padre_Pio

To all the people who are anti prostitution, if you could guarantee the woman (or man) was a totally willing participant would you be for it?

Reviews and Books Galore

Wibbs wrote: »

though to be fair it can be a "thing" like he describes, more usual that sex dries up on one side(like one chap described in his own life). That said it's nearly always the woman referenced and blamed for that, but I've known quite a few women in largely sexless longtermers where it was the man who wasn't up for it and it affected their sense of self and well being and feeling of being a desirable person just as much. If not a little worse in some ways, because it tends to be much less talked about. And the idea that men are always up for it, which must make a woman in that situation feel even worse. Why isn't he wanting me kinda thing. I mean the "frigid married woman" thing is a near meme, so at least there might be a sense of "well, sure I'm not alone in this" for the men in such setups. That 80's US comedy show Married With Children used the sexless husband as a theme, but that's about the only one I can think of in the media?

Imo, I think that's why I don't really see a problem with having 'weekend holidays' for both partners. I think the chinese have the concept of 'heart love' where you think with your nurturing part and 'animal love' where you think with your animal part.



Might make it more monogamous...maybe.

twowheelsonly

victor8600 wrote: »

On the other hand, I feel nothing but contempt for somebody who would treat another person as just a sexual object in exchange for money.

Are you talking about the Prostitute or the John here ?? After all, both are doing the same thing essentially.


I appreciate that it's anecdotal but...…..

I personally know two prostitutes, both of whom work at it part-time but regularly. They're both friends but I'd know one of them better than the other. She's as happy as Larry. She's a single mother of two school going kids so does a few day-time shifts of her own choice each week. On a quiet week she'll take in around €500. Coming up to Christmas / special occasions etc she'll do a bit more. As she says herself, it's like any other job. There's good days and bad days, nice customers and crap ones but the majority would be nice, same as anywhere.
Interestingly, whilst a few of us know what she does, I asked her if she'd 'go public' if it were legalised and her answer was no as she reckons too many people would judge her and her children.

(And no..... I haven't.....)

Reviews and Books Galore

myshirt wrote: »

I am too lazy to read the whole thread but I hope that someone has mentioned that "free sex" is actually the most expensive.

On a serious note, don't regard myself as a prude or anything to that effect, but certainly something unsettling about sex as a product. We have wives, daughters, sisters, friends. Where is the respect and decency gone?

I am not Jesus Christ levitating on the cross above you all though. I live in the real world. If a girl wants to do this, more power to her elbow, but there's something that's just unsettling about it for me. I hope she's ok, but I somehow just don't know if she is. Maybe I'm wrong. Hopefully I'm wrong. Just not for me.

In fairness, sometimes you want somebody to nurture wife/daughter and sometimes you want somebody to let wild with (whore and I'm using this word without any judgement). It's the same way sometimes a woman wants a husband, sometimes she wants a son figure, and sometimes she wants a bushman to be an animal.



I guess it's madonna/whore but both genders do have it.

Tell me how

Bullet To The Head? wrote: »

Look you talk **** about men who pay for it but those guys have hit rock bottom. They don't give a **** anymore. And why should they? I'm not there yet but there's no brakes on this train.

But yeah you're a woman and sex is on tap for you. For your so called empathy, you're actually clueless.

If you think all women have sex on tap I think it indicates a misunderstanding of what sex (meaningful sex) is for a lot of people.
It's way more than just the physical act for most people (certainly women in my experience, fwiw).

Thinking about this and your partner might give you some things to work at in order to improve the situation for you both.

leggo

If you were to take these kind of threads and build a profile of the typical boards user based off them, it’d look like:

- Man who hates #MeToo or any kind of women speaking up
- Thinks dating apps are BS
- Thinks prostitution gets a bad wrap

Oof. When did boards become a haven for the incels?

leggo

leggo wrote: »

If you were to take these kind of threads and build a profile of the typical boards user based off them, it’d look like:

- Man who hates #MeToo or any kind of women speaking up
- Thinks dating apps are BS
- Thinks prostitution gets a bad wrap

Oof. When did boards become a haven for the incels?

Wow.

I am not a fan of the #metoo movement.
I do think that dating apps are bull****
And I have no problem with legalising prostitution.

Apparently I am an incel?

Ok Leggo. :rolleyes:

Reviews and Books Galore

leggo wrote: »

If you were to take these kind of threads and build a profile of the typical boards user based off them, it’d look like:

- Man who hates #MeToo or any kind of women speaking up
- Thinks dating apps are BS
- Thinks prostitution gets a bad wrap

Oof. When did boards become a haven for the incels?

I love how incel is being used to insult men. It's just funny how people are calling men mysognists by saying that they can't get laid and insulting their masculinity :P



I feel like it's being used in the same way 'gay' was used if a man stepped out of societies role.

khaldrogo

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I love how incel is being used to insult men. It's just funny how people are calling men mysognists by saying that they can't get laid and insulting their masculinity :P



I feel like it's being used in the same way 'gay' was used if a man stepped out of societies role.

These feminazis and beta males who are throwing the 'incel' insults around should realize that straight males who are secure in themselves couldn't give a shîte what labels you try to push on them.

I can just picture this person > "I called him an incel!! That will show him..."..... Lol
All it shows is how desperate you are to try and make a weak point seem strong.

Elmer Blooker

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

In fairness, sometimes you want somebody to nurture wife/daughter and sometimes you want somebody to let wild with (whore and I'm using this word without any judgement). It's the same way sometimes a woman wants a husband, sometimes she wants a son figure, and sometimes she wants a bushman to be an animal.

I suppose it would help if it was a wealthy bushman and not a poor one?

Feisar

twowheelsonly wrote: »

Are you talking about the Prostitute or the John here ?? After all, both are doing the same thing essentially.


I appreciate that it's anecdotal but...…..

I personally know two prostitutes, both of whom work at it part-time but regularly. They're both friends but I'd know one of them better than the other. She's as happy as Larry. She's a single mother of two school going kids so does a few day-time shifts of her own choice each week. On a quiet week she'll take in around €500. Coming up to Christmas / special occasions etc she'll do a bit more. As she says herself, it's like any other job. There's good days and bad days, nice customers and crap ones but the majority would be nice, same as anywhere.
Interestingly, whilst a few of us know what she does, I asked her if she'd 'go public' if it were legalised and her answer was no as she reckons too many people would judge her and her children.

(And no..... I haven't.....)

I always peddle the broken lives/damaged goods type hooker however the only one I ever met seemed A1.
I was living with a drug dealer in Belfast back in the day. Arrived back to the house one evening and there was this doll. Bleach blonde, tanned to death and tits about to pour out of her top, eating a fish supper with my friendly dealer. After she had left he said what she did for a crust but that they were friends.

leggo

I’m just saying there’s a recurring trend there that’s clear to see. If someone was able to consensually get the ride, they wouldn’t have issues with women speaking up about being sexually assaulted, would be happy with dating apps because it’s a system that benefitted them and wouldn’t be so willing to ignore constant reports about human trafficking within prostitution and instead look at one AMA with one person from years ago as all the justification they needed. They are three stances you need to bend over backwards to get to individually and they paint a very obvious picture.

And as soon as I pointed that out, immediately the incel language (“feminazi beta male cuck white knight etc”) began getting trotted out on-command.

leggo

leggo wrote: »

I’m just saying there’s a recurring trend there that’s clear to see. If someone was able to consensually get the ride, they wouldn’t have issues with women speaking up about being sexually assaulted, would be happy with dating apps because it’s a system that benefitted them and wouldn’t be so willing to ignore constant reports about human trafficking within prostitution and instead look at one AMA with one person from years ago as all the justification they needed. They are three stances you need to bend over backwards to get to individually and they paint a very obvious picture.

And as soon as I pointed that out, immediately the incel language (“feminazi beta male cuck white knight etc”) began getting trotted out on-command.

While I disagree with the language used by some of the people who responded, you can't be surprised that they lower themselves to your level with your use of incel as an insult.

I also vehemently disagree with your statement that only people who "can't consensually get the ride" would have an issue with what the #metoo movement became.

There is plenty wrong with that movement.

Also, agreeing with the legalisation of prostitution to potentially STOP human trafficking is hardly an indication of not being able to "consensually get the ride".

And the fact that I personally think that dating apps have diminished the ability of both sexes to start a more organic relationship and instead become some Instagram-lite shallow way of judging someone purely on their looks is a little sad. I'm very glad that I am married and am not on the dating scene in this day and age. But, sure that's probably another sign that I can't "consensually get the ride"

Reviews and Books Galore

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I suppose it would help if it was a wealthy bushman and not a poor one?

Funnily enough, I did imagine a bushman with 'wealthy/good supply of food and nutrition' health indicators.



A good head of hair, a strong meaty bone structure (not a gym rat or overly lean), good body hair, tall and with a strong pair of hands, and with healthy clear skin without blemishes.



Do you know there was a psychological study that said women can tell a man's social class based on skin tone due to the fact (most probably modern tbh) that organic/healthy food has become a class signifier?



Just interesting how you said wealthy, but it may in fact be 'healthy'. Edit: I'm talking about my own thought pattern and not picking at your words :P

leggo

You’re taking this personally and you realise I never, at any stage, said ‘the Dunne’ right? That’s a mantle you’ve taken up yourself man.

And you’re making a lot of assumptions on my behalf. I said the combination of the three paints a particular picture. I also think there’s eejits on every side of every discussion. I absolutely loved Bill Burr’s “I think we got ‘em all/Believe 88% of women” breakdown of #MeToo. I also think prostitution should be legalised, but for different reasons.

But, still, it’s hard to deny the picture that vehemently arguing all three stances paints. When someone argues against women, as a whole, shouldn’t speak up about sexual assault, or that one boards AMA conclusively proves that most prostitutes go into it wilfully and happily...they’re both total BS stances to cover for something else. I’m sure you can admit that too, there’s something else going on there right? And it’s natural to wonder what that something else they’re not saying is.

alangeorge

mr_fegelien wrote: »

Why is it seen as wrong? Sex is considered a need like food, water, shelter yet paying for it is considered immoral, desperate, offensive to women, etc....

The "it spreads STD's argument" doesn't add up because many escorts get tested more often than typical couples.

its wrong now because its illegal here but more importantly its wrong because its the innocent and
vulnerable girls that suffer here with pimps and traffickers taking total advantage of the situation and clients will continue to support it and agrue theres nothing wrong with it because of their own selfish needs but at the end of the day they dont think or care about these vulnerable girls who get forced into it through no fault of their own and youre naive about STDS too and you cant compare couples with a business like escorting, do you really believe these escorts will stop working because of an STD, of course not, many work away, do you really believe they care about guys who visit them who are total strangers and who they will never see again, get real please, cash is king and most will work as its their business, their livelihood and they got bills and rent to pay.

Wibbs

leggo wrote: »

Oof. When did boards become a haven for the incels?

The better question would be when did boards* become a haven for retarded American tropes like "incel/feminazi/beta male/cuck/white knight etc" and all the others with the simplistic decisiveness for the sluggish of thought. BTW and I hate to break it to you, you're just as guilty of buying into it wholesale.








*The answer seems to be about five years ago when it first started to creep in and went nuts when that orange fcuknugget Trump came along. Before that "cucking" was only to be found among bored suburban deviants bumping - and they usually were - uglies.

marieholmfan

Not to mention that tedious dullard Bill Burr.

Wibbs wrote: »

The better question would be when did boards* become a haven for retarded American tropes like "incel/feminazi/beta male/cuck/white knight etc" and all the others with the simplistic decisiveness for the sluggish of thought. BTW and I hate to break it to you, you're just as guilty of buying into it wholesale.








*The answer seems to be about five years ago when it first started to creep in and went nuts when that orange fcuknugget Trump came along. Before that "cucking" was only to be found among bored suburban deviants bumping - and they usually were - uglies.

Reviews and Books Galore

Wibbs wrote: »

The better question would be when did boards* become a haven for retarded American tropes like "incel/feminazi/beta male/cuck/white knight etc" and all the others with the simplistic decisiveness for the sluggish of thought. BTW and I hate to break it to you, you're just as guilty of buying into it wholesale.


*The answer seems to be about five years ago when it first started to creep in and went nuts when that orange fcuknugget Trump came along. Before that "cucking" was only to be found among bored suburban deviants bumping - and they usually were - uglies.

Absolutely.