All Cats Not So Grey in the Dark.
The notion that sex in some circumstances is degrading harks back to ideas of racial purity, eugenics even. Some sexual acts can be degrading, both to men and women – but it is never the act that moral campaigners refer to as degrading – it is the circumstances preceding it, and those partaking of the act. You hear little of male prostitutes, nor of whether women are their clients; but the Feministas are obsessed with female prostitutes – despite evidence that some of their clients are women!
According to those indelibly stained by years of Gender and Equality studies, if a woman consents to sex after a man has handed £75 to a suburban pub chef newly installed in an East End refurbished warehouse – that is the enviable product of years of intense lobbying to give women the freedom to say ‘what they want’. However, if he cuts out the middleman, and hands the money directly to the woman, that is an act of degradation; in Northern Ireland, it is an act that they wish to see criminalised.
Yesterday saw the anniversary of International Whores Day, which marks the 2nd June 1972 when 100 French prostitutes occupied the Église Saint-Nizier in Lyon to protest against their working conditions. Campaigners had successfully lobbied the government to force the women out of sight, off the streets – and this had resulted in the murder of two of them. In Dublin, the Monto district was once reputed to be the largest ‘red-light district in Europe’; campaigners successfully engineered The Criminal Law Sexual Offences Act of 1993 which forced the largely ‘independent’ and feisty sex workers off the streets – and equally resulted in the murder of two young women, forced by the law into the disempowering shady network of brothels and massage parlours.
I can comprehend and sympathise with the aims of those campaigners who wish to support women who chose to leave a life of prostitution; what I cannot comprehend is those who wish to criminalise women who chose of their own free will to support themselves and their families and drive them into the arms of such campaigners. Working in a battery hen farm is unpleasant, there are various people who find their very existence disgusting, some workers may be exposed to illness or danger working there – but we respond by improving working conditions, demanding minimum wages, offering health cover; not by banning the sale of chicken. Nor do we cheerfully believe that every battery farm worker has been ‘forced’ to work there, or ‘trafficked’ to do so.
The power of message manipulation is intoxicating to a moral guardian. Readers are transported to a literary dimension where stifling old school journalistic rules do not exist. The message is ideologically driven – reason tells you that not all prostitutes are victims, of anything or anyone – but the bias translator is a powerful tool, and in small groups that suppress any dissent, they transport a far from homogenous group of individuals into their client group of vulnerable victims.
Sex-work prohibitionists have long seen trafficking and sex slavery as a useful Trojan horse. Some of the biggest and most vociferous groups in Ireland have surprisingly generous funding from even more surprising sources. There is ‘Ruhama‘ named after the Hebrew for ‘one who was spared’, which immediately conjures up an image of someone who could not help themselves, rescued from a modern form of slavery which fits with the radical feminist view of sex being a form of subordination and gender inequality.
Ruhama’s funding is 70% from the tax payer – a variety of sources, including The Human Trafficking Unit at the Department of Justice and Equality, the Health and Safety Executive, and if they have their way, and manage to get clause 10a installed in the proposed legislation to criminalise prostitution, there will be an open ended figure to finance the ‘rehousing and on going support’ of those they rescue.
Who are these kindly souls that wish only to house and support sinners vulnerable victims of human trafficking? Well it turns out that the Trustees of Ruhama bear a marked resemblance to representatives of the Religious orders once known as the Magdalen Sisters – who ran the infamous Magdalen Laundries .
“The bottom line is these four religious orders, and the State, were responsible for the effective wrongful incarceration of girls and women who were forced to work for no pay within a brutal regime.
The Magdalen Order refused to pay compensation to the girls so degraded by their ‘saviours’ – so the Irish government stepped in with £34m of tax payer funds. Now they are funding the same orders to ‘rescue’ prostitutes from a ‘brutal regime’?
The other big player in this battle for the souls of sinners sex trafficked vulnerable victims, is ‘Turn Off the Red Light‘. They are an umbrella group of 56 charities who wish to end prostitution, and append ‘sex trafficking’ to their aims these days. Why? In its 2010 “national action plan,” for example, the activist group Demand Abolition writes,
“Framing the Campaign’s key target as sexual slavery might garner more support and less resistance, while framing the Campaign as combating prostitution may be less likely to mobilise similar levels of support and to stimulate stronger opposition.”
‘The Turn Off the Red Light’ group is exceptionally well funded, they have received a whopping £24 million pounds so far to fight the good fight against prostitution, sorry, ‘prostitution and sex trafficking‘, from Atlantic Philanthropies, billionaire Charles Feeney’s foundation. That is a whole tump of money in search of the lesser spotted sex trafficked victim.
The Anti-Human Trafficking Unit (AHTU), established in the Department of Justice and Equality in February 2008, is working diligently to ensure that the Irish response to trafficking in human beings is coordinated, comprehensive and holistic.
In addition to the AHTU there are 3 other dedicated Units in State Agencies dealing with this issue, the Human Trafficking Investigation and Co-ordination Unit in the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB), the Anti-Human Trafficking Team in the Health Service Executive (HSE) and a specialised Human Trafficking legal team in the Legal Aid Board (LAB). These Units have been set up as a response to Ireland’s international obligations to provide services to victims of human trafficking. Dedicated personnel in the New Communities and Asylum Seekers Unit in the Department of Social Protection are assigned to assist victims of trafficking in the transition from Reception and Integration centres to independent living facilities. Furthermore, dedicated personnel in the office of the Director for Public Prosecutions (DPP) are assigned to deal with the prosecution of human trafficking cases.
I haven’t got the energy to track down the governmental budget for all this activity – but the Department of Justice’s Annual Report of Trafficking in Human Beings in Ireland for 2012, some four years later, says only 16 alleged victims of sex trafficking into prostitution were identified in 2012, all of these being adult females.
Only ‘alleged victims’ too. But those 16 ‘alleged victims’ are a valuable commodity. They are being used to bludgeon into silence an unknown number of women who believe that it is ‘their body, their’s to do with as they please’. A sentiment normally music to the ears of Feminsitas – but not if you take the cash rather than the diamonds….
Like all other workers, sex workers need access to the full range of services that are targeted at the general population including housing, health and social support services. Unlike other workers, they need labour rights, and the right to work in an environment free from violence, harassment or intimidation. They also need equality, social inclusion and the right to self determination and the right to legal protection as workers.
There isn’t likely to be the funds or the inclination to give it to them whilst they are tied into emotive words like slavery and human trafficking. It is reminiscent of the situation with child protection in the UK, with millions being spent on headlining show trials of ageing celebrities and exploring ‘stranger danger’, but no money to fund true child protection at the sharp end.
I met a lady in Scotland recently. Her job is finding emergency homes for children waiting to be collected from nursery school but whose Mothers had been sent to jail that day….she operates out of a Portacabin, and had spent the day desperately filling in grant applications so that she could keep going. Nobody is going to give her £24 million pounds.
- Jonathan Mason
June 3, 2014 at 2:29 pm -
Another excellent article.
Good point about paid-for sex being no different from sex obtained by wining and dining, except that the paid-for sex is likely to be better due to the distaff component being better looking, more experienced, and more open to discussing the menu prior to jollifications.
There is a persistent meme in Guardian discussion pages on the subject that goes like this (from male participants): “I would rather be celibate than pay for sex, because paid sex would not provide the same enjoyment as sex voluntarily offered.” And yet it is reasonably clear that women are sexually attracted to money in various different forms. Premier league footballers, for example, are never short of a WAG or three regardless of whether they are budding intellectuals and students of Sartre or foul-mouthed, ignorant jerks, and yet it is well documented that such luminaries as Cristiano Ronaldo (arguable the sexiest man alive) and Wayne Rooney (arguable the least sexy man alive) will still pay for sex if they choose to do so.
Would Elizabeth Bennett really have found Mr. Darcy so damn attractive had he been the local butcher and not the owner of Pemberley/Chatsworth that her spinster creator had visited with relatives on a trip to Derbyshire?
So yes, sex is sex regardless of the route taken to bed.
And, yes, all the hoo-ha about human trafficking is just a backstairs method of trying to win over public support for laws that would make prostitution completely illegal and presumably therefore drive it underground and into the ambit of organized crime. If there is a tiny bit of illegal trafficking of women now, you ain’t seen nothing yet compared to what will happen if the whole business is made illegal.
Fortunately the vast majority of men have no interest in killing or beating up prostitutes, but once legal protections are removed, any area of human activity becomes more dangerous.
Let’s say a man visits a prostitute, she insists on prepayment, he pays, but then in his opinion she does not deliver an adequate level of performance. She says it is because he has been drinking, which he has. He demands a refund, a struggle for the money ensues, she calls for her bouncer who arrive on the scene, a knife is pulled, … (fill in the blanks). This scene tends not to happen in a well regulated brothel where he has already produced proof of ID and deposited funds with management, and drunks have been turned away.
- Lucozade
June 4, 2014 at 9:28 am -
Jonathan Mason,
Re: “Good point about paid-for sex being no different from sex obtained by wining and dining, except that the paid-for sex is likely to be better due to the distaff component being better looking, more experienced, and more open to discussing the menu prior to jollifications”
But most women don’t choose to have sex with a man just because he’s offered to buy her a nice meal, maybe they do in Ethiopia, but I doubt they do in Britain, nor are they under any obligation to even if he does pay for a nice dinner, so i’d imagine that if the woman does decide to have sex with the man later it’s based on a bit more than him buying her a meal or it would hardly be worth her time going for the meal would it? If the meal meant that much she could just save herself the hassle of having to have sex and do sexual favours for man she doesn’t want and just go to the restaurant herself, buy herself a meal (which would be half the price he’s paid because she only had to pay for her own) and she’ll be spared the hassle of having to make meaningless chit chat…
What about men that take their girlfriends out to dinner and offer to pay when they’ve already had sex with her loads of times and the sex isn’t particularly dependent on whether he takes her out to dinner or not? (though i’m sure most of us would rather be in a relationship with someone who does nice things with us from time to time and is sharing and generous).
I’ve been out for dinner with friends that are male and female and have often offered to pay if their a bit skint or will buy drinks for friends or acquaintances (male or female) to try and be friendly. I’ve bought presents for friends or family plenty of times – you don’t always (or even usually) want something in return – and certainly not sex.
Most men offer to take a woman out for dinner because they want to get to know her and do something nice with her, sex is not the only motivation or they *would* just offer her money or visit a prostitute. Prostitutes sell sex, not companionship other than for a short time that the customer must continually pay for. It’s not the same as offering to take a woman you like out for a meal because you want show her your interested and get to know her…
- Jonathan Mason
June 4, 2014 at 2:13 pm -
Yes, but taking someone “out to dinner” is just a kind of symbolic catch all phrase for going on a date that involves expense.
Having said that it is universal that sexual courtship involves activities like feeding the desired mate and playing music for them, or employing others to play the music, and dancing–which equates to going to some place where there is music. (If you asked the Beatles or the Rolling Stones why they formed bands initially, they would have told you that it was because they wanted to attract girls.) Additionally taking someone for a meal in a restaurant with subdued lighting and music will often also lead sharing alcoholic drinks and dancing which will lead to impaired cognition, seeing the partner in a better light, bodily contact leading to sexual arousal and so on, all of which point in one direction–bedwards.
I think that living in a very egalitarian and somewhat austere society like the UK where people’s ideas of a fun night is listening to Any Questions on Radio 4 may tend to mask these basic realities of life. But in many societies women have less opportunities to develop independent careers and be financially independent, so being attractive to men and accomplished during the reproductive years is important for survival–just as it was in the society that Jane Austen described.
Having said that, there are obviously a fair few gentlemen who would rather just bypass the courtship stage or who lack the necessary seductive skills and who would rather just pay up front and know exactly what they are getting than leave anything to chance.
- Lucozade
June 4, 2014 at 3:55 pm -
Jonathan Mason,
Re: “Additionally taking someone for a meal in a restaurant with subdued lighting and music will often also lead sharing alcoholic drinks and dancing which will lead to impaired cognition, seeing the partner in a better light, bodily contact leading to sexual arousal and so on, all of which point in one direction–bedwards”
People just do these things for enjoyment and it works both ways. If you’ve asked someone out on a date though it doesn’t surprise me that some people might want to make the offer seem more inviting by also offering to pay, some men insist on paying, others insist that the other person pays their half, but there are plenty of instances where it is the woman and not the man who makes the first move and plenty examples of women living with men who constantly scrounge off them so it’s not the same rule for everyone…
- Lucozade
- Jonathan Mason
- Lucozade
June 4, 2014 at 9:40 am -
Jonathan Mason,
Re: “Would Elizabeth Bennett really have found Mr. Darcy so damn attractive had he been the local butcher and not the owner of Pemberley/Chatsworth that her spinster creator had visited with relatives on a trip to Derbyshire?”
Elizabeth Bennett is a fictional character, and yes Mr Darcy got her out of a pickle financially but it would hardly have been presented as a big happy ending had he not been presented as having a bit of charisma and other things about him as well…
Would lady Chatterly have found Mellors so attractive if he had been one of her husbands/families friends and not the game keeper?
- Peter Raite
June 4, 2014 at 1:35 pm -
So, to coin a phrase, what first attracted the model Slavica Radić to the billionaire Bernie Ecclestone…?
- Moor Larkin
June 4, 2014 at 1:45 pm -
If his recent bio is to be believed his size…..
Big enough to make her feel important bur small enough for her to slap about.
I’m sure he wasn’t a billionaire when they first got together.- Peter Raite
June 5, 2014 at 10:06 am -
I would guess that whatever degree of millionaire he was at the time is near or equivalent billionaire now. I recalle years ago the comedienne Rita Rudner observed about anyone who said this type of relationship wasn’t about the money: “Yeah, like these guys would get a shot at these women if they were just bagging groceries!”
- Peter Raite
- Jonathan Mason
June 4, 2014 at 1:49 pm -
Or Wendi Deng to hubby Rupert Murdoch?
- Ho Hum
June 4, 2014 at 1:58 pm
- Moor Larkin
- Jonathan Mason
June 4, 2014 at 1:56 pm -
Lady Chatterley already had the wealth via her marriage to an aristocrat. All she needed was some dick. Then of course you can factor in that Mellors was not exactly a country estate serf, having himself been an officer in World War I, adding a veneer of respectability to the humping in the henhouse. Then of course you can also consider that D.H. Lawrence was making some symbolic points about the impotency of the effete aristocracy after World War I when the true wealth of the country was being created by the exploitation of brutally hard working miners in the collieries owned by Lord Chatterley and making some point that the really virile and capable men like Mellors who were being held down in menial jobs like gamekeeper needed to step up and fill the gaps (ahem!) left by the crippled aristocracy.
- Lucozade
June 4, 2014 at 3:08 pm -
Jonathan Mason,
Re: “Lady Chatterley already had the wealth via her marriage to an aristocrat. All she needed was some dick. Then of course you can factor in that Mellors was not exactly a country estate serf, having himself been an officer in World War I”
And were did her aristocrat husband get the majority of his wealth and opportunities in life? Probably handed down to him by his rich family, who in turn probably had it handed down to them.
Those days are gone anyway. My mother earns at least as much as my dad does and I know lots of couples who either earn roughly the same or the wife even earns more. A lot of women in Jane Austen’s day had no choice but to marry for money or security because of way society was back then, there where also a lot of men who married women because of what wealth or opportunites they could bring because of the sort of family they came from etc – it’s not like that these days…
- Jonathan Mason
June 4, 2014 at 4:11 pm -
A lot of women in Jane Austen’s day had no choice but to marry for money or security because of way society was back then, there where also a lot of men who married women because of what wealth or opportunities they could bring because of the sort of family they came from etc – it’s not like that these days…
But it is! Only not among the level of people you know and associate with. If the women you know are earning as much or more than the men, then that is a reflection of the modern economy where the well-paying manufacturing and technical jobs, and jobs in tradionally male occupations have declined. One of the largest groups of wealthy people in the UK are professional footballers, almost all of whom appear to be male, and so are the bankers for the most part.
Also I suspect that a huge number of the wealthiest 20% Britons have acquired what they have via inheritance, especially those baby boomers whose (now deceased) parents acquired residential or other property after World War II and during the decades when land prices have risen exponentially.
In contemporary Britain would not a young man who has inherited a nice country house with no mortgage or outstanding liens be the equivalent of Mr. Darcy in pulling power, assuming he is not physically, mentally, or socially defective? I think so.
- Lucozade
June 5, 2014 at 9:21 am -
Jonathan Mason,
Re: “If the women you know are earning as much or more than the men, then that is a reflection of the modern economy where the well-paying manufacturing and technical jobs, and jobs in tradionally male occupations have declined. One of the largest groups of wealthy people in the UK are professional footballers, almost all of whom appear to be male, and so are the bankers for the most part”
I didn’t say that *all* the women I know are earning as much or more than the men, I know of plenty that aren’t, I was just pointing out that I also know of plenty that are – so it’s not all black and white or as simple as one rule for men and an other for women.
Also, with footballers, although the money must be great for the likes of Cooleen Rooney or other footballers wives and girlfriends I very much doubt it is the main attraction.
Going out with a footballer would be a bit like having a ‘tophy’ boyfriend because of the prestige they have and their fittness….
- Lucozade
- Jonathan Mason
- Lucozade
- Peter Raite
- Lucozade
- nofixedaddress
June 3, 2014 at 2:29 pm -
I trust you are okay but this was one of the saddest articles I have ever read on your blog.
- Edgar
June 3, 2014 at 3:35 pm -
Religious groups are the principal backers of this oppression? I could respond ‘The road to Hell is paved with good intentions’, but I doubt that the motivation of those particular religious activists is good intentions.
- SpectrumIsGreen
June 3, 2014 at 4:07 pm -
There was a statement on BBC Breakfast News this morning stating that there are an estimated 4000 slaves living and working in the United Kingdom. The fact that they said “estimated” suggests to me that it was little more than a number plucked out of thin air designed to validate their story.
- Jonathan Mason
June 3, 2014 at 4:34 pm -
My guess is that it all depends on how you define a slave. It is unlikely that there are any people in the UK who are legally owned by other people, or whose children, should they reproduce, become the property of their owner. On the other hand there may be people in unfair employment contracts who owe money to their employers and are not free to leave or change employers due to visa restrictions, etc. Not exactly slavery, but probably without much legal recourse to improve their situation.
And in immigrant communities there may be sons or daughters working unpaid or just for board and lodging in a family business who are not really free to leave home due to threats, obligations, etc. Could this be slavery?
Certainly if you had the names and address of 4000 slaves, freeing them would be the right thing to do.
- Moor Larkin
June 3, 2014 at 6:24 pm -
I’ve been reading about a few slaves being freed in Britain. It appeared to be that they were enslaved in Chinese/Indian restaurant kitchens. Apparently after they were freed the Immigration authorities came along to ensure they became even freer back wherever they came from…. ….
I imagine there are many Latin American slaves in the United States that need help to become free with the assistance of the US Immigration authorites too. I suspect we’re in the land of Doublespeak as well as Newthink at the moment and in order to comply with ‘uman Rights lobbies we have to talk about slavery rather then illegal immigration.
- Moor Larkin
- Jonathan Mason
- Jonathan Mason
June 3, 2014 at 5:34 pm -
But overall Anna is right. Sex is sex is sex. Government should get out of people’s sex lives and concern itself with legitimate government concerns, for example are prostitutes paying income taxes or charging VAT, adhering to health and safety regulations, stealing from clients, working without visas or work permits, illegally in the country, and so on.
- Joe Public
June 3, 2014 at 5:54 pm -
It seems 11 Downing Street has a vested interest:-
- heydj48
June 3, 2014 at 6:34 pm -
child protection is most under funding.
- MTG
June 3, 2014 at 8:10 pm -
Evolution hard-wired the female brain for prostitution and sex assessments keep the organ on constant overload.
- Ho Hum
June 3, 2014 at 8:13 pm -
If you can fit that into 140 characters, you’ll find your natural home easily
- Ho Hum
- John Galt
June 3, 2014 at 8:31 pm -
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, outlawing prostitution just makes things worse for the prostitutes. The best way of dealing with the problem is the German Model, whose prime concern is for the health and safety of prostitutes and brothels and in return gets a measure of control without fear of prosecution and additional tax revenues.
The Swedish Model (only arresting the John’s) simply exerbates the problem.
- DtP
June 3, 2014 at 8:43 pm -
Dear Anna
Hope you had a lovely birthday – i’m thinking Lionel Richie and maltloaf by a soggy canyon finally getting some sunlight and bursting into ebullience!
The cops have always had laws to sort this – it appears that every other little Napolean wants it too. The HMRC proposal to tap bank accounts is (is this the tap room?) fucking ridiculous. I don’t completely get why state employees are so quick to write new laws when the old ones worked fine. Sure interweb stuff but robbing accounts sans Court action is creepy. Sure, surveillance is one thing but robbing on the back of HMRC with Lin Homer in charge succeeding David Harnett? I did 9 months at working & child tax credits at HMRC and the staff are good but volume’s a thing – these things have a process.
The Female Genital Mutilation stats give salient reading as to the wuckfittery of CPS support – 28,000 suspected cases and this is the season for it – a stern letter to Head Teachers – I shit you not – A stern letter to Head Teachers shall jolly well sort that shit out. Trojan Horses don’t particularly seem plausible these days – I’m quite up for Labour being wankers but they do have committees so it’s probably good that Gove’s getting it in the neck, getting beaten for so much other stuff be nice if he did the job for a bit – natural rhythms and stuff. I think Labour are almost involved, few clinging onto agendas. I dunno – 1st thing they’d say to a new superintendant was ‘don’t shut the brothles’ but new guy, new ideas et fucking cetera. What are Trojan Horses – are they improvised or planned – seems a bit tin foily? Surely everyone can see them coming a mile off?
Anywho – it seems like there’s good fighting to be had – a guy’s gotta work sometimes. On an abstract and totally related note – Mr Ishmael is talking of retiring – little bit upset. Maybe you could have a word.
Luv
DtP
- Ian B
June 4, 2014 at 7:38 am -
There is nothing new about this. They are simply re-running the “White Slavery” campaign of 100 years ago just as, it is now clear that Second Wave Feminism was never anything more than a revival of Victorian sex hysteria under a cobbled together Marxist re-branding. It is possible because it is long enough that everyone who experienced the First Wave is dead, so it can be presented as something new. But that is all it is.
- Stewart Cowan
June 4, 2014 at 8:22 am -
While I acknowledge the hypocricy involved, regarding prostitutes as “sex workers” in an attempt to make them seem legit and worthy of “workers’ rights” is not something I agree with.
It should be regarded against the law. Many people find themselves in dire straits without resorting to demeaning and devaluing themselves like this. If any woman (or man) is a prostitute out of choice then they need a career change or a conviction.
- Moor Larkin
June 4, 2014 at 8:50 am -
I have never understood why men would want a prostitute or why a woman would want to be one. I comprehend all the reasons put forward for both but I can/will never understand. It is self-humiliation on both sides. On the other hand, there are many things I fail to understand about the way people behave, but it doesn’t mean I want to put them all in prison for it or make them out to be monsters because of it.
- Ian B
June 4, 2014 at 8:56 am -
There is nothing humiliating about sex. I’ve never understood why anyone thinks that there is.
Why would a man want sex with a prostitute? Well, because it requires two people is the main reason. Why would a woman want to be a prostitute? Because she can provide a commercial service to the marketplace. Where’s the mystery?
- Moor Larkin
June 4, 2014 at 9:24 am -
Who said there was anything humiliating about sex? It is a human transcendence, which is the principal reason why paying for it would make it seems so darned humiliating. It aint what you do, it’s the way that you do it…….
I expect Jonathan Mason to arrive any minute to tell me my wife is a prostitute because…. but…. sometimes my wife says No, no matter how much I may have spent. Perhaps it’s all about free will, with the accent on free. If I just want sex, why not make use of that other unique gift to Man – the opposable thumb? Cheaper, quicker, faster……..
- Lucozade
June 4, 2014 at 10:33 am -
Moor Larkin,
Re: “I expect Jonathan Mason to arrive any minute to tell me my wife is a prostitute because…. but…. sometimes my wife says No, no matter how much I may have spent”
Exactly, so your wife isn’t a prostitute. But if any woman has ever shown any affection to you after you’ve gone out your way to do something nice for her – she was obviously just a glorified prostitute (lol)….
- Lucozade
- Ho Hum
June 4, 2014 at 11:27 am -
Not as simple as mere monetary commercialism. It’s been a way for women and men to get something, or more of something, that they can’t realistically hope to be any other means. Wealth, security, fame, position, influence – personal, social and political – anything that they want that they couldn’t get from where they started in life, or by shacking up with the boy or girl next door. Even, for some, emotional and physical satisfaction that for whatever reason they can’t get elsewhere.
None of that is ‘right’ in a ‘perfect’ world, not for some ‘yuk’ factor, not necessarily for constructs as to who has power over whom, but rather because of the potentially disasterous collateral damage on the emotional and practical relationships of others, in particular the hurt and loss of trust that can be engendered, and often never recovered
- Jonathan Mason
June 4, 2014 at 1:45 pm -
Exactly right. Men won’t pay for what they can get for free, so when they pay for sex they are getting some kind of premium, usually good looks, youth, or just point-and-click convenience that they can’t get for free. Of course some men can’t get any sex at all for free.
There is also a wide range of points of view depending on personal experience. It is easy to assume that everyone feels the same about things like sex, but it is clearly not so. Some men will find more pleasure in spending money on sex with a beautiful woman than spending the same money on a round of golf or a pair of tickets to a premiership soccer game.
But let’s be realistic. Many soccer fans who are planning to spend a huge amount of money in the next few weeks traveling to Brazil for the World Cup to cheer on the lads are probably also planning to spend part of their vacation funds bonking some of the same Brazilian beauties as the lads, especially if the lads go out of the competition early.
- Moor Larkin
June 4, 2014 at 1:52 pm -
@ some men can’t get any sex at all for free. @
Double amputees are in a predicament I guess@ Many soccer fans who are planning to spend a huge amount of money … traveling to Brazil … are probably also planning to spend part of their vacation funds bonking @
Might depend on how expensive the beer is, in the case of the English……….- Jonathan Mason
June 4, 2014 at 2:43 pm -
Double amputees would be a case in point, although an extreme example, but there are far more men than that who are unable to find sexual partners by the normal means of inviting someone to share one’s bed. Possibly you are intending to imply that only double amputees are unable to pleasure themselves, but most people would regard self pleasuring as similar to a visit to the toilet as it simply produces a temporary loss of tension and does not involve another person, mutual arousal, caressing, various tactile sensations, etc. that are just as important to most people as a simple release of fluids.
- Moor Larkin
June 4, 2014 at 2:59 pm -
How romantic you make prostitutes sound. My understanding is that you can fuck them but it’s extra to kiss them. Pretty Woman has a lot to answer for….
- Jonathan Mason
June 4, 2014 at 3:16 pm -
I have not seen Pretty Woman and rarely watch movies. I think the media have a vested interest in portraying prostitutes as drug addicted, alcoholic, bottle blondes with nicotine stained fingers and pink nail varnish wearing PVC miniskirts with motorcycle burn scars on the legs covered by high heel boots, but in reality they are usually just young women of somewhat above average physical attractiveness who are trying to make a living like everyone else. Some are also models and actresses, and many are single mums trying to make money to provide for their kids.
Re kissing, I posted a link to a video of two men flirting with prostitutes in a brothel yesterday, and there was plenty of kissing going on in the prepayment phase of interaction. It looks like Anna removed that link, so I imagine she does not approve of it. Well, it is her blog and it is her call, so that is fine with me. However if you Google La Passion Sosua Youtube you can see an 8-minute video of some rather obnoxious guys flirting with some real prostitutes.
- Moor Larkin
June 4, 2014 at 3:30 pm -
I guess prostitutional sex could reasonably be said to equate with a disco-meeting and an eventual one-night stand or bunk-up, in terms of it’s intimacy levels. “Ladette” culture, probably developed via Ibiza and Costa Brit-culture has certainly disturbed the equanimity of the British in recent years, although generally welcomed by the lads at the time. Equality has a price all it’s own I guess.
- Jonathan Mason
June 4, 2014 at 4:16 pm -
Anna hasn’t removed any link!
My bad, landlady! It was on a post on the earlier article called “Filthy Lucre” and I though it was here. Buy yourself a Cuba libre.
Do not click the link if you are easily shocked.
Dancing with Wolves?
http://sosuarealestate.org/la-passion-in-sosua/
- Moor Larkin
- Jonathan Mason
- Moor Larkin
- Jonathan Mason
- Ho Hum
June 4, 2014 at 1:52 pm -
Brazilians tend to put a different slant on the old phrase about the bird and bush
- Moor Larkin
- Jonathan Mason
- Moor Larkin
- Lucozade
June 4, 2014 at 10:22 am -
Moor Larkin,
Re: “why a woman would want to be one”?
££££££££££££
I don’t think I understand why a man would want to go to one though, although some have told me it’s for the naughtiness factor i.e doing something your not really supposed too etc…
The likes of Wayne Rooney probably use them because they can be more trusted to be discrete and not blab to everyone (so the wife finds out) as it would also affect their (the prostitutes) business…
- Moor Larkin
June 4, 2014 at 10:35 am -
@ ££££££££
Maybe they just want lots of sex, without the necessity to have to do his laundry and cook his dinner…..
- Lucozade
June 4, 2014 at 11:00 am -
Moor Larkin,
Re: “Maybe they just want lots of sex, without the necessity to have to do his laundry and cook his dinner…..”
Lol …and meet his mum…
Never thought of that – and get paid a fair amount into the bargain too…
- Lucozade
- Moor Larkin
- Ian B
- Ian B
June 4, 2014 at 8:52 am -
No, it should not be “regarded as against the law”. The only just purpose of laws is to punish those who harm others. And no, “harm” doesn’t include offending their value system.
If you want to influence people into agreeing with some set of personal values, stick to the pulpit.
There are two basic origins of sexual puritanism. The first is the felt need of ancient peoples to control procreation and family structures. The second is the ascetic principle that the physical and sensual is the enemy of the spiritual and transcendent. The first is out of date and place, applicable to societies in different times and places with particular social goals. The second is a load of old cobblers. People are entitled to believe in them of course, but are not entitled to cross the line into imposing them on others, even if they have the power to do so.
- Ho Hum
June 4, 2014 at 11:34 am -
Making every form of moral imperfection into a some sort of offence, for which someone can face a criminal conviction, is the pathway of madness loved by those who would dictate their rectitude to your soul. My goodness, we’d even end up sending people to jail for writing or saying nasty things…but then, as I think we just have – (sorry for no link but see BBC news website today)
Clearly you’re in the ascendancy. Hope you can afford to pay for all the jails we’re going to need
- Ho Hum
June 4, 2014 at 11:36 am -
Not again! That was for Stewart Cowan
- Ho Hum
June 4, 2014 at 11:45 am -
And as if to prove that, old Liz has just announced that you can get up to 10 years under the planned Cinderella law
Hope neither old Larkin, nor any of the rest of you out there, didn’t fuck up the kids…
Still, look on the bright side. This has just got to speed up the decriminalisation of assisted suicide, as there will be streams of old coves buying up their one way tickets to Switzerland, as they head for the Exit, hotly pursued by Plod, the SS and their kids for not buying them a jammy dodger 30 years ago
- Ho Hum
June 4, 2014 at 11:47 am -
Tsk…. That should have read
Hope neither old Larkin, nor any of the rest of you out there, fucked up the kids…
- Moor Larkin
June 4, 2014 at 12:09 pm -
@ 10 years….
I was hearing on the Wireless last night that Mexico is introducing new jail terms for kidnapping. Apparently if you kill the kidnapped person, the sentence you are likely to get is now to be increased to 140 years…… :-0 … The earnest BBC presenter didn’t even seem to stifle a snigger as she conscientiously read out her ‘News’, but I felt free to laugh like a drain.
- Ho Hum
- Ho Hum
- Moor Larkin
{ 57 comments… read them below or add one }