|
On August 04 2011 15:28 Kahuna. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2011 11:06 acker wrote:
You have yet to explain, if it's the legality that separates the job from roofing and garbage pickup, why you still would not consider college students paying off loans using sex in Nevada or Canada equivalent to college students paying off loans through other dangerous, high-paying jobs with low entry requirements.
This is pretty simple. The roofing and garbage pickup work doesn't carry all the other negative baggage/potential guilt/eventual lack of self-esteem (the list goes on) that being a "sugar baby" would entail. Read the article if you need examples of the baggage/guilt these women carry. So even if the jobs are equally dangerous... they are still not equivalent in other ways (this includes the potential illegality of being a "sugar baby"). There's the explanation you're seeking. And yeh, you might not agree, since you have a bunch of other questionable assumptions and views based on your responses in this thread.
You're still projecting your morals onto others, here. Not everyone has the same moral compass you do, therefore different jobs have different effects on everyone. If it's consensual between all parties and they are rational adults, they can quit if it offends their moral sense to that extent. If some don't quit and still have moral problems, then they're doing something that happens in quite a few other professions; exchanging ethical qualms for cash. The latter is, quite frankly, their responsibility to choose what they're prepared to accept, just the same as any other job where individuals may have differing ethical boundaries.
Garbage pickup and meat packing would cause great distress to some Hindus of upper caste. Both are dangerous jobs. Should we ban both jobs to college students on the grounds that some people would suffer moral scarring if they chose to do them? Or should we let people judge their own morals and apply for jobs accordingly? If you have problems with the legality, would you be ok with it if similar steps were taken independently by college girls in Canada, or any other country with legal prostitution?
If you have problems with garbage pickup and meat packing on technicalities, I'm sure you can think up a whole host of dangerous jobs that might scar segments of society for life if they chose to apply. The key word being "chose".
A disclaimer: if we're taking into consideration those who are literally trapped into it with no other recourse by negative pressure (due to debt), then it's a whole other can of worms. For the purposes of the above, I'm assuming that you think that the girls have "acceptable" alternative choices.
On August 04 2011 15:28 Kahuna. wrote:Show nested quote +I'm fairly sure you haven't read the article; college students mushroomed by over 350% on the site after the recession hit. I'm actually positive that I have read the article, so the first portion of your statement is incorrect. As for the latter part, again this is really quite simple. It just means that the college students who are slightly less "short-sighted" than the ones who had joined prior to the recession decided that it was now time to join the party.
Five people are unemployed for every job opening nowadays. The BLS data is on page ten and covers it by profession (or, more accurately, industry). Almost all professions were and are on the same trend, though some have recovered relatively more than others over the last year. It was twice as bad immediately after and during the recession. Some party, huh?
Incidentally, you're still assuming "only "short-sighted" people become prostitutes; therefore all prostitutes are "short-sighted"". I thought we went over why this is absurd to claim for the collective. Threw it right out alongside my statement that "since all college kids have long run foresight, all college kids can plan ten years ahead into the future".
|
I don't see anything wrong with what's happening here. As long as both sides cotribute their end of the bargain, both sides come out ahead.
I also don't see how this is ethically wrong as was mentioned earlier. No one is forcing anyone to do anything and/or cheating anyone out of anything.
|
From an objective viewpoint there is nothing wrong with whoring. It is perfectly natural to use what you have to gain more.
It has been done as long as humanity has existed and will continue until we are extinct. It is very human and occurs in all layers of society.
Christianity has leaked into "free will" through mass media thus causing the belief that it is wrong. The christian brainwash has happened to such an extent that no western politician can contradict it without being doomed.
|
On August 04 2011 16:07 wongfeihung wrote:What the heck?! There are girls in their 20's on that site.
It's a scam like almost all dating sites, fake profiles that give you fake emails that you must become a member to open then once you sign up you realize the site is only men who fell for the same stupid trick.
|
On August 04 2011 16:32 acker wrote:
Incidentally, you're still assuming "only "short-sighted" people become prostitutes; therefore all prostitutes are "short-sighted"". I thought we went over why this is absurd to claim for the collective. Threw it right out alongside my statement that "since all college kids have long run foresight, all college kids can plan ten years ahead into the future".
Bro, this discussion can go on for a lifetime... but since I don't have a lifetime to discuss it let's just leave it at this: I have my assumptions, and you have yours... we're both making claims for the collective, and we both disagree when it comes to which of those claims are more reasonable. This applies to almost every one of the disagreements we've had in this thread... which is why our conclusions regarding the issues at discussion are different. Yes, I do think these women are short-sighted and yes, I do think that being a "sugar baby" is wildly different from having a career in roofing and garbage pick-up (which is why many women who engage in this type of activity do feel guilt afterwards, some feel dirty/worthless and so on)... I have my reasons behind my views. You disagree when it comes to this and you have your reasons behind your views.
To me, my assumptions, claims and reasoning behind them are more acceptable than yours (and, yes, I know that this depends on the person who is making the judgments) based on my observations in life which is why I hold my stance on the issue... You feel the other way around. I am not imposing my views upon you or anyone else, it's just what I think, and based on many of the responses in this thread there are similar sentiments. (e.g. "this is really sad", "this is wrong", "there are other, more acceptable ways to get out of student debt", etc.). You don't need to share them, but the sentiments are there.
At the end of the day, both our views are based on claims we've made for the collective. Which is why neither of our views on the issue is no more valid than the others... it's purely relative. Think what you want... I've pitched in my more than two-cents on the issue and the intent was not to impose my views on others, but just to share my views like one generally does on a forum.
|
You're entitled to your own opinion, I'm not the thought police. And no one wins on the Internet, I knew that before I started.
Just wanted to know where exactly your ideas were coming from, and I think I have a fairly good idea now.
|
On August 04 2011 06:30 dybydx wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2011 06:04 Kahuna. wrote:On August 04 2011 04:20 dybydx wrote:
we can just regulate prostitution, just like how porn movies are produced. in both cases, women are paid for sex. it will be done at a safe location with safe ppl and have medical insurance available. Hmm this is interesting because I never knew... Are porn stars actually given medical insurance by their employers? depending on how you regulate it. for example, in Germany, prostitutes even get a pension plan. in exchange, a portion of their earning is taxed. maybe TLO can tell us more about this.
LOL.
"Hey TLO, nice BO3, congratulations for taking the win. Now, on another subject. Do prostitutes in germany get a pension plan? Do you have some personal experience to share? Where to you spend all your prize money?"
But, its true actually. Prostitutes have to pay taxes like everyone else has to (of course some of them probably dont pay them...).
|
On August 04 2011 16:32 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2011 15:28 Kahuna. wrote:On August 04 2011 11:06 acker wrote:
You have yet to explain, if it's the legality that separates the job from roofing and garbage pickup, why you still would not consider college students paying off loans using sex in Nevada or Canada equivalent to college students paying off loans through other dangerous, high-paying jobs with low entry requirements.
This is pretty simple. The roofing and garbage pickup work doesn't carry all the other negative baggage/potential guilt/eventual lack of self-esteem (the list goes on) that being a "sugar baby" would entail. Read the article if you need examples of the baggage/guilt these women carry. So even if the jobs are equally dangerous... they are still not equivalent in other ways (this includes the potential illegality of being a "sugar baby"). There's the explanation you're seeking. And yeh, you might not agree, since you have a bunch of other questionable assumptions and views based on your responses in this thread. You're still projecting your morals onto others, here. Not everyone has the same moral compass you do, therefore different jobs have different effects on everyone. If it's consensual between all parties and they are rational adults, they can quit if it offends their moral sense to that extent. If some don't quit and still have moral problems, then they're doing something that happens in quite a few other professions; exchanging ethical qualms for cash. The latter is, quite frankly, their responsibility to choose what they're prepared to accept, just the same as any other job where individuals may have differing ethical boundaries. Garbage pickup and meat packing would cause great distress to some Hindus of upper caste. Both are dangerous jobs. Should we ban both jobs to college students on the grounds that some people would suffer moral scarring if they chose to do them? Or should we let people judge their own morals and apply for jobs accordingly? If you have problems with the legality, would you be ok with it if similar steps were taken independently by college girls in Canada, or any other country with legal prostitution?
I am sorry, but you are projecting the "lets have no morals whatsover in our society" here and that doesnt work. Morals are part of the culture of a country and last time I checked the US had pretty strict community morals against sex and even "beep words". Last time I checked the US wasnt populated by Hindus as a majority either, so thats just another stupid argument to have no rules. You do need "community rules" (morals, codes of conduct, ...) though to define a country and having none will just make you a globalized citizen without any culture.
Prostitution is prostitution, regardless if you give it other names. Dont try to use the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law. It is - and should be - illegal. People are just too lazy to do "the dirty but honest job"; if you cant afford college you shouldnt try for it; if you cant afford a child (both due to time you are willing to "sacrifice" and money) you shouldnt have one. Prostitution is the "easy way out" for girls, but its a bad solution and really only supports the "perverted" way of men paying for sex. Its like saying "I only grow marihuana plants which are natural, so that should be acceptable."
I have to quote Dumbledore from one of the Harry Potter movies here: "We have to decide between what is right and what is easy!"
|
i just wonder how many of those people saying there's nothing wrong with it,
would themselves date/marry a girl who's done the same?
of course, guys on teamliquid would probably say "uh we only said it's not wrong, that doesn't mean we'd like our own gf/wife to have done the same when she was in college"
people here like to look logical, going beyond political correctness, etc. but i am willing to bet that if you knew some girl personally fucking gramps for necessary cash, you'd probably be disgusted.
it's like how many people claim upfront they aren't racist but secretly, they are racist, whether or not they realize it or not.
|
On August 04 2011 19:54 hmmm... wrote:
i just wonder how many of those people saying there's nothing wrong with it,
would themselves date/marry a girl who's done the same?
of course, guys on teamliquid would probably say "uh we only said it's not wrong, that doesn't mean we'd like our own gf/wife to have done the same when she was in college"
people here like to look logical, going beyond political correctness, etc. but i am willing to bet that if you knew some girl personally fucking gramps for necessary cash, you'd probably be disgusted.
it's like how many people claim upfront they aren't racist but secretly, they are racist, whether or not they realize it or not.
I think no-one would disagree with you here. See, prostitution is needed for the society, because having your primal needs satisfied maker you a better worker. But the fact that there are whores, as there were, and there will always be doesn't mess with other people's ideas of true love or probably only sex with people who you're attracted to. As long as there are girls, who wouldn't do this, I'm OK with that (even though in my country they are quite rare to find). But think of it that way - would you pay for whores when you turn 60-70 ? If you would, then you're equally disgusting, if you wouldn't - well chances are, there are girls who think that way too 
|
On August 04 2011 20:13 n00b3rt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2011 19:54 hmmm... wrote:
i just wonder how many of those people saying there's nothing wrong with it,
would themselves date/marry a girl who's done the same?
of course, guys on teamliquid would probably say "uh we only said it's not wrong, that doesn't mean we'd like our own gf/wife to have done the same when she was in college"
people here like to look logical, going beyond political correctness, etc. but i am willing to bet that if you knew some girl personally fucking gramps for necessary cash, you'd probably be disgusted.
it's like how many people claim upfront they aren't racist but secretly, they are racist, whether or not they realize it or not. I think no-one would disagree with you here. See, prostitution is needed for the society, because having your primal needs satisfied maker you a better worker. But the fact that there are whores, as there were, and there will always be doesn't mess with other people's ideas of true love or probably only sex with people who you're attracted to. As long as there are girls, who wouldn't do this, I'm OK with that (even though in my country they are quite rare to find). But think of it that way - would you pay for whores when you turn 60-70 ? If you would, then you're equally disgusting, if you wouldn't - well chances are, there are girls who think that way too
a. Calling sex a "primal need" is a bit of an exaggeration IMO, because it makes it sound totally necessary. It reminds me of one episode of Boston Legal:
Alan defends a judge suing a company promising to cure him of "same sex attraction disorder," ... which is simply "being gay" instead of a disease. The same should apply here: Dont invent fancy names which make something sound "less bad" than it actually is.
b. Humanity has survived without sex being as important as the pill, the sexual liberation, our media (especially the "sex sells" ad campaigns) and the porn industry make it. I have to go back to the novel DUNE by Frank Herbert again, where there is this "test of the box". Only if you are able to override your instincts will you truly be a human and "free love" is exactly the opposite of that. Being able to override your instincts is ever more important, because if we dont learn that skill we are going to be cheated by any stupid ad campaign, politician or journalist, just because they are adressing the "basic instincts". Could you say NO if [insert the most attractive person here] would come up and said "Hey, lets spend the night together doing naughty things.".
This is just another issue where we can see the decline of our western culture. Prostitution and having sex without being married is turned into an issue without consequences and that is bad for a human character. Teenagers getting pregnant (and screwing up their education in the process because they have a child to care for), spending too much time on "fun" instead of "work" while you are living on borrowed money (and thus amassing a huge debt over time), becoming a prostitute (and losing interest in sex due to having to do it with detestable "sugar daddys" repeatedly), smoking, spending all your time at the computer playing video games (instead of going out with real life friends OR learning how to make real life friends in the first place) ... everything has consequences and most of the bad ones can really screw you up for the rest of your life. It mostly comes from the "nothing bad can ever happen" attitude which we are taught by our media and the propaganda adopted after the social revolution in 1968.
Prostitution is only needed because we are taught to value having sex too much. I once saw a 13 year old boy who said that "50% of conjugal success is having good sex." (or something like that). If we didnt value sex as highly those 70 year old sugar daddys wouldnt feel the need to pay young girls for their services, but sadly it is easiest to sell things with sex ... and since we dont restrict ad campaigns every company will use it.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Sex is a primal need.
And sugar babies aren't illegal.
|
On August 04 2011 16:32 acker wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 04 2011 15:28 Kahuna. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2011 11:06 acker wrote:
You have yet to explain, if it's the legality that separates the job from roofing and garbage pickup, why you still would not consider college students paying off loans using sex in Nevada or Canada equivalent to college students paying off loans through other dangerous, high-paying jobs with low entry requirements.
This is pretty simple. The roofing and garbage pickup work doesn't carry all the other negative baggage/potential guilt/eventual lack of self-esteem (the list goes on) that being a "sugar baby" would entail. Read the article if you need examples of the baggage/guilt these women carry. So even if the jobs are equally dangerous... they are still not equivalent in other ways (this includes the potential illegality of being a "sugar baby"). There's the explanation you're seeking. And yeh, you might not agree, since you have a bunch of other questionable assumptions and views based on your responses in this thread. You're still projecting your morals onto others, here. Not everyone has the same moral compass you do, therefore different jobs have different effects on everyone. If it's consensual between all parties and they are rational adults, they can quit if it offends their moral sense to that extent. If some don't quit and still have moral problems, then they're doing something that happens in quite a few other professions; exchanging ethical qualms for cash. The latter is, quite frankly, their responsibility to choose what they're prepared to accept, just the same as any other job where individuals may have differing ethical boundaries. Garbage pickup and meat packing would cause great distress to some Hindus of upper caste. Both are dangerous jobs. Should we ban both jobs to college students on the grounds that some people would suffer moral scarring if they chose to do them? Or should we let people judge their own morals and apply for jobs accordingly? If you have problems with the legality, would you be ok with it if similar steps were taken independently by college girls in Canada, or any other country with legal prostitution? If you have problems with garbage pickup and meat packing on technicalities, I'm sure you can think up a whole host of dangerous jobs that might scar segments of society for life if they chose to apply. The key word being "chose". A disclaimer: if we're taking into consideration those who are literally trapped into it with no other recourse by negative pressure (due to debt), then it's a whole other can of worms. For the purposes of the above, I'm assuming that you think that the girls have "acceptable" alternative choices. On August 04 2011 15:28 Kahuna. wrote:Show nested quote +I'm fairly sure you haven't read the article; college students mushroomed by over 350% on the site after the recession hit. I'm actually positive that I have read the article, so the first portion of your statement is incorrect. As for the latter part, again this is really quite simple. It just means that the college students who are slightly less "short-sighted" than the ones who had joined prior to the recession decided that it was now time to join the party. Five people are unemployed for every job opening nowadays. The BLS data is on page ten and covers it by profession (or, more accurately, industry). Almost all professions were and are on the same trend, though some have recovered relatively more than others over the last year. It was twice as bad immediately after and during the recession. Some party, huh? Incidentally, you're still assuming "only "short-sighted" people become prostitutes; therefore all prostitutes are "short-sighted"". I thought we went over why this is absurd to claim for the collective. Threw it right out alongside my statement that "since all college kids have long run foresight, all college kids can plan ten years ahead into the future".
let me get something straight, you are defending the rights of high class prostitutes due to the unemployment rate and high tuition costs and basing this on the ability of a college student to plan for the future? Prostitutes sell pussy, Most college students do drugs or drink/smoke
|
On August 04 2011 22:54 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2011 20:13 n00b3rt wrote:On August 04 2011 19:54 hmmm... wrote:
i just wonder how many of those people saying there's nothing wrong with it,
would themselves date/marry a girl who's done the same?
of course, guys on teamliquid would probably say "uh we only said it's not wrong, that doesn't mean we'd like our own gf/wife to have done the same when she was in college"
people here like to look logical, going beyond political correctness, etc. but i am willing to bet that if you knew some girl personally fucking gramps for necessary cash, you'd probably be disgusted.
it's like how many people claim upfront they aren't racist but secretly, they are racist, whether or not they realize it or not. I think no-one would disagree with you here. See, prostitution is needed for the society, because having your primal needs satisfied maker you a better worker. But the fact that there are whores, as there were, and there will always be doesn't mess with other people's ideas of true love or probably only sex with people who you're attracted to. As long as there are girls, who wouldn't do this, I'm OK with that (even though in my country they are quite rare to find). But think of it that way - would you pay for whores when you turn 60-70 ? If you would, then you're equally disgusting, if you wouldn't - well chances are, there are girls who think that way too a. Calling sex a "primal need" is a bit of an exaggeration IMO, because it makes it sound totally necessary. It reminds me of one episode of Boston Legal: Show nested quote +Alan defends a judge suing a company promising to cure him of "same sex attraction disorder," ... which is simply "being gay" instead of a disease. The same should apply here: Dont invent fancy names which make something sound "less bad" than it actually is. b. Humanity has survived without sex being as important as the pill, the sexual liberation, our media (especially the "sex sells" ad campaigns) and the porn industry make it. I have to go back to the novel DUNE by Frank Herbert again, where there is this "test of the box". Only if you are able to override your instincts will you truly be a human and "free love" is exactly the opposite of that. Being able to override your instincts is ever more important, because if we dont learn that skill we are going to be cheated by any stupid ad campaign, politician or journalist, just because they are adressing the "basic instincts". Could you say NO if [insert the most attractive person here] would come up and said "Hey, lets spend the night together doing naughty things.".
Did you just quote a fantasy *fiction* novel as a model of society in the past? (and an episode of a fictitious television series as an example of misguided political correctness?)
Sex has been a HUGE part of humanity ever since we still lived in wandering tribes. To say otherwise is absurd. Consensual sex is a relatively modern invention. Just a few hundred years ago, women would be beaten for refusing their husbands, (who they likely did not choose btw). You had sex probably daily, and had however many children that naturally ended in. How on Earth are we somehow less "moral" than our progenitors?
It's human nature to glorify the past. We always lament the "new, depraved world we live in today" and wistfully long for the "good ol' days" of our fathers. It's a running theme we seem to never tire of.
When the Waltz first grew in popularity, it was deemed to be "destroying society", due to a 3-beat tempo, (which symbolized the devil), and that it required young men and women to physically touch each other. The first books which were not the bible were criticized as garbage which would erode the brain and distract people from their work. Newspapers criticized radio, claiming it would destroy society, and radio in turn condemned television. Politicians lambasted segregation, women's suffrage, and now gay marriage all as things which are "destroying our good moral society."
I know what it's like to imagine a perfect past world, but to claim that our civilization was more "moral" in the past is ridiculous blind nostalgia.
|
Take the last 5 words off of the title of that thread and you have the history of mankind in a nutshell.
|
On August 04 2011 23:13 Zorkmid wrote:
Take the last 5 words off of the title of that thread and you have the history of mankind in a nutshell.
Up until the last century I don't think many women were involved in such things voluntarily.
|
On August 04 2011 23:15 Haemonculus wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2011 23:13 Zorkmid wrote:
Take the last 5 words off of the title of that thread and you have the history of mankind in a nutshell. Up until the last century I don't think many women were involved in such things voluntarily.
Women didn't voluntarily use wealthy men until 1900 ?
|
Russian Federation266 Posts
On August 04 2011 22:54 Rabiator wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 04 2011 20:13 n00b3rt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2011 19:54 hmmm... wrote:
i just wonder how many of those people saying there's nothing wrong with it,
would themselves date/marry a girl who's done the same?
of course, guys on teamliquid would probably say "uh we only said it's not wrong, that doesn't mean we'd like our own gf/wife to have done the same when she was in college"
people here like to look logical, going beyond political correctness, etc. but i am willing to bet that if you knew some girl personally fucking gramps for necessary cash, you'd probably be disgusted.
it's like how many people claim upfront they aren't racist but secretly, they are racist, whether or not they realize it or not. I think no-one would disagree with you here. See, prostitution is needed for the society, because having your primal needs satisfied maker you a better worker. But the fact that there are whores, as there were, and there will always be doesn't mess with other people's ideas of true love or probably only sex with people who you're attracted to. As long as there are girls, who wouldn't do this, I'm OK with that (even though in my country they are quite rare to find). But think of it that way - would you pay for whores when you turn 60-70 ? If you would, then you're equally disgusting, if you wouldn't - well chances are, there are girls who think that way too a. Calling sex a "primal need" is a bit of an exaggeration IMO, because it makes it sound totally necessary. It reminds me of one episode of Boston Legal: Alan defends a judge suing a company promising to cure him of "same sex attraction disorder," ... which is simply "being gay" instead of a disease. The same should apply here: Dont invent fancy names which make something sound "less bad" than it actually is. b. Humanity has survived without sex being as important as the pill, the sexual liberation, our media (especially the "sex sells" ad campaigns) and the porn industry make it. I have to go back to the novel DUNE by Frank Herbert again, where there is this "test of the box". Only if you are able to override your instincts will you truly be a human and "free love" is exactly the opposite of that. Being able to override your instincts is ever more important, because if we dont learn that skill we are going to be cheated by any stupid ad campaign, politician or journalist, just because they are adressing the "basic instincts". Could you say NO if [insert the most attractive person here] would come up and said "Hey, lets spend the night together doing naughty things.". This is just another issue where we can see the decline of our western culture. Prostitution and having sex without being married is turned into an issue without consequences and that is bad for a human character. Teenagers getting pregnant (and screwing up their education in the process because they have a child to care for), spending too much time on "fun" instead of "work" while you are living on borrowed money (and thus amassing a huge debt over time), becoming a prostitute (and losing interest in sex due to having to do it with detestable "sugar daddys" repeatedly), smoking, spending all your time at the computer playing video games (instead of going out with real life friends OR learning how to make real life friends in the first place) ... everything has consequences and most of the bad ones can really screw you up for the rest of your life. It mostly comes from the "nothing bad can ever happen" attitude which we are taught by our media and the propaganda adopted after the social revolution in 1968. Prostitution is only needed because we are taught to value having sex too much. I once saw a 13 year old boy who said that "50% of conjugal success is having good sex." (or something like that). If we didnt value sex as highly those 70 year old sugar daddys wouldnt feel the need to pay young girls for their services, but sadly it is easiest to sell things with sex ... and since we dont restrict ad campaigns every company will use it.
Looking at things you try to frown upon, like sex without marriage, I guess you're a religious person. Would you be so kind to elaborate (without resorting to religious ethics for arguments), why giving up obsolete social restrictions is harmful for individuals constituting our society?
On August 04 2011 19:54 hmmm... wrote:
i just wonder how many of those people saying there's nothing wrong with it,
would themselves date/marry a girl who's done the same?
of course, guys on teamliquid would probably say "uh we only said it's not wrong, that doesn't mean we'd like our own gf/wife to have done the same when she was in college"
people here like to look logical, going beyond political correctness, etc. but i am willing to bet that if you knew some girl personally fucking gramps for necessary cash, you'd probably be disgusted.
it's like how many people claim upfront they aren't racist but secretly, they are racist, whether or not they realize it or not.
I wouldn't have any problem dating such girl if I would be sure enough that I won't get STD from her(actually had a relationship with an escort girl for some time). And I'm not interested in marriage at all due to various rationalistic reasons.
|
Prostitution is only needed because we are taught to value having sex too much. I once saw a 13 year old boy who said that "50% of conjugal success is having good sex." (or something like that). If we didnt value sex as highly those 70 year old sugar daddys wouldnt feel the need to pay young girls for their services, but sadly it is easiest to sell things with sex ... and since we dont restrict ad campaigns every company will use it.
I find it amusing you'r saying society caused sex to be so important, and drive people to "achieve" it, so to speak. This is the same society that's been telling us for the last century or so that being thin is a virtue, and yet there are more people suffering from over - weight then the ones suffering from under = weight in the US. It's basic instinct - I wan't to eat a chocolate and so I do.
|
Cool, guys can sign up looking for sugar mommies.
Now there's a fallback plan if my career fails.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
