Feminist on Prostitution

[Mishelle]

Children are being abused.  As long as people keep pointing fingers we'll never get to the bottom of it and squeeze it out of the culture.  This has been a huge mistake of feminists today, all the finger pointing. If the men start doing that too we will get exactly nowhere new.

[PatrickC]

Children are being abused.  As long as people keep pointing fingers we'll never get to the bottom of it and squeeze it out of the culture.  This has been a huge mistake of feminists today, all the finger pointing. If the men start doing that too we will get exactly nowhere new.

 

Other than a minority perhaps, I'm not sure men are doing this.. But I do agree, that it doesn't require a male political revolution of course.. Do you think this is happening Mishelle?

[Mishelle]

I see this tendency in the men's movement and I really can understand the motivation--like fight fire with fire.  But what women need is not to shoulder the blame instead of men, what is the greater percentage of fault and so on, but for men to be real leaders in getting us out of this mess.  Women really really need men, of course I see feminists send the exact opposite message sometimes and I certainly understand why men would get resentful.  But when men bitch and complain without taking action I see them acting exactly like how they complain women act (and I agree!).  What can we do to make sure men and women stay in this conversation and also take action publicly on their own behalf (which is necessary!) that women can also get behind in support.  There is only leading by example in this, blaming and slicing straws is so counter-productive.

[PatrickC]

I'm really of this opinion where men are concerned,

 

"A man must be big enough to admit his mistakes, smart enough to profit from them, and strong enough to correct them." – John C. Maxwell

 

That doesn't absolve women of responsibility mind, it's just that as men, if we want to lead (which I think we do), then it seems incumbent on us to take that responsibility I think.

[CrazyCanuck]

Children are being abused.  As long as people keep pointing fingers we'll never get to the bottom of it and squeeze it out of the culture.  This has been a huge mistake of feminists today, all the finger pointing. If the men start doing that too we will get exactly nowhere new.

I'm not finger pointing you made  a comment and I pointed out that it's women stop abusing children.  Men can't do that, men can not make women stop doing anything.

Other than a minority perhaps, I'm not sure men are doing this.. But I do agree, that it doesn't require a male political revolution of course.. Do you think this is happening Mishelle?

Actually it seems the Men's Right Movement is laying at least some of the blame.  I don't like the Men's Right Movement because it solves nothing.  They tend to spend pretty everyday thinking how evil feminist are.  

[PatrickC]

Actually it seems the Men's Right Movement is laying at least some of the blame.  I don't like the Men's Right Movement because it solves nothing. They tend to spend pretty everyday thinking how evil feminist are.  

 

So this is another reason why I don't need to engage with you.

 

You perhaps want to listen above the white noise, but I'm not holding my breath of course.

[CrazyCanuck]

I see this tendency in the men's movement and I really can understand the motivation--like fight fire with fire.  But what women need is not to shoulder the blame instead of men, what is the greater percentage of fault and so on, but for men to be real leaders in getting us out of this mess.  Women really really need men, of course I see feminists send the exact opposite message sometimes and I certainly understand why men would get resentful.  But when men bitch and complain without taking action I see them acting exactly like how they complain women act (and I agree!).  What can we do to make sure men and women stay in this conversation and also take action publicly on their own behalf (which is necessary!) that women can also get behind in support.  There is only leading by example in this, blaming and slicing straws is so counter-productive.

Why would I fight feminist?  In the end they will end up with nothing.  They will be lonely, unhappy, etc.  It's already happening.  There is research showing that women are less happy then men.  Men can't be men when we are confused, we are dammed if we do and we don't.  Both of my sisters need to be in control, if they don't get their own way they get aggressive. Pretty hard for for my brother in laws act like men.  They have to be somewhat feminine in nature.

I'm responsible for my own life even it's the other people's fault.  No finger pointing I really don't care because selfish people will end up with nothing.  I have tried to speak up but when I do it gets ugly.  It's not worth my time or effort.

So this is another reason why I don't need to engage with you.

 

You perhaps want to listen above the white noise, but I'm not holding my breath of course.

Go to avoiceformen.com then you will see what I mean.  There are great women out there why focus on the feminists?  I won't go to the junk yard expecting to find a brand new car.

[PatrickC]

Go to avoiceformen.com then you will see what I mean.  There are great women out there why focus on the feminists?  I won't go to the junk yard expecting to find a brand new car.

 

You are acting like a shill here (no surprises). Despite the issues that may or may not occur at AVM according to your good self. You may want to approach the history that many men have spent in silence.  Personally I can accept some 'shrill' speak from men that have been put through the cultural grinder, so to speak.

[CrazyCanuck]

You are acting like a shill here (no surprises). Despite the issues that may or may not occur at AVM according to your good self. You may want to approach the history that many men have spent in silence.  Personally I can accept some 'shrill' speak from men that have been put through the cultural grinder, so to speak.

As I remember when I spoke up in the later 90's and even more  later on, guess what.  These guys were white knighting the feminist.  Every guy was defending feminist like tooth and nail.  Been there done that.  Took enough of their bs.  Sorry it's tough like because it's the men that allowed this crap. Why should I care about them when all they cared was themselves.  By white knighting they were trying to feed their ego and increase their chances to find a woman to date or have a relationship with.  They haven't been silent I can assure you.  That's just your thinking.

[PatrickC]

So perhaps I'm confusing your last comment with a potential 'white knighting', who knows? So far you still haven't complimented many or most of your comments with much or any reason.

[Mishelle]

CC

"Both of my sisters need to be in control, if they don't get their own way they get aggressive. Pretty hard for for my brother in laws act like men.  They have to be somewhat feminine in nature."

I'm sorry to hear this is your experience, I know lots of women with control issues too and this must really be hard to be so close to in your immediate family.  Was this also your experience of your mom?  Are they so similar your brother-in-laws?  How about your dad, is he also forced to be somewhat feminine in nature because of the aggressiveness of your mom?

[CrazyCanuck]

CC

"Both of my sisters need to be in control, if they don't get their own way they get aggressive. Pretty hard for for my brother in laws act like men.  They have to be somewhat feminine in nature."

I'm sorry to hear this is your experience, I know lots of women with control issues too and this must really be hard to be so close to in your immediate family.  Was this also your experience of your mom?  Are they so similar your brother-in-laws?  How about your dad, is he also forced to be somewhat feminine in nature because of the aggressiveness of your mom?

I don't know my mom that well I have vague memories of her.  It was my father that was aggressive to my step mom.  Both of my sisters (technically they are my step sisters, we all have different moms).  They saw how my father father would beat her and boss her around.  My brother in laws are just naturally great guys.  For a great of my life I talked very much this is why it's hard for me to interact and communicate with people.  I have a problem expressing myself so that people can understand what I say.  It was me that was the one got the beatings, lecture's etc but it seems like it's done a lot of damaged to my sisters in many ways.

 

In my later years in high school people I hated women.  I saw feminism  my life.  Now I just don't care, I just needed to forgive and move on my life.  Not forgiving was a huge burden emotionally and mentally. 

So perhaps I'm confusing your last comment with a potential 'white knighting', who knows? So far you still haven't complimented many or most of your comments with much or any reason.

That's your opinion.  Obviously I am wasting time because you don't have any listening skills.  Not many have good listening skills. 

[Livemike]

I read it and I think it is saying "Men should be made to take moral responsibility for visiting prostitutes, not excused for it." I agree with that and I think "Men buy sex because they think they can treat prostitutes differently than they can treat their wives, girlfriends, and dates" is probably true as well - but it doesn't satisfy my curiosity as to why men want to do this? I have never seen the appeal.

 

What is more something about the tone very much does not appeal to me and I feel resentment reading it.

 

http://feministcurrent.com/8190/if-prostitution-isnt-about-lonely-undersexed-men-what-is-it-about-or-justin-bieber-doesnt-need-to-pay-for-sex/

 

 

Ok the central question should be not "Why are we excusing men going to (female) prostitutes?" but why do they need an excuse? The transaction is consensual.  Both parties benefit from it, but one is expected to appologise for satisfying a desire that is entirely natural.  When someone wants you to appologise for natural desires it's always because they want to limit access to that satisfaction and effectively charge you for it.  That's where your resentment comes from*.

 

Yes you could they would be happier in a relationship that was based on mutual respect and admiration.  But you could argue that about a lot of the sex men have, including much if not most sex in relationships.  

 

"Men buy sex because they think they can treat prostitutes differently than they can treat their wives, girlfriends, and dates."

Well yes, that's right, we do believe that because it's true.  Beyond the play acting that prostitutes provide the relationship is pretty honest.  As long as you factor in that you're probably not really their favorite client and they're don't really sexually desire you with a white hot passion they won't decieve you.  Nor need you decieve them.  If you think feminists are deliberately undermining society for money and power you can tell her.  She won't not have sex with you because of it.  If her dress sense is bad, she go off in a huff (indeed she might agree).  So what's wrong with wanting to treat women differently from how we treat our girlfriends, wives and dates?  Wouldn't condemning that imply that the way we treat our girlfriends, wives and dates is either desirable or virtuous or both?  

 

The nature of the prostitution relationship is uniquely equal in today's society.  It is the one sexual opportunity where men don't have to censor themselves.  There's a line in Tootsie where the female lead say to Dorothy wouldn't it be nice if a man just said "You know, I could lay a big line on you and we could do a lot of role-playing, but the simple truth is, is that I find you very interesting and I'd really like to make love to you.".  Dorothy is in fact Michael Dorsey, so he tries that exact line on the women, to the word.  Naturally she throws a drink in his face.  It's funny because it's true.  Women say they want men to be honest, but confront them with their own lack of virtue and you're not getting any.  There might be a few exceptions to this rule but I honestly don't personally know any.  

 

Fundamentally when someone pays a prostitute they're saying "I would rather pay money than do the things required to get sex with someone else.".  Now historically given the problems of ensuring support from males females made it hard to get sex so this was understandable.  The burdens men had to bear to get "free" sex were considerable and it's not surprising many went the monetary route.  Now however there are many women who will have sex regularly with much less effort.  Even "The Rules" that handbook of manipulation, recommended sex on no later than the 12th date.  Assume each date lasts 3 hours and that you can get sex 12 times in total with say 24 more dates .  That's a total of 108 hours to get 12 sessions of sex or 9 hours per act.  Prostitutes cost about $80 for a half hour at the more basic establishments.  So paying a prostitute is basically saying that not dealing with the woman you could date is worth $9/hr. 

 

*  This pyschological advice is based on zero years of professional training and practice.  I am not in any way professionally qualified to give pyschological or pyschiatric advice.  Use of amateur pyschiatric advice may cause confusion, depression, anxiety or anal leakage.  

Just read a bit of the article.

"Men buy sex because they think they can treat prostitutes differently than they can treat their wives, girlfriends, and dates. They buy sex in order to project what Moran called “evil arousal” onto a human being, guilt and consequence-free. They buy sex to experience dominance and to make rape and abuse “consensual” (as we’ve convinced ourselves that payment = consent)."

 

Ok there's a number of claims here, firstly that men buy sex to "project' emotions.  Wouldn't it be easier to explain men buying sex becasue _they want sex_?  

 

Why would the arousal projected be "evil"?  Yes, most men who hire prostitutes want them to be aroused (although they probably don't care as long as it's convincingly faked).  That's because sexual arousal in a partner is sexually attractive to relatively normal people.  Only sadists desire sexual partners who are not aroused over those who are.  Yet Rachel Morgan is equating the desire for a sexually eager partner with rape, which is the opposite.

 

"They buy sex to experience dominance"

And yet many pay for submissive experiences and others don't make dominance and submission part of the scene.  When someone is so convinced of someone else's motives despite directly contrary evidence that's generally projection.

 

" and to make rape and abuse “consensual” (as we’ve convinced ourselves that payment = consent)."

No we've convinced ourselves that someone saying "Would you like sex for $80?" = consent if you pay them.  Now of course it's possible that there is an evil man hiding somewhere who will shoot or beat up the prostitute if she doesn't propose sex and then go through with it.  In that situation of course there isn't consent.  But that's not the situation that Rachel Morgan is talking about.  She's saying that somehow, despite a woman clearly saying "I will have sex with you under these conditions" and you satisifying these conditions, the sex isn't consensual.  The argument I suppose is that the woman is doing it only because of economic need, not genuine desire.  But factory workers are doing it because of economic need not genuine desire.  Are they slaves?  Many Marxist feminists would say "Yes" but that's why we don't have to take them seriously.

 

 

 

 

[HasMat]

I'm not sure I understand the concept of exploitation re prostitution. In general it seems to involve someone being vulnerable and that vulnerability being used to derive a gain for someone else.In the case of slavery clearly the slave master exploits the slaves weaker position and gains a monetary reward. And the slave is in no way exploiting the master. This is not so clear with prostitution, the prostitute can make a very good living, even "retire" in her 40s if she's an up market call girl. So it's clear who makes the monetary gain, but who got exploited? Was the pro vulnerable because she only had selling sex as a way to make money? (may be true in developing world) But was the client exploited because his biology/psychology predisposes him to want sex that he can't otherwise easily get?

My understanding is that the exploitation is not based on occupation.

 

I read a review of a book, I believe its called "The Game". Its about how to systematically destroy a woman psychologically. Its presented as the pimp's bible.

 

If women could produce something of financial quality/demand besides sex, in the same quantities, while living under same conditions (no self-esteem) then The Game would florish to that industry also. Sex is ez money for no competence, small time, and you dont need any psychological health/wellbeing.

 

"Bitch get in there and screw that guy or I'll blow your head off!".

customer is still getting the quality he paid for, product doesnt suffer in large ways. who knows, maybe that increases it?

 

the idea is quite interesting. abusing vulnerable victims until their own sense of personal progress detaches, and is then re-attached to the pimp's goals. hookers stop caring if they make money and start caring if her pimp is getting his due respect from others. its a drastic re-wiring of a person's psychological structures.

 

what makes this kind of exploitation so heinous in many ppl's eyes is when the victims have a belief in sexual purity beforehand, and are coerced to act against that belief. break them down psychologically until they violate their moral code.

 

this type of 'coercion' and 'fraud' are not essential elements of prostitution, its just commonplace in that industry. arguably because its illegal.

 

its a systematic gambit mixing invitations to believe mythologies, intimidation, real violence, and gifts. these are things taht really only work on 1 type of group: the vulnerable.

 

ofc other types of prostitutes exist, but this is the side where real undeniable exploitation is occuring.

[Mishelle]

On that note, of The Game, it reminds me that for the average Joe and Joleen, we have no personal experience with this.  What we know comes from books and television and others' anecdotes on occasion.  So, I'd just like to point out that fewer than 18% of Hollywood's writers and directors are women and when it comes to producers, I believe there's like 2.  This really drives how we view these things--not the stats or real-life experiences--how these roles and images are being pumped into the population.  no pun intended

[LovePrevails]