Opinion is like a pendulum and obeys the same law. If it goes past the centre of gravity on one side, it must go a like distance on the other; and it is only after a certain time that it finds the true point at which it can remain at rest. – Arthur Schopenhauer
Last week my blog was discovered by the men’s rights community; they see me as sympathetic to their cause because of my vocal dislike for neofeminism. And so I am, just as I’m sympathetic to the basic tenets of true feminism. I have said many times that the idea that men and women are “equal” is political nonsense. Two things which are equal to each other are the same as one another, and men and women are not the same. We have equal importance in the scheme of things, but it’s because the genders complement each other, not because they’re interchangeable. Women are strong in areas men are weak and vice-versa; yin and yang, Earth and Sky, night and day. In places where political and social systems strongly favor men over women (as in Islamic cultures) feminism is needed, and in places where political and social systems strongly favor women over men (as in modern American culture) a men’s rights movement is needed.
Nature set things up so that the sexes were balanced, and early human civilizations continued that balance. But over time certain power-hungry men, as the movers and shakers in the outside world, betrayed the trust of women and set things up so that men were not merely the governors of the world but its rulers. There is a BIG difference between the two; a governor holds power in trust and is accountable to the governed, while a ruler holds power as a right and is not accountable. And so the “war between the sexes” started, and still continues today some 3000 years later. Now women are in control and are abusing men as badly the worst patriarchal societies ever did women. Well, as Pollyannaish as it may sound two wrongs don’t make a right, and the current retributive maltreatment of men is beginning to provoke a backlash as any rational mind could have predicted. The reason for this is that “-isms” are never satisfied; like all political entities they become solutions in search of problems once their primary goals are attained, and they keep maneuvering for more and more power until the original situation they were formed to remedy is completely reversed, setting the stage for still more conflict as the unbalanced system struggles back toward balance…and beyond. The pendulum swings one way and then the other, and though it may eventually settle in the middle nobody reading this will live to see it.
Each side of the swing is a reflection of the other, so unsurprisingly men’s rights activists tend to fall into the same errors as feminists did. Just as most feminists tar all men with the same brush, most MRAs tar all Western women with the same brush; just as many feminists dismiss or belittle the contributions of men, so many MRAs dismiss or belittle the contributions of women. Weirdest of all, both neofeminists and a certain percentage of MRAs are anti-whore! The men of this sort constantly use “prostitute” as an insult against amateurs for wanting money spent on them, and while my opinion on this subject is well-known I obviously don’t consider “whore” an insult, and I have a pretty low opinion of any man who does. If sex with a woman wasn’t worth paying for, the world would be a very different place, yet many MRAs pretend they can “get it for free” or that women are all interchangeable. Unjust marriage laws have artificially inflated the price of a woman’s favors, yet these silly men attack and insult those women who price sex fairly because they have an overdeveloped sense of entitlement (just as most feminists do) and think they “deserve” to get laid for free (presumably because of their good looks and charming personalities).
One commenter recently said “if men and women are equal then dick is as valuable as pussy”. Unfortunately for this logic, we are not equal (as I said above) and male sexual participation is not as valuable as female; it is not and could never be, anywhere in the animal kingdom. The basic rule of reproductive biology is “spread the seed, guard the egg”, which is why men are driven to give it away and why women can charge for it, not to mention the reason societies tend to be more concerned with harm to women than to men; lots of men can die without affecting the birth rate at all, but EVERY dead woman lowers it. This is an undeniable FACT, no matter how little some men like it. On the other hand women, though as intelligent as men, are not as good at the kind of analytic objectification which makes technology possible; the dearth of female inventors, composers, engineers, etc is proof of that, and it has nothing to do with education as feminists are so fond of claiming because the situation has not changed in the past century and never will. This is a FACT, no matter how little some women like it. Men and women tend to be good at DIFFERENT things, and properly complement each other rather than competing. And please don’t post a bunch of comments about how Miss So-and-So is a crack engineer and Mr. Whathisname is beating the women off with a stick; the only rule without exception is that which states “all rules have exceptions”. Or expressed more graphically, there are cases on record of people surviving falls from airplanes without parachutes; care to try it for yourself?
If men’s rights activists were smart, they would STOP mimicking feminists and support prostitutes’ rights rather than insulting an old and noble profession. Why do you think neofeminists hate prostitutes so much? Because we let men have sex at a fair price. The suppression of our trade has contributed to the current feminist control of men, and by attacking us MRAs are doing exactly what the neofeminists want. The only recipe for peace is to restore things to their ancient balance, and one of the first steps toward doing that is to decriminalize prostitution so men have access to sex on their own terms; this will bring down the artificial inflation in the value of women’s favors and thereby force women to deal rather than demanding. On the other hand, modern technology allows women to earn as much as men if that’s what they want, which brought down the artificially-inflated price of male labor which made the patriarchal cultures possible. For the first time in millennia the sexes have the potential to return to their primordial equal footing, and if we can find that balance we stand a good chance of being partners again as the gods intended rather than continuing the present adversarial relationship created by the human pigheadedness amply demonstrated by both genders.
I enjoy reading your blog. I also think that this battle of genders is more for the power than for anything else, appears to me that in all relationships, even between friends, always someone wants to lead to be right. But the issue is that between that battle and our ego, we forget to recognize the real skills that each one has.
[…] http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2011/04/09/pendulum/ […]
“Last week my blog was discovered by the men’s rights community; they see me as sympathetic to their cause because of my vocal dislike for neofeminism. And so I am, just as I’m sympathetic to the basic tenets of true feminism. I have said many times that the idea that men and women are “equal” is political nonsense. Two things which are equal to each other are the same as one another, and men and women are not the same. We have equal importance in the scheme of things”
Hi Maggie. I’d put it slightly differently. My thoughts, a week on, is that it seems to me many current and former prostitutes merely wish to be free to do what they wish to do when it causes no injury, harm or loss to anyone else. That you wish to be free to pursue your business without state interference. That you do not want ‘legalisation and regulation’ but rather freedom. Freedom is a very deep tenent in the MRA/MRM area. Men just want the guvment to get the hell out of our lives.
Further. Men in the MRA area and Free Man area have asked women to speak out against the blatant crimes being committed by police at the behest of women. From what I read. Prostitutes are suffering similar crimes by the police at the behesst of women and their mangina lackeys. False imprisonment. Fraudulent fines. Harassment. So it is not so much your ‘vocal dislike of neofeminism’ that I appreciate. It is your refreshing honesty that women who see an advantage for themselves and the ability to oppress a ‘competitor’ or gain money are quite willing to tell all sorts of lies to invoke ‘violence by proxy’ of the cops.
And yes. Your position that ‘men and women are not equal’ is refreshing. I’m sick of hearing ‘a woman can do anything a man can do’ and ‘a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle’. (Um? Alimony?)
Men are by far the leaders at creating a civilisation for ALL people to live in. I constantly remind women that men were circumnavigating the globe while women could not innovate tongs to forceps thereby condemning untold hundreds of millions of women and babies to excruciatingly painful deaths.
If there is one characteristic that can be said to empitomise men, it is that many of us have done our utmost to make the lives of women better. For this we are called oppressors. Sure, some men are arseholes. It was a man who invented forceps by the way. And most medical improvments to make child birth the relatively safe practice it is today were invented by men. Men, the evidence shows, are better than women at everything except child birth and breast feeding.
There is not a man I know who does not inherently understand. One woman. Nine months. One baby. One man. Nine months. LOTS OF BABIES. And we want to volunteer to BE THAT MAN. Men understand women hold the ace in the hole. The ability to reproduce the baby. What good is civilisation if there are no babies? Duh!
Therefore men and women are natural allies in many ways. We are CO-DEPENDENT. So it is with some serious distane that we dislike being called ‘oppressors’ when so many of our number have died for ‘the women and children’. We have asked women to ‘just be honest’ and this is a hurdle too high. Hence. Men in the MRA area seeing a woman be honest? Even THAT makes you unusual.
I believe you have missed that men like me are not impressed for what you are ‘against’ but for what you are FOR and your honest way of expressing it. That you are RARE in the west? I see it as sad. Honest women are a dime a dozen in the east.
Last night I was having dinner with a prospective fav#5. We met last October. I told her about how my fav1# told me to my face that if we married and she changed her mind on a baby she would cuckhold me and that she and most women felt that was no big deal for the man. I was watching my new prospects reaction very closely to check out her honesty. She is either a great actress or she is honest. She just kind of frowned and sighed and said “Yes, I know that most women see cuckholding as no problem at all. And I understand a man would be really upset to find out 20 years later the child was not his. I don’t like that attitude of women either.” Honest women from the east seem a dime a dozen. Why are they so rare now in the west? When did being honest go out of fashion for women?
I call bullshit on this. There are SOME women who would do this, but to say that “most women see cuckolding as no problem at all” is total, complete bullshit of a high order. If it were true, how come only about 15% of women cheat? 🙁
And here is a ‘patriarchal society’ that is ‘oppressing women’. Um. How many of these 50 will be women? My guess is the same number as were dead women firefighters at ground zero on 9/11. That would be zero.
Patriarchal societies oppress men more than women. We’d just like our women to notice this fact rather than call us oppressors. Men die for women only to be called ‘oppressors’. It’s time that bit stopped.
I am pretty sure men would also be quite happy to stand for the right of prostitutes to choose to do as they wish. The artificial inflation of the ‘price of pussy’ in the anglosphere is driven by manginas and women. Same bunch that are attacking the fathers.
http://theweek.com/article/index/213796/are-the-fukushima-50-doomed-to-death
Maggie!!
Oh No!, PETER is back.
Isn’t he the one that called his ex wife of 23 yrs a “Prostitute”? thinking that was a put down? Isn’t he the one that said he used to give her 20 to 30 orgasms a night??? Isn’t he the one that said in a previous post that he was “Done with Western Woman”, but is still posting on a Western board?
It seems to me that PETER, (He probably likes his name) for all the wrong reasons…LOL!, thinks pussy should be free on demand. It seems to me that he is full of shit and needs to leave Western women alone.
Joyce,
You have no evidence that I said or meant ‘prostitute’ as a ‘put down’ because I didn’t.
I pointed out that my wife, in my opinion, was a prostitute in that she offered ‘sex and love’ for money but then didn’t actually deliver. I have made it pretty clear that I believe that prostitutes are actually MORE honest than my ex.
Interesting to see that you would interpret that as a ‘put down’. Low self esteem on your part? It was suggested to me that I include my opinion on prostitution in the book. So I did. And my opinion is that if a woman and a man do whatever they do in private? It’s none of my business.
Interesting that a man who actually takes the position that prostitution is lawful and is actually willing to assist is then slandered and criticised.
Just goes to show western women will hate on men…no matter who they are or their jobs. This is what I expect.
Blockquote>You have no evidence that I said or meant ‘prostitute’ as a ‘put down’ because I didn’t.
Okay!
Emily.
And where is the ‘put down’? If YOU interpret what I said as a ‘put down’ then it is you who takes the position that the use of the word ‘prostitute’ is a ‘put down’. Not me.
As a number of women here have noted ‘pussy is not free’. This despite that IF men and women are EQUAL THEN penis has the same value as pussy. I can point you to a LOT of women claiming ‘men and women are equal’. Why don’t you rebut THEIR claim of ‘men and women are equal’?
So. If pussy is not free, as some readers here claim, what is the ‘price’ of pussy that is not immediately paid for? It is the ‘babies and money’ plan enforced via a ‘marriage certificate’ which is really slavery for men.
In my opinion there is little difference between women trying to get money for ‘sex and love’ via a marriage certificate and a woman asking for the ‘pay as you go’ model which is commonly called ‘prostitution’. The first model is HIGHLY promoted by women and the second model is roundly hated on by the VAST majority of women and not a few men.
Yet? How do they really differ? The biggest difference is that MANY of the women who promised ‘to have and to hold’ actually don’t deliver on the promise. Like my ex. Go talk to some men to realise how many men are regularly put on ‘sex bans’. I’m told, and you women here can tell me if I am told correctly, that the majority of men who go to prostitutes are married men. Why do that? Most likely because they can’t get what they need at home.
It is interesting to me that I actually place prostitutes ABOVE my ex on the honesty stakes and somehow a prostitute claims this is a ‘put down’ against prostitutes. Maybe Maggie might be the only one here who can actually understand what I am saying.
The interesting thing is this. When a man makes a comment that is ‘perceived’ as ‘negative’ by western women they immediately attack him. They don’t ask him ‘why’? No discussion needed. It is an immediate attack and 99% of the time it is based on lies and then the lies he never spoke are attacked. You have no idea how often I have seen this tactic by western women. No EEW attack me when I say the same thing. No EEW make up lies about me and then attempt to attack me for the lies they made up.
The level of man-hatred in the west is quite astounding when you see how absent it is in EEW.
Okay!
Joyce, you are so perceptive. If you wish to know what Peter-Andrew: Nolan (c) really thinks of women you might wish to google him. Here’s a little breakdown of his charming personality:
He has disowned his children so that he doesn’t have to pay child support. He is on a campaign of harrassment against his ex-wife and her entire family. He boasts on his website that he would be pleased if his own daughter were shot in the head. He refers to ALL western women as lying scumbag criminals. He suggested that it would be just dandy if a man leaked poisonous gas into a shopping mall because it would mainly be women who would be murdered. He is a heinous excuse for a man and a fat ugly bastard to boot!
Love your blog, Maggie xxx
Thank you, Janice! 🙂
Thank You Janice,
I have seen several of his post and they were very upsetting. I had to respond to them and his hate of Western Women, but he probably has it in for ALL women. My guess is that his wife hates him just as much and probably with good reason. Not sure why he would come on a Western board spuing hate of Western women.
I never saw the photo of him.
I notice not too many guys on here blast him, like the women do and I wish they would.
Yes I figured him out pretty quick, but it really is not too difficult, just read a few of his post. There is another one on here too that hates women and his post piss me off too. I think these guys think pussy should be free on demand, rape is ok and a women is meant to serve!!! These guys have serious issues that are beyond my ability to even understand. I think they could be dangerous, but they need to know A LOT of women would love to rid the earth of them FIRST.
Hugs……………….Joyce (:
The women here have done an excellent job of blasting this guy, so it didn’t seem necessary to join in. Really, I didn’t want to interfere with the drubbing he was getting.
“Men, the evidence shows, are better than women at everything except child birth and breast feeding.”
Peter, I can guarantee with a good deal of certainty there are several other things I do much better than you. If it so happens I’m wrong that would then indicate you are taking the male brotherhood of which you preach to an entirely different level; an idea / image which will surely destroy my enjoyment of sex for at least the next two weeks. Thanks.
Kelly,
He THINKS women are only good for SEX, CHILD BIRTH and BREAST FEEDING…LOL!
Oh No Here we go………
PETER,
You did refer to your ex as a Prostitute in a demaning and degrading way (In YOUR mind). You say she “Offered sex and love for money”, Well…Prostitutes never offer LOVE, They do not love you, they offer sex, but not love. It is a business. Pussy is a so desired by men, so craved by men that yes WE can charge for it. It is not FREE, no not even from a wife.
You had mentioned that your wife did not work…So what??? It is possiable her WORK was servicing you??? Keeping the house etc…My God ….You said “I gave her 20 to 30 orgasms a night”. # 1 that is impossible!!!!! She was a good faker, but you obviously liked it enough that you stayed 23 yrs. You talk about giving her money, I guess you mean, providing a house, food etc…. Well to fake 20 to 30 orgasms a night is something she could have been doing, HAD SHE BEEN SMART ENOUGH, with 20 to 30 men per day and night and getting at least 300.00 per hr for, so you paid her NO where near her value. 20 men x 300.00 (Low ball figure) is 6000.00 per night that she could have been making.
You said she did “not deliver”. Did not “Deliver” what?????
Trust me Peter, I have NO “Low self esteem”, in fact I think you do. I charge 800.00 per hr for my time because I CAN. I offer certain discounts, but if a man does not like MY price, he is free to move on. If I had a “self esteem” problem, I would be having to cater to men like you and lower my rate.
I hope your ex is working as a Prostitute in the WEST and getting paid her true worth, shit….Not even (I) could fake that many orgasms per night, anymore that one man can GIVE that many.
Since you love the women in the EAST, then why not just stay in the EAST??? You will never change Western women or the men who prefer US. I am sorry pussy is not FREE to you and you cannot afford the pussy you would really like, I would like a Bentley, but I have to save for it and yes WORK for it. I tried to tell the Dealership that the cost was too high and unfair, but the threw me out. I then went over to Macy’s to get a new silk blouse, I wanted to buy one and get another free, but, they threw me out!!!
BTW, There are MANY FEMALE Firefighters, not sure how many of the Female Firefighters died in 9-11, but I am sure there were many females/nurses caring for these injured men in the hospital.
It is YOU that came on this WESTERN Board bashing/”Hating on” Western women.
Joyce,
“She was a good faker, but you obviously liked it enough that you stayed 23 yrs. ”
I stayed in my marriage because I took vows. Not because I ‘liked it enough’. Vows are something western women seem completely unable to understand or to live up to.
Other women might wish to call women on the fact that at least TWO women have stated based on their research that 90% of divorces are initiated by the woman including many where the woman manipulates the man into getting divorced without him really knowing that is what is happening. That means the VAST MAJORITY of women support women breaking vows and being REWARDED for such. And you wonder why I call so many women liars? What is breaking a vow other than lying? Men keep their vows to their death. Women keep their vows until the alimony and child support seems good enough to kick out beta provider and move alpha-stud in.
Coming here and reading Maggies work I had hoped I might find a few women who were also open and honest like Maggie presents herself. I openly said I was intrigued and impressed at what she was writing. Your comments Joyce? I’ve seen them thousands of times over. Same ‘hate on the man no matter what the woman did’. Women are saints. Men are demons. It’s a very worn out refrain.
It’s not that the man honoured his word and stayed in an obviously bad marriage for the benefit of the kids and HID what his wife was doing so the marriage appeared great from the outside.
Nope..that can’t be the noble and self sacrificing reason he stayed. It must have been that he was getting enough sex. Well? I can assure you that I would have made a MONK look like a sex fiend after baby #2 arrived. But no. The vast majority of western women will hate on the best of fathers and husbands while defending the worst of wives and mothers. And that is what I tell the young men. Don’t get married because it is a terrible deal.
Funnily enough. I take the position that prostitution is lawful and I would like to see what I can do about extending the protection of the law to prostitutes in Australia in our upcoming courts. For coming here and talking openly I am hated on by a few more western women. Not much different to anywhere else I go online.
Western women are so brainwashed that when the truth is presented to them they immediately have to reject it. I went through a phase where I felt very sorry for western women for their victimisation of the Illuminati via ‘feminism’. But after another 18 months of them hating on me for pointing out they were victims? I got over that. Women claim victimhood everywhere EXCEPT where they ARE actual victims. It’s amazing to see. Women are the victims of feminism. Henry Makow has been telling you this for 11 years now.
Peter,
Just stop BASHING Western women. It is really very simple, just STAY AWAY FROM WE WESTERN WOMEN.
You sound like the typical client that we Loath!!! They come in bashing their wife or ex and usually the wife has good resaon to be sick of them.
BTW, You posted:
“It is the ‘Babies and money plan’ enforced via a ‘Marriage Certificate’, which is slaverly to men”. Slavery to MEN?????
Peter just tell men to never get married!!! I personally think it woild be GREAT for the women, not to have to suffer at their hands.
What makes you think every woman wants a MAN and BABIES???? I sure as hell do not. Most of my girl friends do not want to ever be married again and glad they are rid of the guy. I have known women to decline alimony just to not ever have to have contact with him again, I have known women to give up the babies to him to never have to see his face again.
“Babies for money plan” my ass. Men cannot pay a woman enough to have kids. Having kids is very difficult. Putting up with a man in my face on a daily basis as a couple makes me ill!!! I just want to get them it, get it over with, pretend he was the greatest, move on, collect the next fee and do the show all over again. They just keep coming back though and paying the VERY high fees.
On 4-11 (Pendulum) you posted
“as a number of women here jhave noted “pussy is not free’. This despite that if men and women are EQUAL THEN penis has the same value as pussy”…LOL!
Yes women and men are equal, but you go peddle your dick and see how much money you make.
IT WILL NEVER BE FREE PETER!!!!………So give it up, get over it and forget it!!!
Yep, that was me.
Peter you say “I stayed in my marriage because I took vows” Why did it take you 23 yrs to let the “Vows” go?
Yes PLEASE to continue to tell the men not to get married. Women are so used and abused by men in the relationship of Marriage, that I tell all women to SELL IT, never give it away to some man that is only trying to strap you down and lock you in.
Joyce,
“not sure how many of the Female Firefighters died in 9-11,”
The answer is ZERO Joyce.
And your point???
Yes, what IS the point? Some kind of “suffering contest”? Some kind of “numbers contest”? If you’re into this you can lose sight of the bigger picture. 9/11 made a lot of new MVS, unfortunately. There’s also the family/friends of the rescue people who were hurt, died, etc., trying to save people, etc. Stuff like “there were X number of men helping”, “x number of women”, etc., do these things really matter in the whole scheme of a tragedy this big? Thank you, Joyce, for asking what the point of this kind of hair-splitting is in regards to a tragedy this big.
BTW Peter Boy!
On 4-3 you posted the following on (Forgone Conclusion)
Maggie.
“It amazes me that virtually nobody has the guts to call them on their hypocrisy”
You PETER then continue with
“Well I have the guts to do it openly in my own name. I take the position’the vast majority of Western women are liars and hypocrites’. They hate me but they don’t try to deny it anymore”.
So we are “Liars and Hypocrites”….Peter, gee we really are hurt by you low opinion of us, shit , I doubt I will be able to sleep or eat for days over this….HA HA!!!
No cheap or free pussy here! I am a PROUD WESTERN WHORE.
JOYCE
Maggie, you get discovered by linkage.
Now… since I live in a country where prostitution is legal (it actually was always legal, but living of the products was not thus being a madam or pimp got you in front of the magistrate)… it hasn’t made a difference. There are methamphetamine addicted young (very young, 14) on the streets still.
The courtesan trade continues discreetly, as it always has.
On the issue of the pendulum, you are correct. The problem is that the current discourse (driven by feminism) denies the basic nature of both sexes (I almost wrote “gender”: learning to self-censor is a survival trait in the Anglosphere). Yes, the favours of women are demanded by men. We are visual. We can be easily manipulated women who are in love with the power of this.
Yes, we are disposable.
We can choose, however, not to treat each other as just cogs in a machine. This may not always lead to respect — though I have more time for women from your trade than almost every academic feminist I have met (they are in the same moral category as politicians, car salesmen, and other assorted con artists).
But the law? Meh. We have to ignore the state and build a more human society.
Chris, there will ALWAYS be poor, and drug addicts, and victims of crimes. Neither decriminalization nor civil rights laws nor a so-called “social safety net” nor police omnipresence can prevent those ills. But I feel (and judging by your post you do as well) that the largest ills are caused by statism, and that minimizing the authoritarian machinery would allow people to treat each other more like people rather than being encouraged and enabled to do otherwise by the “authorities”. It won’t save the most desperate members of society (because nothing will), but it will largely spare the rest of us from evils beyond those inherent in the human condition.
Maggie,
This piece was brilliant. Extremely concise and well-written and absolutely on-point. You assault every position of the Womyn-as-victim-men-as-oppressor meme currently running the show.
In fact, there’s nothing here I can’t endorse. So long as I can get pussy for free, it’s beyond unlikely I’ll be paying for it; but as far as I’m concerned, whatever anyone does that doesn’t hurt someone else (by the recipient’s estimation – not those on the outside) is fine by me.
The very last thing we need is a nanny state, dominated by theocrats or feminist theocrats, telling anyone what’s acceptable behavior in the bedroom.
The graceless hypocrisy of the feminist movement when it comes to sex and prostitution is galling. It’s more than obvious that it’s just middle-class female self-interest guarding the value of their juice.
From my perspective here in Korea (where I’m working for a few months again), I have to say: human societies are all the same. This war for sexual market domination is the only aspect of the truth that the feminists have noticed.
This was particularly good:
If sex with a woman wasn’t worth paying for, the world would be a very different place, yet many MRAs pretend they can “get it for free” or that women are all interchangeable. Unjust marriage laws have artificially inflated the price of a woman’s favors, yet these silly men attack and insult those women who price sex fairly because they have an overdeveloped sense of entitlement (just as most feminists do) and think they “deserve” to get laid for free (presumably because of their good looks and charming personalities).
Thank you, Gorbachev! I wrote once before about the degeneration of first- and second-wave feminism both from movements concerned with real problems into political parties dedicated to advancing the control-freak agenda of middle-class white women. As it happened in the 1890s so it happened again in the 1980s and will again with third-wave feminism. Tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock…
So when will this particular pendulum swing back, do you think?
I think it’s starting to swing back right now; the Swedish Model and other increased criminalization of prostitution, attempts to restrict abortion rights, assignment of alimony to men whose wives make more, increasing popularity of the men’s rights movement…all of these presage a swing back in the other direction. I just hope it doesn’t pass the midpoint again until after I’m dead. 🙁
“The swing of the pendulum” is an excellent analogy, in my opinion, for the massive shifts that go on in Society. Not a perfect one, perhaps, because it seems to me that all of Society has crept left-wards toward statist tyranny over the last decades; but there’s still a hope of some relief, someday, when and if the swing pulls everything back from its current repressive and oppressive position.
It’ll be a little late for me, though, genetically speaking. I’ve spent my life aware that my sexual-caste position was as a dalit, a pariah, untouchable and scorned. I’ve compensated by turning inwards, to meditation, to quiet solitude. I’ve found my own center and learned to reside there at peace.
But now there’s nothing that pulls me toward women, even those I recognize as powerfully attractive and “just my type.” No, I can’t really say that; rather, I see attractive women as completely beyond my reach, and I no longer even try. I have quite utterly accepted that I have nothing to offer a woman that she can’t get easily for herself. So I relate to them as might an old eunuch; I’m quite at ease talking with a lovely lady, right up to the point where I smile and bid her “good day” … and go my own way.
More for you, Peter. Oh, well.
Dear BeijaFlor, if you don’t mind my asking, why do you say this: “It’ll be a little late for me, though, genetically speaking. I’ve spent my life aware that my sexual-caste position was as a dalit, a pariah, untouchable and scorned”?
Laura, I was raised by a single mother in a houseful of women, and I learned misandry at my mother’s knee. Actually my grandmother’s knee. It’s a long story and I won’t burden this site with it. But thanks for asking.
You’re welcome. I’m hoping you broke away from that evil you were taught and didn’t take the easy way out and stay in bitternes, stereotyping, etc.!
Well … I guess I accepted the stereotype.
When I grew up, I took care of my by-then-elderly mother, because she needed my care … unlike the “strong, independent women” (as self-declared) of my generation. I paid the rent, then I bought a house for us, and Mom lived there until the last night of her life.
She passed on the year before I turned fifty. The best offer of companionship I got after that? A friend’s wife, who worked part-time at the animal shelter, offered to bring me a cat.
I believe, though, that I’ve managed to outgrow “bitter.”
There is one chapter you left out of here, which is often cited but rarely put in context.
The second wave of feminist was launched after the publication of Betty Friedan’s “The Feminine Mystique.” The book was largely a look at how Friedan’s college classmates didn’t like how they’d ended up as housewives.
Out of this came a lot of the questionable anti-man memes that second wave feminism is know for. But what’s rarely noted is that it was largely male ingenuity that gave Friedan and her cronies the time to pursue their anti-male agenda.
Where Friedan’s female elders had to spend their days washing clothes, sewing, preparing food (or even growing food, etc.), automatic technology was in place by the 1950s and allowed women like Friedan the time to sit and cook up anti-male ideas — not realizing it was men’s ingenuity that gave them the time to begin with.
Wishing for equal opportunity, which Friedan did in her book, was one thing. But the massive anti-male and anti-white male campaigns her followers waged were another, and this where (IMO) second wave feminism degenerated into something else (factions, neofeminism, Marxism, whatever). We live with this today in our culture more than the concept of basic equality, which says something.
Yes, that’s more or less what I was getting at in the last paragraph, though I didn’t state it explicitly. Camille Paglia does state it directly in several places. 🙂
Hi Maggie,
I just found this on ‘a voice for men’. Now. I can’t claim to know if ‘Lotta Goo’ is legit or not. Sounds pretty far out to me. But she does actually make the point that many people, like men in general, are told and actually believe that for all their hard work and money that they bring into the household that they are entitled to a little loving in return.
It’s a common theme in the mens world. And apparently at least one woman street walker says so as well. Amazing to see a street walker turn up on a voice for men the same week I find your site. I am sure you know Paul Elam.
http://www.avoiceformen.com/2011/04/09/love-support/
Indeed. I am not sure if the whole thing is a rather toungue in cheek dig at how women get ‘spousal support’ so men should get ‘love support’.
I can certainly sympathize with men today, and I would love to get sex for free (please provide a link), but the situation is much more complex than every penis is worth every vagina.
An ugly old man who wants to sleep with a beautiful young woman has to face the reality of supply and demand. (There are a lot more ugly old men than beautiful young women.)
A free market is one where special interests don’t use the government to manipulate supply and demand. Traditionally, religious leaders have used secular laws to control the sex market: No free sex, and not even inexpensive sex, only sex in exchange for lifetime support.
Worse, they further limit the availability of sex by mentally castrating little girls. I think parents of daughters are more likely to oppose accurate, balanced and comprehensive sex education.
But even if girls were allowed to develop their sexuality without restrictions, there would still be some prostitution, formal and informal.
http://sexhysteria.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/sexual-inhibition-and-mental-castration/
When I saw men outside of my relationship for sex only, about the only costs they had were to get to my place. Most of the time we’d meet at my place. The only other costs were on the 1 date we had. I wanted 1 date 1st in order to see how they were in person, etc. There were times I paid for everything for them. Other times it was Dutch treat or they paid for everything. Sometimes all we had was the free ice water. It depended on our financial situation at the time to a big degree. I also purposely broke the evil dating game “rules” by doing things this way. I always had condoms, lubricant, etc., and never asked anyone to provide them. I did that on purpose also to break more ###*** “rules”. As far as food went at my place, there was really only 1 time that issue came up and my friend and I did Dutch treat for dinner and I bought breakfast for both of us the next morning. He was 1 of the few I allowed for overnight visits as he lived far away. I never asked anyone to pay me back for anything. That was another “rule” (eyeroll) I wanted to break. I kept things as free as possible on purpose. I also never charged a cent specifically for sex and never will. To be honest, it seems at times that the women like me are “invisible” to men. I find it frustrating, but will keep speaking out on all this. It’s also a motivator for me to speak out. I wish more men would consider the personal ads. This is what I used as you can be VERY open and honest in them. I find it so sad that so many men are just resigned to all these “rules”, etc. Yes, you DO meet at least a few with no manners, etc. But, the work it took me to meet a few good 1’s was worth it. It wasn’t the easy way out and usually the NON-easy way out with anything has big rewards. I haven’t seen anyone but my fiance for about 8 years. That’s been on purpose for at least a few reasons. However, our arrangement still stands and always will. Actually, right now I’m very interested in a certain man for a sex only relationship but don’t know if that’s going to happen for various reasons. Yes, I know women like me are rare. But, we DO EXIST and I’m proud of that. There’s been many small groups all through history that have changed things greatly for the better. We DO COUNT and I have many great memories from my time in what I call “wildness”. Also some bad 1’s! But, overall: GOOD. Thanks for listening.
I forgot to say the post I made above this 1 was directed to sexhysteria.
Despite the traditionally controlled market, some women can be very generous and compassionate, and I think generosity and compassion are things society should encourage.
It’s hard to understand why “Christians” and other religious fanatics do their best to cultivate the killer instinct by denying humanity’s natural desire for physical contact, hiding the beauty of human skin, and demonizing any form of politically incorrect love.
I’m curious about how you became the person you are!
Dear sexhysteria, I’ll be glad to tell you why I got into “wildness”, still have an arrangement, etc. when I have time. Thanks for your interest.
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
– Margaret Mead (the attribution has been disputed, but no other source is suggested)
Dear Sailor Barsoom, THANK YOU! You know that’s 1 of my favorites also (the Mead quote). There’s many examples of small groups changing the world for the better. Also many individuals also! I’m so tired of hearing the arrogant, defeatist ###***: You’re in too small of a group to count, be bothered with, etc. (BIG eyeroll) 1 person can’t change ANYTHING for the better. Why bother to try to change anything or educate anyone? Things are always going to be ###***. People don’t have any power. Just accept things as they are (###*** this 1 especially!). Thanks again for posting the quote!
Dear sexhysteria, I’ll be answering your question in the next few days.
Laura, you can send me an email through Maggie (hopefully she won’t mind forwarding it to me).
I won’t mind. 🙂
I sent it a while ago. Thanks for your patience. Thanks, Maggie, for agreeing to forward.
Maggie, you’re such a sweetheart!
I do try to be. 😉
“Now women are in control and are abusing men as badly the worst patriarchal societies ever did women.”
I hope you’re not serious.. I have never heard that widowers are being burnt because their owners have died, that it is considered absolutely okay for women to kill and torture their husbands, or that men have their genitals mutilated so that every sexual act will be so painful they are guaranteed not to cheat.
Dear Sina, when I read anything about “that it is considered absolutely okay for women to kill and torture their husbands” I have to keep myself from screaming. That ANY murder that wasn’t true self-defense, during war or a deserved death penalty (like in cases of serial killers)has ever been OK with anyone is an outrage! This reminds me of that WONDERFUL child sacrifice that was done in what I call the “good old days”. I was ready to fall over when I read about it in the Old Testament. These ###*** weren’t even arrested. It was wonderful to read how God ordered His followers to never do this evil to their kids. It was great to read about some light fighting that darkness. Anyway, thanks for pointing out how the reaction to most murder should NEVER be.
But Sina, the societies of which you speak treated everyone abominably. Men were castrated and sometimes emasculated to create eunuchs, thieves’ hands were cut off, people were severely beaten for misdemeanors, etc. It’s not fair to compare ANY modern Western society with those cultures apples-to-apples; I’m talking about the relative degree of mistreatment between male and female within a culture, not cross-cultural comparisons.
I’m sorry I didn’t make that clear; mea culpa! 🙂
In Polynesia, when a woman died,it was customary for her husband to scoop his own eyes out with a wooden spoon,and cutting a man’s foreskin off removes many of the nerves that make sex pleasurable for men, some cultures do this with the express purpose of making masturbation or sex less pleasurable for men.
Perhaps you should read more.
From reading, anecdotal evidence of friends and relatives, and ahem personal experience, I’d have to say that if male circumcision is intended to discourage masturbation, it’s been a dismal failure.
Sailor –
#WINNING.
Love,
Emily
@Nergal: I read quite a lot, thanks for the suggestion.. and that is also the reason why I know that removing the foreskin and female genital mutilation are two very different things and comparing them on the same level is either a sign of ignorance or a conception that females have to suffer much more for it to have the same weight as men.
Many men have a too tight foreskin and trouble with keeping that area clean, so there are medical reasons why some cultures started this (often unnessecary) practice. If done correctly, removing the foreskin can even add to sexual enjoyment of the man as it can avoid premature ejaculating. There are no such reasons for fgm, on the contrary it often leads to life-long infections or even death. FGM in it’s most common form would anatomically equal cutting the whole penis and balls away and then sewing the remaining opening to the urethra together so that even after the wound is healed, no normal urinating is possible. No castration practice has ever been as widely spread as FGM, which is estimated to affect about 100 Million girls and women (WHO).
Hey, I like your blog and agree with many of your points overall,which is to say,you offer a much more rational view of intergender relations than modern feminism. I disagree with this point made in this post, however:
“But over time certain power-hungry men, as the movers and shakers in the outside world, betrayed the trust of women and set things up so that men were not merely the governors of the world but its rulers. ”
If power or control was what was vexing early feminists, wouldn’t they have IDENTIFIED “too much male power” as the source of their grievances?
How do you explain the fact that early feminists described the reason for their feminism as “the problem with no name”, malaise, or boredom, rather than “power-hungry men”?
I think it is much more likely that men made things too easy for the women and “displaced them” from the center of the home with technology, such as dishwashers, laundry machines and microwave ovens. This was done with the intent of making it easier on women, as a nice gesture, but perhaps made women feel redundant or unnecessary.
Your thoughts?
Also, I agree prostitution is an honorable profession when the prices are reasonable, most MRA’s do, but many of the women here are SEVERELY delusional. $300 an hour, $800 dollars an hour,seriously?
What are you,supermodels or something?I can have sex with most women for under $20,or masturbate for free. Unless you used to be a Dallas Cowboy cheerleader or something,$800 an hour is fucking insane.
I agree that pussy is a resource that has value, so is electricity, electricians make about $50-$75 an hour. I wouldn’t pay over $150 an hour to fuck a hot female celebrity and the extra 50 to 75 bucks would be for the novelty of it.
Women are valuable, but non-essentials are never THAT valuable,especially in the case of used goods. I’d be more likely to pay $300 an hour for the services of a ditch digger than a prostitute.
Nergal, you’re speaking of second-wave feminism; first-wave feminists all the way back to Mary Wollstonecraft identified the denial of rights (such as the vote and right to education) as the most important issue.
As for your claim that pussy is overpriced, the free market disagrees with you. Even in countries where prostitution is decriminalized some women can easily command higher prices, and in the days before criminalization courtesans were often among the wealthiest of women. Just because YOU wouldn’t pay that much doesn’t mean others wouldn’t. I personally think it’s asinine to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for one building lot in some urban anthill, but I’d have to be a fool to claim nobody would.
As for “used goods”, how can a service be “used”? Are you claiming an experienced chef or established actress should make less than a beginner? The very idea is absurd.
“As for “used goods”, how can a service be “used”? Are you claiming an experienced chef or established actress should make less than a beginner? The very idea is absurd.”
Pussy is not a service. It is a tangible good.
Speaking as a man, I can tell you that VERY few women know how to be sexually pleasing in bed. Just because a man can achieve orgasm with these women does not mean they were any good. I can achieve orgasm masturbating into a wet hand puppet but the quality of the sexual experience is very low.
Even prostitutes often give lackluster performances, ESPECIALLY if they are only in it for the money. Rushing through sex to get to the next “job” reduces the overall quality of the experience.
I’m glad you brought up chefs,because that illustrates my point about used goods perfectly. How much would you pay a restaurant for a sandwich that everyone in said restaurant has taken a bite of?
Sure, if you’re starving you might pay for a half-eaten sandwich, and be damned glad to eat it, but when you are not hungry, someone would have to pay YOU to eat that same sandwich.
That’s how I feel about paying for sex. Unless the woman is DAMNED good at pleasing men, because that is something she PERSONALLY feels compelled to do, her vagina is worth no more than the wet hand puppet to me. Just about every woman I’ve ever personally been with or watched my friends fuck (as a by-product of communal living, I’m not a voyeur) offers the exact same level of sexual performance which is very low and not very arousing to a man.
“Pussy is not a service. It is a tangible good.”
If you are just in it for the pussy only then there are women who price it within your range. I (and the other ladies here within the profession) do not provide a tangible good. We DO provide a service that yes, comes with pussy. Herein lies the difference between escort, courtesan and streetwalker, wham bam thank you slut.
The $x00/per hour girls provide an overall experience. There is companionship, laughter, flirting, foreplay, sex, cuddling, caressing, kisses, conversation, seduction, romance, passion, etc. THAT is what you pay for when paying the higher prices. Not just the goods.
A car is an engine on four wheels. Go buy a cheap Hyundai if you want to go from point a to point b only. Buy the Jag if you want to do it in comfort and style.
Nergal: In that case, I suggest you become gay, because your perception of women betokens serious cognitive and psychosexual flaws which will probably not be cured in this lifetime, at least not without the extensive services of a used therapist. 😐
That your grasp of economics is shaky, and that you might want to read more.
New products do not find their way to the market because someone thought, “Awww, gee willikers, I just want to give the whole world a great big hug made of sunshine”. Altruism gives things away for love of making puppies smile. Capitalism identifies an untapped market, produces a good people will buy, and makes a great load of wonga.
The microwave oven was an accidental invention by an engineer looking to mass-produce magnetrons used to power WW2 radar systems.
Akin to saying if you buy a pair of scissors then you have bought the haircut. You’re either confusing the noun with the verb it performs, or you’re not that bright.
Tangible goods can be warehoused independent of their servicers, inventoried, put in a box and shipped to Maine.
Intangible goods are individual items which cannot be held in the hand (you know… intangible). Freelance articles, market algorithms, software.
Services are actions – labor. Sex, cooking, intensive psychosexual therapy.
Yeeeeeah.
Options:
Never went to college.
Never heard of porn industry.
Issues. Like, damn.
You forgot one possibility, Emily: “Not as deep in the closet as he likes to think he is.” 😐
I think its more of a misunderstanding then anything. Paying for sex is akin to buying goods, paying for an hour with a women is a service. The pussy if it is the only goal is just the most realistic sex toy you can buy, considering the next best things cost usually $100 and you get to keep them makes paying $300 for one use seem crazy.
I should add that I generally agree with bdevereaux though, in that there are other things involved as well, and in most cases you cant compare paying for sex to buying a fleshlight.
Speaking of pendulums–
A few years ago, when I was 33, was was seeing someone. I met her in a salsa club: hotbed of intrigue and horniness and on-floor clothed sex. Korean salsa clubs are glorious and wonderfully anonymous and usually not about picking up chicks. We hit it off, danced perfectly together, and before the week was out, were in bed. She was extremely forward, very aggressive, and sexually persuasive. Her appetites were insatiable. It was an intense month or so.
I thought she was about 23. I was pretty sure. I was in Korea, so it was hard to guess anyone’s age: at 16-26, some women can look awfully young.
After a few days, I was in palpable shock and had some consternation when I discovered she was 17. Not only 17; she had turned 17 about two months before. Needless to say, this was illegal in some places. It put me out of my mind when I thought about the consequences.
For sleeping with a *woman* who was sexually provocative, aggressive, demanding, and voracious, and who actively pursued me, I could have *gone to jail*.
I can guarantee that this woman wasn’t a stranger to sex. That was something she was hungry for and enjoyed thoroughly.
We stayed together for about a month or so, maybe a month and a half or a bit more. Eventually, we had a “discussion” and I ended it (I’d also met someone more appropriate, who I stayed with for over a year). The girl was in highschool;
And here’s where the meme infects you. I’d internalized it all.
No matter how much I tried, I couldn’t get the feeling out of me that I was a pervert, some sick, twisted bastard for thoroughly enjoying my time with this young lady. I shuddered from time to time.
Not only did she not complain, she seemed genuinely distressed when we ended it; wanted to meet “on the side” for a while, and to remain friends. If I remained friends, I knew it would end up in bed, so I had to call it.
I’ve been told by a number of 25-25 year-old guys that this is not at all uncommon – 16-20 year-old girls glomming on to them like glue. Sounds pretty primeval and basic. In my experience, it was raw and powerful in a way I hadn’t experienced myself since I was about 17.
I think we coddle each other and try to draw arbitrary distinctions too much.
This idea of feminism really deserves more than a blog comment, but there are also those better equipped to deal with it. But here goes anyway.
Feminists do not see women as helpless victims.
The damsel in distress trope was not invented by feminists, but rather rallied against it. If a male insists on protecting women, that such a thing is somehow his role as a man, he’ll be labeled sexist. Feminist rally against the idea of women require male protection.
http://www.feministfrequency.com/2009/11/beyond-true-blood-sensationalism/
Sex positive feminists, as far as I have seen anyway, don’t consider statutory rape to be rape. If a 15 year old woman wants sex, and a guy obliges, so what? These feminists will readily acknowledge that teens are sexual (a few will even say children have a sort of sexuality, though personally not me). However while statutory rape is not rape, gray rape is rape. The key word is consent of course. Not only willing but enthusiastic.
For intimate partner violence (a broader term for domestic abuse) there is some acknowledgment of females attacking males. In my class a student presenters had a clip from a reality show demonstrating it, and we discussed it, and I read on a non-feminist website, a story about a man abused by his wife. He couldn’t get a the police to listen, until a feminist organization helped.
I’m missing the link, but there was a study showing that when asked if they believed various positive and negative statements about men and women, feminist women were more positive about men and non-feminist men.
Though the big exception to the above statement is of course is what Maggie calls Neo-feminists. The “Anti-porn” feminists who DEFINE pornography as degrading to women, created the swedish model, and often spout anti-male rhetoric. However, most of the stuff I have read is more sex positive, the most popular feminist websites are sex positive, the current generation of feminists are sex positive. (As far as I’ve seen anyway. Though it suddenly makes sense that women born after the second wave would feel less hate and fear for the other gender.)
Reading this blog has created a dilemma. I find myself agreeing with nearly all of it but I cannot imagine a setting where I could get any benefit or avoid losing a lot by mentioning it. In the popular mind, what kind of guy argues for legalizing prostitution? What mental images form in the minds of almost everyone out there?
This is a tough problem if you are sympathetic guy. Picking the right – the exactly right – time and place to make the case will matter a lot, imho.
Well, Rum, if we can infect enough people with that dilemma, it will cease to be one. 😉
Rum,
“In the popular mind, what kind of guy argues for legalizing prostitution?”
The kind of guy who says that men and women may choose to be sovereign and self governing and kick the guvment out of their lives.
That would be me and like minded men.
The idea that me being paid to use my brain and write software is somehow ‘legal’ while a woman using her brain and body to entertain a man is somehow ‘illegal’ is ludicrous if looked into in any depth.
The only reason anyone thinks prostitution is ‘bad’ is that the women realise that it threatens them and so they denounce it and denounce any man who supports it.
I have noticed this pattern in the way women have hated on me these last three years. Stumbling upon Maggies blog has revealed that prostitutes are hated on in the same way. I never realised this because I never bothered to listen to women hating on prostitutes because I have always thought the practice was perfectly ok.
“The only reason”-RIGHT! You love the unfair blanket statements, don’t you? I personally hate prostitution and there’s MORE than 1 reason for that. However, I am for decriminalization. Anyway, please don’t ASS-ume about all who don’t want any part of it. Thanks for listening.
@Maggie,
As for your claim that pussy is overpriced, the free market disagrees with you. Even in countries where prostitution is decriminalized some women can easily command higher prices, and in the days before criminalization courtesans were often among the wealthiest of women. Just because YOU wouldn’t pay that much doesn’t mean others wouldn’t. I personally think it’s asinine to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for one building lot in some urban anthill, but I’d have to be a fool to claim nobody would.
Speaking of the free market – something has been bothering me for years.
When I was seeing “Mina”, the PR/events co-ordinator who sidelined (“Mainlined” if you consider income) as an “entertainment” girl, she related some economic info to me that continues to baffle me.
Aside from the fact that she earned several times what I did, the way she earned it didn’t always make sense.
As an entertainment girl in Seoul, “Mina” got two pay rates depending on what she was doing. The work was different, and fell under different categories, though sex was usually involved in some way in both:
1) “Entertainment” – about $200 a night to give men the privilege to grope, touch, squeeze and poke at her, while she wore a hot outfit and sang and paid attention to a particular man, etc., often in a group. She’d be plying them with drink and talking and listening. These were corporate “meetings”, so she was told who was and wasn’t important; It was all kind-of scripted and if the outside-client being entertained felt inclined (which was never guaranteed at all), then she could accompany him back to a prearranged hotel. She wanted them to be interested more often than not: she baldly told me (as I sat jealously listening to her tell me she wanted them to want sex) that she more or less wanted the man to want her sufficiently to pay her extra.
If she had sex, usually in some kind of “experience”, it added between $100-150 to the total bill. The only thing that added hugely to the bill was anal sex, which she was averse to, and only because she told the agency that if she had to do it, she expected more money. She was never paid by the client – the bill was always sent by the agency to the company for “drink and unspecifieds”, and the agency paid her minus 25%; the above was her take-home.
This bothered me: What was interesting was that being “entertainment” commanded as much or more than actually having sex.
I’m still wondering after all this time. I know the culture over here is probably different, but any ideas why? I mean, either the value of having sex is lower than I thought, or the value of hanging around and pretending some guy is fascinating is really high.
2) Out-calls: She graduated to tonier clients because of her demand and her apparent ability to keep her mouth shut, but I personally suspect it was because she had a touch of class and grace that most women I’ve met didn’t have; it was her demeanor. When she “graduated”, she got $450 a night for this; it involved the entire night, though she’d leave really early in the morning, usually. She got $200 for a few hours.
Now THIS is what stunned me, and I STILL don’t get this:
If dinner was involved, or going out in public, the rates skyrocketed – it was almost $800 for a semi-public dinner with other people, for just a few hours, and the rest of the evening, which – to my utter disbelief, half the time DID NOT INVOLVE SEX. I presumed she was protecting me and not telling me she was having sex with these men, but given I knew everything else, I can’t see the possible motivation in her lying to me about this – I mean, if I was comfortable with her doing what she did on a basic level, why would she lie? We were pretty open about everything: Her general candor was unique among all women I’ve ever known.
So why would men pay so much for this kind of service? And this was often corporate, which means the guy never picked up the bill himself, but sometimes it wasn’t. Which means that either he was paying the tab himself, in which case he was forking over lots of cash. If the company was picking the tab up for him, I can see taking sex or leaving it, but this was then free sex with a very hot and willing young woman – so again, …?
Upshot: Oftentimes, she commanded much more money for NOT having sex with clients.
What’s the logic here? It makes no sense to me at all.
I was initially attracted to Mina because she was extremely pretty, very flirtatious, open and talkative and charming. If *I* had actually paid $800 to take her out, paid for food, and had us driven around, I’d damned well take her back and have as much sex as possible, and I’d be expecting a memorable evening.
There’s no way I’d pay that much money and not go to bed with a woman if I’d been up to paying that kind of money in the first place.
So – I’m just wondering:
Do you have any idea what’s the economic logic going on here?
I’ve been on many, many calls which did not involve sex. My guess? Women who are interesting and high-class enough for a gentleman to be willing to be seen in public with them can command more than those who are only interesting from a sexual standpoint, whether sex is involved or not. Though the cops like to pretend it’s a dodge, the money really is just for our time; every escort I know charges the same whether sex is involved or not.
Maggie,
“every escort I know charges the same whether sex is involved or not.”
Really? Men pay for time with women that does NOT include sex? Wow.
I know that must sound naive…but I am totally flabbergasted.
I’ve heard of a new service in Japan which was ‘friends for hire’. It was for singles who were going to social events and they wanted to make believe they had a ‘significant other’. I am staggered at that too.
The difference here is the difference between “pussy as a tangible good” and the sort of service Maggie provided. I’d imagine that the sex itself only accounts for $75 to $100 of the overall cost (I understand that’s what you pay for a sex-only quickie sort of thing with a streetwalker). The other $200 or so is for the mood, the playfulness, the GFE or chance to act out some fantasy.
Peter,
I was a beard for a gay man. Junior man in a law firm in the south, wanted to make partner, and being gay would have shot that down forever (hell, even being single was seen as “not stable with an eye for the future”). Not really fair, but that was his situation.
I spent a while on his arm at Christmas parties, a couple of lunches, being pretty and well-spoken and decidedly female. We never got further than public kisses on the cheek and hand-holding (gay, you know). I got paid, he made partner. Win-win.
Another regular customer and I never had sex. He was impotent, with medical conditions than precluded little pills to help.
I can’t say it’s common – any woman looking to make a living as an escort by only situations such as these ought to not make long-term financial plans, if you know what I’m saying. But neither is it impossible or even terribly rare.
Cheers,
Emily
So guys pay for sex, and they pay for companionship, or for a pretty girl to hang out with them, but–
A woman really only charges for her *time*?
Interesting.
Okay, that makes some sense, once you adjust your mindframe.
Basically, it’s a woman’s time and attention that are valuable.
The actual act of sex has been taken off of its pedestal, no longer something “worshipful” and “pure” and therefore severely valuable for a woman to surrender.
IE – the price of pussy is being fairly set, as opposed to put artificially out of reach.
Yes, exactly! 🙂
Just a question if you do not mind.
What in YOUR opinion is a (Fair Price For Pussy) and how do you decide?
This question is for ALL the guys that would like to answer.
I charge for my time and my WORK that is involved. If I must wear a gown and go out for 8 hrs, as opposed to a hr meeting the fee is VERY high and most men cannot afford it, but that is OK because some can and will afford it. out call for 1 hr is 800.00 now, incall is 650.00, but how do you decide on what pussy is worth?. I would thing it is all the same. I know some charge more, some charge less.
I will appreciate any response.
I intend to come back and answer this with more detail than I probably should, since it will all be hypothetical.
That’s way out of my league. I can only speculate that guys that spend that kind of money on an escort service must be fairly wealthy.
Reading posts like this is so frustrating for me. I consider myself a sex positive feminist. For the most part, sex positive feminists would agree with you about prostitution, but this essentialist (i.e. the two sexes are essentially/fundamentally different) would send them into a fit. It seems like you’re a fellow sex positive at first, but apparently not quite.
Sex positive feminists would arrive at a lot of the same conclusions from different assumptions. Our belief is essentially that sex follows the same moral rules as anything else. I once saw someone illustrate why rape is wrong with a graphic description of force feeding someone their favorite. Rape is ultimately wrong because forced anything is wrong, and because it violates a person’s right to their own body. Prostitution is okay because in a capitalist society anyone can turn anything into a business if they really want.
Religious conservatives of course have a whole ‘nother layer of morality especially for sex, and they’re very clear on what that is. Neofeminists sometimes sound like that, but are rarely clear on what “feminist sex” actually is.
It seems here that you believe in a commodity model of sex, though this has a lot of problems. For one thing, the sex wars are an inevitability. In any mercantile exchange, each side tries to maximize when they get compared to what they give, which inevitably leads to conflict if what they’re bargaining for is important. Not to mention that men can and do sexual favors for women, and women can and do financially support house husbands or get them romantic gifts.
The commodity model is of course confusing for homosexuals. I suppose the more dominant one could be the buyer, but then would admit that homosexual men and women can change roles depending on personality. It’s even worse for intersex (no physical gender) and genderqueer (no psychological gender) people, who are rare but do exist.
The “Yes means Yes” blog and book explain this in detail, but also include the words of sex workers. The focus is, admittedly, the problems, but in each case it was from women who want to do that and just wish the men were more respectful and stop “trying to get inside [their] head”.
I would recommend “Carnal Nation” except they stopped adding new articles when they ran out of money. The newest headline claims they’ll be back…eventually. Unfortunately I think they would have a similarly mixed reaction to Maggie. The kinky writers would tell of the submissive men they know, the Trans-men (i.e female to male transgender) would glare, the women who work to help sex workers would start to sound like Neo-feminists.
To me, both the evolutionary pysch and sociology explanations make sense, but I do lean towards the sociology side. It just makes sense that between your parents, friends, the media, leaders, and everything else one sees in life would influence your behavior. To pretend culture doesn’t influence seems insane.
Oh, dear, I would never claim culture has no influence! But to me, nature is the cake and nurture the icing. Ice a cake however you like, it’s still a cake.
I’m curious to know why you think transsexuals would glare at me, though; their existence is the best disproof of “social construction of gender” I can think of! If gender is truly “socially constructed”, true transsexuals couldn’t exist because they should just act and feel however they were “socialized” to act and feel…yet they don’t, proving there is a gender-switch deep inside the brain which is switched the wrong way for transsexuals so that they feel like the opposite gender their sex organs (and socialization) would dictate.
@Quinc,
The problem is that rape is more gray than that. Sex isn’t defined by absolutes.
Enthusiastic consent is often withheld. Men and women play games with each other; to not be identified as a slut, women will often play “hard to get”. This is called misogynistic, but it’s also true. The greatest betrayers of the mystical revolution in feminist-inspired sexual morality isn’t men: it’s women.
Many women refuse to play ball.
With a lot of women, if you wait for enthusiastic consent and requests for sex, it never, ever, ever comes. A very large percentage of women expect to be overwhelmed by more powerful men. More, a lot of women will play the “I’m a good girl” card endlessly, expecting the man to steamroll them: If he doesn’t, he’s a loser, a wuss, a wimp.
Despite 60 years of social engineering, this has been my experience, and I’ve been with a large enough sample of women for this to be instructive:
Most women like men to be dominant; many women don’t want to let on that they want you to take them sexually, but they do; many women are worried about being seen as slutty, and will put up token barriers in the full expectation that the man will vault over them in a decent manner.
Why?
Many women want to be relieved of the responsibility for having had chosen to have sex with X or Y man. You see, if they were just overwhelmed, then, golly gee, I’m in no way responsible. It was hormones/he was seductive/etc.
The whole act of seduction is the art of, essentially, parting a woman’s legs, to be crude.
If you want to see the bald, naked truth of this, and have the “enthusiastic consent – sign legal forms for every stage of seduction” model trashed as thoroughly as possible, I’d advise you to step over to the Romance Novel counter, and peruse Female Porn.
The men are almost universally tall, forceful, and take what they want – even if they later succumb to female wiles and devote themselves to a woman.
This is what women want: The Bay Boy who is a leader of men and who brooks few arguments, who paradoxically devotes himself to her, even while he has endless options. This strokes the woman’s ego enormously and justifies her submission.
It all sounds terrible, but virtually every woman I’ve ever been with has had rape fantasies that made me wonder about what I was told while growing up.
So before it sounds like I’m endorsing rape – which I’m most emphatically not – I’d just like to point out that the whole constantly enthusiastic consent model is doomed to be a complete failure.
Sex is a game played through deception, coquettish displays, seduction and mystery.
The reason feminist models for sex seem to unbearably unsexy is that these elements are stripped from it in order to provide complete clarity.
Like floodlights blasting light on a night scene, it bleeds the color out of sex for almost all people and makes it virtually pointless.
The *women* who actually fuck men and enjoy it and pursue it and let men pursue them are the greatest criminals in the Feminist world. Beyond a few ideological patsies in colleges, the great swarming mass of men and women in the world do exactly what they’ve done for millions of years. All the ideology on Earth can’t change the actual reality.
All we can do is go in and take potshots on the individuals who do cross the fuzzy line, out of selfishness, greed, social maladaptation, drunkenness or sociopathy.
If you read some of the bizarre things that come out of the feminist utopias in colleges in the US, the almost inhuman dating and sexual behavior policies, you can see why this is going to be a minefield forever.
Humans aren’t easily categorizable and human sexuality is one of those malleable but also unchanging things that will just defy legislation with its neat categories and controls.
Lots of guilty people will still go free; lots of innocents will still be harmed, both men who become victims through misunerstandings and false accusations and women forced into sex when they don’t want to have it.
That’s the price we pay for civilization, in a species where sex was never designed to be equal or an easily definable constant. We were designed to reproduce and be efficient machines for the propagation of our genes: We are replication machines for our genes.
Looking to re-mold human sexuality is like trying to make us breathe a different air. good luck.
Quinc, this is exactly why I can’t understand why true feminists (especially sex-positive third-wave feminists) don’t vociferously oppose the schemes of neofeminists. Mandatory prosecution laws, the Swedish Model, etc infantilize women and should make proper feminists furious, but most are curiously silent on the subject.
I agree that most of the current crop of young feminists is sex-positive, but unfortunately they’re not the ones who get the big bucks for bogus “studies” designed to support governmental tyranny against women. The Melissa Farleys and Donna Hugheses are still the ones with the power, and national governments use their hateful crap to justify more violence against whores and our clients. 🙁
@Maggie: I personally ignore PAN for the most part, he posts some good things every now and then, but a lot of his “insights” and actions makes me think he got his expertise out of a box of cracker jacks.
A question I wanted to ask you from our first discussion, is that given the obvious problems of a registry, how would you go about protecting underage girls from exploitation? There’s gotta be a way to make sex work legal AND safe for the women involved(as well as harrassment free from gubbermint thugs/feminists) while protecting young girls and boys, your thoughts
Also on an unrelated note, I’m curious why you assign the label “neo-feminist” to your self, I usually think of feminist as someone whose words and deeds I couldn’t contemplate and keep the contents of my stomach where they should be, and you(and the other workers who post on your blog) seem to go against a lot of what women has stood for. It’s just something I ask as I fully support sex workers as well as the causes of women(and children and men.) who really do experience all kinds of oppression worldwide, but whenever the label feminist comes out you’ll have to excuse me for wanting to take a step back.
On http://brandysbedroom.wordpress.com/2011/04/08/learning/
I try to discuss ways to protect all sides – customer/prostitute/underage-forced but as Maggie stated before, no matter if it is legalized, decrim, or accepted, there will ALWAYS be some asshat looking to make a profit off of coercing a woman or child.
Donn,
“but a lot of his “insights” and actions makes me think he got his expertise out of a box of cracker jacks.””
Which expertise are you claiming came out of a box of crackerjacks?
I’ve made it pretty clear that I don’t have a lot of experience with a lot of women.
*oops, my apologies maggey, I mean archeo-feminist, no insult meant.
Donn, it is impossible to “protect” everyone from everything, as much as we might like to. Brandy has made suggestions regarding the underage thing and reputable escort services already check ID; if we had a professional agency like the Bar Association we could issue credentials ourselves without turning any data over to the government. But the most important factor is that merely decriminalizing our profession would allow clients who were offered underage girls to report the offer to the police; this would make it a lot harder for traffickers to make good profits on them.
As for the label, you have to consider what the word “feminist” means in and of itself; it implies one who is pro-woman, that’s all. The negative associations around the word have nothing to do with the basic principle (protecting women’s rights) and everything to do with the recent implementation (attacking everyone’s rights). No one who works AGAINST the autonomy and adult agency of women can rightfully be called a “feminist”, hence my label “neofeminist”. The prefix “archeo-” means “old”, so my coinage “archeofeminist” means one who defends the old-style female power the neofeminists revile so much, and that includes sexual power. Proud whores, pagan priestesses, old-style matriarchs who keep their families together by the “iron hand in the velvet glove”…these are archeofeminists. It’s my label for women who are quite happy being women and view competition with men as silly at best and counterproductive at worst. Does that make more sense?
Maggie,
I got the word about your blog via the grapevine. Been reading along for the past week or so; good stuff!
Question: I am curious what tyou think of Levitt & Dubner’s book “Super Freakonomics” where they take up the question of prostitution and its effects on relationships and marriage? It occurs to me that the Sexual Revolution has hurt the Ho Business. Of course, “escorting” is indeed a different matter; that’s definitely on some Courtesan stuff right there, and again confirms a solid and enduring truth of our existence:
Beautiful Women (that is to say, Women exceeding a point rating on the attractiveness scale of 8 and above) are a scarce resource, and Men have been proven to be willing to pay big bucks to be next to such Women down through history.
Just wanted to get your thoughts on all of that. Also, I’m in full support of legalizing prostitution, and agree that what’s been going on insofar as Feminists and Social Conservatives is nothing short of a kind of Vaginal Protectionism. You may be aware of the IMBRA provision of VAWA – case in point.
Holla back
O.
Hi, Obsidian! I haven’t yet read Super Freakonomics, though Freakonomics is on my Amazon Wish List (so many books, so little time…) So, I’m afraid you’ll have to ask me that question at some point in the future!
But yeah, the International Marriage Brokering Act is clearly intended to protect “home grown pussy” just as tariffs protect domestic lumber. It’s incredibly demeaning to women and repressive of men’s right to free association (no surprise), but it was an inevitable extension of “trafficking” hysteria.
Hey Obsidian,
welcome. Glad you chose to come over.
Not precisely.
In this industry, pretty girls are fungible. There is that subset of customer whose only interest is young and hot as his wallet affords, willing to lie back and think of England. He screws her once and moves right on to the next Hottest Young Thing I Can Afford.
Historically, such successes as those to which you refer are always referred to as intelligent, noted for their charm and talent and being interesting. It isn’t uncommon to find one who is described as not being beautiful. (Mata Hari, Anne Bolyn, Harriette Wilson…)
Fame and success weren’t exactly about beauty, but the ability to hold a man’s fascination with or without beauty and sex.
Hells yea! *fist bump* right here!
one thing…
“Beautiful Women (that is to say, Women exceeding a point rating on the attractiveness scale of 8 and above) are a scarce resource”
I beg to differ. Beautiful women are a dime a dozen. Now beautiful women who are intelligent and capable of carrying on a conversation are much less common. And the amount of those women who can be considered decent human beings….well…
I agree; I addressed that in my column of August 20th (last 3 paragraphs). 🙂
Beautiful women who rate above 8 on the attractiveness scale and are intelligent and capable of carrying on a conversation and who are decent human beings and will put out are pretty bleeding rare.
And what is both desired and rare becomes expensive.
@Maggie:
Good point, On my end I’ll continue to be a proponet of de-criminalization, the bar association like org sounds like a great idea, but I’ll stay out of the implementation debate and leave it to people actually involved in the profession who no doubt have more knowledge than me, thanks for hearing me out on that.
yeah that makes more sense, you’ll just have to forgive me for asking for clarification, as I’ve been spending more and more time slugging it out with the wackos and its only added to my further distaste of feminism, you just do great work which I don’t think deserves to be associated in anyway with “Feminism” as I’ve come to know it, but whatever label you’re comfortable with is all gravy, I’ll continue to send people I know to your blog, which you’ll be happy to know has gotten good responses. People need to know there are alternatives to blowhards like Amanda Marcotte and others who won’t be named
Thank you, Donn; I sincerely appreciate your input and the referrals! 🙂
Hi Maggie,
not sure if you saw this one. Apparently its not just fathers and whores these champions of ‘tolerance’ on the left wish to attack.
Apparently a valley girl uni student who makes some dumb comments on a youtube video is well worth attacking too. And note that it even made the NEW YORK TIMES! LOL!!
These people have nothing better to do than to attack valley girls?
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/pc-campus-culture-takes-out-alexandra-wallace/
Four paragraphs in and I gave up.
LIBERALS ARE MEAN AND ICKY!!!
It would have saved space.
a slogan which ought to be put on a bumper sticker. Love it
And it doesn’t take 1,431 words to say it.
I was having problems with the REPLY button, so I will respond this way.
On PENDULUM
PETER posted on 4-10
“I’m told, and you women here can tell me if I am told correctly, that the majority of men who see Prostitutes are married men. Why do that? Most likely because they can’t get what they need at home.” LOL! Peter!!! MEN LIE. I have heard this shit over and over. The FACT is men CHEAT…..PERIOD!!! They have come to me, told me that they have sex with their wife, love their wife etc…MOST Men will cheat, even if a wife has sex with them EVERYDAY!!!. The problem is, (When they realise they do not NEED what they want, they can get what they need). I am very tired of THAT and other lies that men tell, so they can dick other women. They need to just be honest and say, “I am a cheat, always will be, I love a variety of pussy. The truth will set them free!!! Men NEVER get enough pussy, they are always on the hunt. These men have NO business getting married and trying to decieve a woman. Some guys think getting married is a ticket to sex on demand and FREE sex………………………..NOT SO!!!!
GORBACHEV Posted on 4-10
I was initially attracted to Mina because she was extremely pretty, very flirtatious, open and talkative and charming. If I had actually paid 800.00 to take her out, paid for food and had driven us around, I’d damned well take her back and have as much sex as possible, and I’d be expecting a memorable evening.” Yes this might work with some young girl if YOU were young too, but try this with any upscale lady and her security will be dealing with you and your attempted abuse. Trust me, you would never be able to get your dick hard again.
Not sure this was a low end ho or a date from long ago, but that speaks volumes about the way men try to use and abuse women and why women should sell it and price it high!!! Yes my fee and many upscale ladies are 800.00 PER HR!!! No you do not get to have sex ALL NIGHT. Yes you pay for the dinner or the show, we go back to his place, or my place and it is ONE POP!!! You are paying for the experience of her company. This is what I tell other women ALL the time. MEN ONLY WANT AS MUCH SEX AS THEY CAN GET. They think if they pay for a date from a dating site, they are OWED SEX!!!! . They THINK if they pay 800.00 for 1 hr, they get to screw for a solid hr…LOL! They THINK if they pay 3300.00 for a 12 hr date, they are going to screw more than once, they might get to TWICE if it is just dinner and over night, but never more that twice in 12 hrs on on call. Sounds like you need to stay low end and just pay as little as you can get away with, but I doubt you ever saw or could afford High end ladies. Yes SOME men do pay these prices and do not expect the world in exchange. They are high class business men, They own accounting firms, Law firms, they are surgeons, Publishers etc… YES IT REALLY HAPPENS. These Ladies do not need or want YOU!! We do not care about what you expect for a mere 800.00
800.00 is a one hr call. It is a meeting to talk a little, dance a little and then the encounter, then good bye!!!
NERGAL Posted on 4-10
Also, I agree prostitution is an honorable profession when the prices are reasonable, most MRS’s do, but many women here are SEVERELY delusional. $300 an hr, $800 dollars an hour, seriously?”…YES SERIOUSLY Nergal!!!! I would never see a guy for less and yes they pay it every day. You must understand that these are a diffent class of men than you. They are upscale professionals making over 500K per year. They think differently than you, they dress differently. These are not (Electricians)…..LOL! Of course electricians cannot afford ladies like me and that is fine. I have a very nice car, in fact two of them, but I cannot afford the Bentley just yet. I do not piss and moan about it or expect it to be the same price as a Chevy or claim that a car is a car and they are all alike. Nor are the men all alike, you have slobs, jerks, ego freaks, sex addicts, drunks and junkies etc…, but I only deal in the high end guys and NO I will not lower my fees to accommodate a guy who would like to see me, but cannot afford it. I am not running a damn charity!!! It is a business and I worked hard to get to this level. I work out daily to stay in shape and spend thousands to look nice.
You then go on in your post and say “I’d be more likely to pay 300 an hr for the services of a ditch digger than a prostitute”…..Well YOU probably are a ditch digger and no lady of class would ever want to spend time with you. You cannot compare yourself to some of my guys. I think your statements expose how you really think of women in general. Just continue to see your 20.00 per blow quckies, probably some MEN too, I have no doubt or use your hand. Just know this I DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU SAY OR THINK!!!
You mention “Used Goods”…Yuck!!! think about YOURSELF. God only knows what you have been infected with. I feel sorry for the women that have to see guys like you. Please just leave women alone. High end ladies get tested and are 100% free of any STD. Smart men know this and are willing to pay for the best. Yes there are some Prostitutes out there working and they have Herpes, HIV etc…They will have unprotected sex with you for a little extra money. My guys know better and they sure would never want to take an STD home to their wife.
BTW, I do model professionally.
I think PETER has gotten a few of his cronies on this board.
The thought process and other things is just to similar among these few. They are as bad as that video that was posted here by someone with the guys talking about how much they are sorry for what they have done to women, Anyway, I think this group here too are a bunch of women hating homosexuals.
@Joyce,
A few comments.
These men have NO business getting married and trying to decieve a woman. Some guys think getting married is a ticket to sex on demand and FREE sex………………………..NOT SO!!!!
Men get married for several reasons. Women get married for reasons, too. Among the reasons for men are affection, relationship stability, and procreation. These are the assumptions that men make in their own self-interest and what motivate them to get married.
For women:
– They want someone to look after them. Even in a feminist world, almost all women sacrifice career for family. They require support, unless a high-tax nanny state takes the place of a male. Police protect people; welfare states provide care and resources; etc. Subtract this and in order to breed, women will require protection and support again.
There’s no equality in reality. In a society of men and women, breeding incapacitates women and reduces their chance for individual survival. They need more resources than men to survive. They have one advantage.
They have wombs. Men don’t. In order to get access to the next generation, women can provide access to their wombs in exchange for resources and time and labor.
You can piss on it as much as you want, but this was the foundation of marriage: Women sell sex (hence genetic future). Men purchase it. The terms of the purchase change over time but the basic transaction doesn’t.
Prostitutes up-end this by providing sex at a MUCH lower cost – instead of inflating it, they negotiate easier terms. This pisses off women looking to mate and extract resources in a social deal.
This is why most women hate prostitution. it dilutes their negotiating power drastically. Suddenly, the pussy isn’t coated with gold.
To be blunt.
For men, there are advantages to marriage:
– The kids they have are their own: Women aren’t supposed to step out. In exchange, the men traditionally agreed not to spread their resources around.
In almost all societies, there was *no* explicit agreement for men not to have mistresses, young women in other towns, or the neighbor’s wife if the neighbor wasn’t looking. It wasn’t a crime against the WIFE to go elsewhere: It was a crime against the other woman’s HUSBAND/FATHER/BROTHERS, who have a genetic investment in *who* the woman chooses to mate with.
Don’t forget, a man’s true allies aren’t his wife and her relatives: It’s his relatives, female included, and offspring. The wife is nice, but his sister is more important to him genetically than his wife.
Same goes for women. The daughter-in-law is valuable only as a tool to produce new family members related to the mother in law. Other than that, she has no intrinsic genetic value.
You are allied to those related to you.
Marriage is a contract that traditionally recognized the male tendency to screw around (on occasion) and almost all traditional societies allowed this : WHAT THE WOMAN got was his *resources*.
The legitimate wife got it all. So did her offspring. This was as true in England as China.
This isn’t some male conspiracy. It’s a negotiated social bargain: She gives up her womb to the man; he purchases it with resources and promises to exclusivity or a specified proportion. For example you could have two wives – but then the proportion of resources the wives get is spelled out in some fashion.
MEN CHEAT: THEREFORE THEY SHOULDN”T GET MARRIED is absurd.
WOMEN WANT SEX LESS. WOMEN WANT VARIETY LESS.
Men wand sex more. They want variety more.
Most women just want the highest quality man they can get. They don’t need 100 a year.
This is all basic biology. It’s as true for rats as humans. Because females have wombs and males don’t, because sperm is super-cheap and ova are super-expensive, because males can have thousands of potential offspring (if given access to wombs) and females can have, at most, a couple dozen –
Marriage is designed to provide a system that negotiates these different demands.
Men who cheat aren’t bastards. They’re JUST MALE MAMMALS.
Marriage laws once took this into account, and punished men who took this reality and over-used it or abandoned their families. Why? The families were owed RESOURCES.
You can’t punish men for male sexuality.
Very well-said, Gorbachev, and exactly right. It amuses me when men are incredulous about the prices escorts charge; these are guys who haven’t figured out that “free” pussy is the most expensive kind.
Absolutely correct, and in fact some neofeminists have DIRECTLY stated this as their motive for opposing prostitution (which, to give them credit, is at least a lot more honest than the “prostitution demeans women” rhetoric).
I want to point out that not 1 person I saw when I had sex only friendships said I was “expensive”, “greedy”, etc. I heard the opposite at least a few times and was always glad because that meant I was accomplishing 1 of the things I wanted to. I found it very sad, to be honest, seeing the look of shock on the men’s faces when I said I was going to pay for dinner, etc. But, was also very glad to see their looks of relief and happiness after that! It was the same with doing Dutch treat at times. There were never any conflicts over actual costs of anything. The whole “free sex costs” mentality doesn’t apply in every case. Even 1 case counts just like every individual counts and I was cheering when I read earlier that Gorbachev has never had to specifically pay for sex. Thanks for listening.
Laura,
The whole who-pays dating minefield was easier when everyone understood simple f’ing etiquette.*
The definitive word: Whomever does the inviting and acts as host is expected to do the paying. To put it in the most basic terms, you don’t get to host an entertainment at your guests’ expense.
The confusion arose when people mistakenly assumed guys paid because they were guys, instead of the actual reality that in ye olden times it was guys who virtually always set up dates and were the hosts.
Times changed. Etiquette didn’t**. Host pays, guests enjoy. Never had a damned thing to do with whether your naughty bits dangled or bled.
* Not swearing at you, just frustrated more people didn’t learn this as children like I did. God, it makes me feel like such an antique, you know?
** It isn’t etiquette’s fault people decided it was ‘old fashioned’ and tried to reinvent the wheel in new and exciting forms, such as an eleven-dimensional triangle.
Joyce,
While I understand what you say, I think you’re a tiny, tiny bit woolly. I’ll show you.
GORBACHEV Posted on 4-10
I was initially attracted to Mina because she was extremely pretty, very flirtatious, open and talkative and charming. If I had actually paid 800.00 to take her out, paid for food and had driven us around, I’d damned well take her back and have as much sex as possible, and I’d be expecting a memorable evening.” Yes this might work with some young girl if YOU were young too, but try this with any upscale lady and her security will be dealing with you and your attempted abuse. Trust me, you would never be able to get your dick hard again.
I dated Mina as her de facto BOYFRIEND for half a year; yes, she was working, but she actually liked me. I never paid her for services because she was with me voluntarily.
I’ve actually never paid for sex. I’ve never had to, of course, and I understand there may be some advantages to it, but I’ve never seen the need. I travel a lot and make money but I’m not the kind of guy who would buy a new Iphone because it’s there nor am I the kind of guy who would spend money on a non-durable good without having a solid reason.
I wasn’t devaluing a woman who charged $800 for a night – I was just illustrating how I don’t understand *MEN* who would pay for this. I mean, I was sleeping with Mina for free – and some of her clients weren’t ugly and were quite rich. I don’t know why they wouldn’t just find themselves a mistress.
I understand the psychology of women who work in prostitution more readily than I understand the men. This was my point – you may have missed it.
Not sure this was a low end ho or a date from long ago, but that speaks volumes about the way men try to use and abuse women and why women should sell it and price it high!!!
I think you’ve missed the point of what i was trying to say. I was never saying pussy wasn’t worth $800 – I was just shocked that anybody would pay for it on that level, regardless of their personal wealth.
I’ve been having sex for free all my life. In my world, sex is free. I never understood what Mina was doing on a basic level – I never grasped the economics or the demand.
She was smart, classy, very pretty, experienced and obliging – and charged money. But in those characteristics, she was neither unique nor superior (though she was admittedly shockingly well-informed about what men like).
I liked her as a human being, and after some time getting over the social stigma, was able to see her as a fully-fledged woman and relate to her as a man and respect her as an equal, who happened to entertain (and fuck) men for money. It changed my view of this sort of thing.
How the hell does this signal any abuse?
Yes my fee and many upscale ladies are 800.00 PER HR!!! No you do not get to have sex ALL NIGHT. Yes you pay for the dinner or the show, we go back to his place, or my place and it is ONE POP!!! You are paying for the experience of her company. This is what I tell other women ALL the time. MEN ONLY WANT AS MUCH SEX AS THEY CAN GET. They think if they pay for a date from a dating site, they are OWED SEX!!!! . They THINK if they pay 800.00 for 1 hr, they get to screw for a solid hr…LOL! They THINK if they pay 3300.00 for a 12 hr date, they are going to screw more than once, they might get to TWICE if it is just dinner and over night, but never more that twice in 12 hrs on on call.
My experience of paying for sex is zero. I had no idea that saying what I did constituted abuse in the world of prostitution. Calling my comment abusive is a little absurd.
Sounds like you need to stay low end and just pay as little as you can get away with, but I doubt you ever saw or could afford High end ladies. Yes SOME men do pay these prices and do not expect the world in exchange. They are high class business men, They own accounting firms, Law firms, they are surgeons, Publishers etc… YES IT REALLY HAPPENS. These Ladies do not need or want YOU!! We do not care about what you expect for a mere 800.00
800.00 is a one hr call. It is a meeting to talk a little, dance a little and then the encounter, then good bye!!!
If I ever have to pay for sex, I’ll take your notes in good faith and consider not discussing money and services because, clearly, it’s insulting to do so.
odd – I find a parallel among non-prostitutes who think their services are automatically worth vast fortunes in attention, time, and effort (if not money, but often money). Sometimes, princesses are just princesses, apparently.
Why is it that guys like to say “I do not have to pay for it”? LOL!
You have to remember that you are dealing with very experienced prostitutes on this board. We have pretty much heard and seen it all. There is no line of BS that you can throw my way that I have not heard before. I am just saying that men need to be honest BEFORE they marry, it is only fair. It is not “Controlling his sexuality”, it is expecting him to be honest from the beginning so the woman can make an informed decision. I would not mind if I had a husband seeing other working ladies as long as (I) knew they were safe. I would not want HIM telling me that I could not work if I wanted to, as long as HE knew I was being safe. Deceit is NEVER acceptable to me.
I have had many guys come in and say “This is the first time that I have done this”, I would always think in my mind (Yeah me too pal”..LOL! I knew they were lying. Refferences never really mattered to me as I have the screening takien care of by a source that I pay. I never even ask for refferences. Before the guy gets in, I know EVERYTHING About him, but he never knows that I know.
Yes some of the statements you posted were indicative of an abusive man.
You say you were “Shocked” that some men would pay those kinds of fees. (I) am shocked that a working girl would fuck for free on a regular basis, This just does not happen in MY world.
Many men do not want a mistress because of the problems it can cause for them. A mistres has an emotional interest in the guy, she wants to know where he lives, she starts to care for him in the husbandly way. She might call him at home etc….Prostitutes are running a business, we do not care to call guys at home or his job, we have NO interest beyond getting paid and doing our job of making him think he is the best we ever had. We are actresses giving the guy what he wants and has paid for…A fantasy.
When the show is over, lightes out, good night, thank you all, pay again and see the show again.
I am trying to cover BOTH of your responses in one here.
You stated that the “traditional marriage contract”….yap yap…..Well you cannot base TODAY on hundreds of years ago. Times have changed, more people, more crime, more disease. No woman wants her husband out running around( behind her back) and still having sex with her!!! She is not willing to DIE for a man!!! How would you like your wife to be out running around behind your back, and infect you with HIV?????? You must be honest and if you cannot, then do not get married. It is so fucking simple!!!!
You have a strange way of thinking.
Joyce, I think you’re letting your anger at a couple of the other male posters cloud your appraisal of Gorbachev. Since he started posting last week I’ve found him to be very reasonable and to “get” quite a few things about us in a way many men don’t. Take a look at his post about his friend “Mina” from last week; I think it’s well worth reading. And do try to give him another chance; I feel he’s on our side. 🙂
Ok, But he need not post about (Over Priced Pussy). I cannot stand men trying to tell women what to charge when they can move on to what THEY want and can afford. Nor do I believe women just give FREE pussy to him. As you well know Maggie this is a very common lie among most men. Also he mentions “Traditional Marriage”, as though times have not changed. Not sure where he is from, Maybe Russia. In his response to me, he talks about a wife just being a “Tool”. I still maintain that men who want to marry, just need to be honest at the beginning so the woman can make an informed decision. They are deceitful and then wonder why their ass ends up in divorce court and they have to pay support. Why not just get it in writting that they can cheat other they standing up lying.
My friend is getting the divorce that I told her she should get three yrs ago, but he has not infected her with Herpes. This will only get her MORE than half all assets and yes he will piss and moan about how HE was mistreated. I personally would have just shot him in the head as he slept, but she choses divorce.
These guys need to learn that to not marry or being HONEST is best, They cannot have both unless it is agreeable to the wife that he can cheat. I never minded a husband stepping out as long as I knew who he saw and that she was safe, after all it was MY HEALTH that was at risk.
Tired of these fucking cry baby ass holes. I will see how he post in the future. Perhaps I did toss him in with the other two.
Hugs…………JOYCE
This post has gotten a LOT of replies! And I have to admit, some of it is starting to look like Days of Our Lives or some such. Not Maggie’s post, but some of the drama in this thread.
I still intend to answer the “fair price for pussy” question. Please remember that it will be my best guess of what I would be willing to pay, if I had the money to pay anything at all.
My air conditioning has been turned on, so I will be moving back into my own apartment over the next few days, settling back in, etc. So I may fall even further behind than I already am. But I will catch up.
It looks like I never did answer the FPFP question. And guess what? I’m not going to answer it now, except to say “the going rate.” I don’t think that I deserve some special discount, and I’m not willing to pay more than others.
Then again, that’s how I am about most goods and services.
I found your blog via psychology today, where a fairly well known psychologist quoted you:
Intelligent men are less likely to believe in silly propaganda against us, and less likely to have the kind of fragile masculine ego which would be wounded by “having to pay for it.” The intelligent man knows that “free tail is the most expensive kind,” and can make the reasonable and pragmatic decision to spend his money on a “sure thing” rather than chasing women whose price and quality are uncertain.
Firstly, whenever I am in between relationships, I liberally visit asian escorts. I’ve never had a better massage. It’s something about that whole lotus-flower dynamic, but whatever.
When I read this I felt flattered, even validated. My ex-fiance was expensive, she set her price to astronomical heights. I bought her father a brand new truck. I bought her a new refrigerator. I bought her new stereo equipment. I fixed her roof. And on and on and on.
We broke up. Of course we did.
When I see an escort I have an honest conversation; in fact, there have been many times when it has been downright intimate and loving, if only brief.
So thanks for your kind words. BUT, as Rum mentioned, we men are in an uncomfortable position: how do we come out and support legalizing prostitution, when we have mothers and sisters who are set against it?
BTW, and out of mere curiosity, are you Canadian? Don’t answer if you don’t want. It’s just a vibe I get. I’m Canadian, and if I am not mistaken prostitution has been decriminalized in Ontario. I’ll have to google it and get back to you.
You’re very welcome, Tim. As you’ll discover if you read my blog for a while I am from New Orleans and have never as much as set foot in Canada, but New Orleans is very “Old World” in many ways which might perhaps be the source of the “not american” vibe. You can read about the Ontario issue in my columns of December 7th and March 14th.
… I feel a bit like a child who woke up in the night, slipped downstairs to hear the women talk … and got caught at it.
Sorry, ladies. I feel more than a bit embarrassed. A bit more than guilty. And more than a bit outclassed.
I have never had professional sex in the USA; no incall, no outcall, no massage-parlors, no streetwalkers, nada. I went from school straight into a DoD-civilian career, that required a high security clearance … and I knew that clearance and my position would be stripped from me if I were caught buying sex.
My first visit to a bordello was on my 50th birthday! I was in Asunción, Paraguay – where I was on temporary duty, with the US Embassy’s Defense Assistance Office … and I was taken to a high-class house by “Coronel C”, my liaison in the Paraguayan Army, as “VIP entertainment”. Since then, I have made a few “unofficial business” vacations to South America – countries where prostitution is legalized (Uruguay) or never criminalized (Argentina, Paraguay) – but I’ve never sought anyone in the USA.
I want to thank you, Maggie, Joyce, Brandy … others … for some needed education on the subject.
You’re quite welcome, Beija; I’m sure I can speak for the others in saying it’s our pleasure. 🙂
If you don’t mind my asking, did you ever think of using the personal ads to meet someone? There’s women that use them that like me didn’t charge a cent for sex. I had so many answers to my ads that I was shocked when I 1st got into all of that. I also found it sad and still do. It showed how frustrated so many men are and also victims of the evil dating game “rules”. It is a way that takes more time/efforts in some ways, but I know personally the rewards are great. I found it to be like many other things in life that take more effort/time: the results are worth it. I loved being able to call up a friend when I was “in the mood” and not have to deal with any ###*** dating game ###***.
Personal ads also have the advantage for men of being legal, i.e., if the women don’t specifically charge for sex.
Thank You Laura,
I wish I knew more about how this works, because all I ever found were guys with a ton of baggage, no money and they all wanted to get married!!!! I never got any great rewards, just headaches. I too got tons of responses, but they wanted to buy dinner and have sex on the first date and if not, the SECOND forsure.
You must be doing something right. Maybe it is your kindness and patience. I found I did not want to weed through the masses to find a few good ones. When I work I do not worry about them wanting to get married, not knowing the deal upfront etc… I mostly just see my regs from the past and they are overnight, weekend or too many days at once..LOL!
Hugs……Joyce(:
Actually, Laura, there is no such thing as an “illegal ad” in print unless it violates some sort of obscenity law, though one wouldn’t know it to hear the lies mouthed by cops and FBI men. The Justice Department recently had to correct the FBI for claiming that websites were “facilitating prostitution” by publishing “illegal” escort ads, when in fact there is no such thing.
And as you know from reading this column, most escorts don’t “specifically” charge for sex either; that’s why cops have to lie in police reports, to claim we do. 🙁
Laura, I certainly don’t mind your asking….
Yes, I did try personal ads; not so far as placing any, but I responded to several, and, well, it just didn’t pan out for me. I was disappointed in a couple of the ladies who had advertised; others were disappointed in me; and “it just didn’t go anywhere.” Eventually I just gave up.
I live in the Washington, DC region, and this is the most “SELF-important” city in the world. A man of my age, size and looks would have to be a successful lawyer, a successful lobbyist, or a Congressman, to succeed in the “meet-market” game in this burg. My place in the local game is kind of a reverse-L’Oreal position: “I’m NOT worth it.”
Oh, well. I’ve gotten used to it. I try not to be bitter, and I think I succeed … usually. To misquote the lyrics from “Garden Party” – I can’t please anyone, so I’ve got to please myself.
Speaking of which, the temperature is warming up and the wind is about right for some sailing ….
Part of what Laura did right was to have sex on the first or second date. 🙂 But yeah, she does have some wonderful qualities, and she puts out a sort sexual radiation that men pick up on (OMG, she’s got SEX RAYS!! Don’t let her teach school!!!).
Maggie, you could probably do a whole column on illegal ads, and how they’re not, and if they ever are.
Well, in the United States there are certainly “truth in advertising” laws, and restrictions against some kinds of ads on television (smoking and formerly drugs and lawyers), but none against escorts in any medium.
Thank You BeijaFlor!
We like nice guys to come on this board. I am sure Maggie would welcome your friends too. This is the best board to learn from.
Hugs……………..Joyce(:
Oh dammit. I’m reading this a year after the fact, and it’s begun to drag… When does this go back to being Maggie’s blog instead of Peter’s? I don’t mind spoilers.
FEMINISM IN ANCIENT SPARTA
Feminism is not a modern invention, as many suppose. It existed in the ancient world – and its consequences were largely the same as now. A classic example is the Greek city-state of Sparta. It would shock most people to know that the famous warrior state was a paradise for women (relatively speaking) but it was. The Spartans granted educational and economic equality to women – and it contributed greatly to their eventual downfall. Spartan girls were given the same curricula as the boys and encouraged to engage in sports. They were also granted the right to hold property in their own name and inherit property on an equal basis. The Spartan economy was largely agricultural. While Spartan men were away on war Spartan women ran the household and controlled the finances. As much as 35%-40% of Spartan land was owned by women some of whom became quite wealthy.
Sparta suffered quite a decline in its birth rate during its decline. Some of this was caused by economic factors, such as limiting reproduction to avoid splitting up estates and inheritances. But much more it was caused by the independence of women. Women were too busy being “liberated” to bother with the necessities of reproduction. In several centuries time, the total number of Spartiae (Spartan citizens as opposed to the helots and half-citizens) had declined from 7000 down to 700 (a 90% drop). Spartan sterility was remarked upon by many observers, particularly the Romans. The Spartans eventually reached the stage where they could no longer replace their losses in war. They were conquered by the Romans and ceased to exist. Spartan women were noted for their adulteries, particularly in their later stages of decline. There was no stigma attached to adultery and Spartan women could violate marital vows with relative impunity.
The similarity of all this to modern feminism is striking. The sterility, the free love, the equal educational and athletic opportunities, the female control of the economy are, in essence, the same trends observable today. And this brings up the key point: Totalitarian societies, past and present, do not enslave women, they liberate them. It was so in the ancient world; it was so in Jewish-Marxist Russia; it is true in the degenerating and decaying society of today.
Totalitarian societies enslave everyone, women not excepted. The women in those societies may be “liberated” in the sense that they are no more oppressed than the men (or, to put it more accurately, that the men are as oppressed as they are).
If the Spartan women were so busy screwing around, why weren’t they having babies? Did the Spartans invent the Pill a few millennia early? I suspect that what happened is that the Spartans became inbred and couldn’t make babies. That and the fact that the men were too busy warring to play their part in reproduction (women don’t do it by themselves, after all).
Utter nonsense. They the newborn babies to die on the rocks.
The charge was that the Spartan women were wildly promiscuous, and yet somehow weren’t having any babies. If they had babies and left them on the rocks or in the woods to die, that’s another thing altogether. And from I know of Sparta, that is exactly what they did, except you’d think they would keep enough to maintain their population. Perhaps their standards of acceptability rose so high that merely human babies were almost ALL considered defective?
I was trying to make a more serious argument to somebody who would actually use the phrase “Jewish-Marxist Russia.” And that was probably a mistake on my part. People like that should be either pitied or mocked, or perhaps ignored.
Read Alexander Solzhenitsyn on the Jewish commissars of the 1920’s and 1930’s – then tell me its nonsense.
Jews make up a miniscule percentage of the human race. If they are responsible for a tenth of the stuff that they are blamed for, then Jews are truly the Master Race of Earth.
They are. Read their Talmudic scriptures on how only Jews are human – with non-Jew animals only made to appear human so as not to offend Jews. So said the late deceased chief rabbi of Israel.
I’ll try this one more time, and then I’m done.
If Jews are responsible for a tenth of the stuff that’s blamed on them, then they don’t just THINK that they are the Master Race, they REALLY ARE the Master Race. Nothing less could do all of that crap while making up such a tiny part of the overall population.
But then, I never believed that Jews were responsible for everything from communism to rained out baseball games, so I’m not in the position of having to believe in a Master Race, and I don’t.
And I’m done.
This comment attempts to equate Jewish responsibility for Communism (a well established fact) with Jewish responsibility for rained out baseball games. It is merely the babbling of a mind that cannot think.
Now I’m done.
Dear ray gorman, Sailor Barsoom can think and does so very well so am glad you haven’t said any more ###*** to him that he doesn’t deserve.
Thanks Laura. You are able to pick up on things like “rained out baseball games” being a joke, but not everybody is. Once, again, I was trying to make an argument when I should have just sat back and shook my head in pity.
I am no MRA, just a free-roaming player (sounds like a breed of chicken, does it not?), but this article struck a chord with me. I know many, many men who were utterly deceived by feminist brainwashing about the nature of women, sexual marketplace, gender roles, issues like rape culture, gender gap, glass ceiling and so on.
Waking up from this dream is an an awful experience. Even if it leads to less suffering and then to happiness later, the beginning is shattering and many don’t make it. I am not surprised that many men just say “fuck it” upon discovering the truth and go back to their holes or proclaim all women bad. I would still prefer such men to those who still live in a fantasy world, simply out of necessity, but it’s not a good company.
As for the entire movement, whether it’s from MRA or sex worker side, I don’t think that we should be concerned about how things are as long as they’re fair. I.e. not fair as in “sex should be free”, but fair as in “everyone has a choice and everyone is properly informed”.
For example, I wouldn’t mind the alimony and child support catastrophe so much if the mainstream media and feminists weren’t in constant denial about it. I also wouldn’t have anything against female sexual preferences (attraction to game, drama and “butterflies” over stability, dependability, niceness) if most women weren’t claiming that they like the latter. Etc etc.
I suppose every movement will always have its differences, but they should all share one common goal: shattering the veil of denial that the modern world is wrapped in.
Thankyou Maggie for demonstrating why I am neither a feminist or an MRA. I am a person of conscience and reason, and that is all I need. Maybe everyone else will recognise this in time.