Not every woman is a prostitute, but prostitution is the natural apotheosis of the feminine attitude. – Georges Bataille
One of the most important aspects of the fight for sex worker rights is pointing out that prostitution is not only normal and natural, but that it exists on a continuum with other female behavior. While it’s not entirely accurate to say “all women are whores”, it is accurate to say that there is no clear line delineating prostitution from other female sexuality. A minority of women never do anything which even remotely resembles transactional sex, and a minority are professionals, and a huge majority occupy the immense grey area between those two extremes, occasionally or frequently trading sex for money or other things they desire, whether with strangers or employers or friends or boyfriends or lovers. It is precisely because there is no foolproof way to separate prostitution from other sex acts that police must lie and manufacture bogus “evidence”, and also the reason why women who do not consider themselves prostitutes need to be just as opposed to the criminalization of our trade as we are. If you’re sexually active with a man or men to whom you aren’t married and want to know what a prostitute looks like to police and prosecutors, look in the mirror.
In my column of one year ago today I mentioned that, though ignorant people and even some clients buy into the Hollywood hooker stereotype, Camille Paglia had it right when she wrote “The most successful prostitutes are invisible, because the sign of a prostitute’s success is her absolute blending with the environment.” Because we really aren’t different from other women, the only time we don’t blend in is when we choose not to. Streetwalkers often dress to attract attention as a form of advertisement, but criminalization makes this dangerous and the internet makes it unnecessary. Yet even some whores believe that being a prostitute means wearing garish outfits, standing under lampposts, being indiscriminate in one’s selection of clients or exceeding some arbitrary number of them, and because they don’t do these things they deny that their means of obtaining income qualifies as prostitution. A July 29th article at Huffington Post interviewed several such women; they’re “sugar babies”, low-volume unprofessional whores who prefer long-term arrangements. Some of them are university coeds hoping to defray expenses and avoid onerous student loan burdens; others are career girls who don’t make nearly enough to support themselves as they would like to be supported. And all of them are prostitutes, though many of them deny it.
The article goes into great detail about what its author, Amanda Fairbanks, prefers to call the “sugar baby phenomenon”, and though she does admit that this sort of relationship has existed since time immemorial and that the only new wrinkle is the rise of websites which make them easier to arrange, she still seems unable to resist using asinine phrases like “selling themselves” (as though ownership changed hands) and “thinly veiled digital bordello”. Like police, legislators, neofeminists, moralists and even many sugar babies and daddies, Fairbanks just doesn’t seem to be able to wrap her mind around the fact that the only important differences between formal prostitution and many, probably most, male-female relationships are duration, honesty and professional ethics. She interviews a lawyer who harrumphs about sugar baby arrangements not being “direct exchanges” and therefore not prostitution, ignoring the fact that most high-end escort transactions are no more direct. She labels as “stark” findings that 17% of British coeds, 33% of German ones and 30% of French ones say they would be willing to do sex work to pay for their education, and quotes a female Kingston University professor who moans that “arrangement-seeking websites are but another invitation for rich men to abuse young, vulnerable women” and laments that today’s young women “were raised to believed that their sexuality isn’t something to be afraid of.” Women who aren’t afraid of sex and refuse to be burdened with crushing debt due to arbitrary restrictions? The horror!
Not all of Fairbanks’ interviewees are delusional, though; she spoke to Ronald Weitzer (whose studies I’ve linked on a number of occasions), and he pointed out not only that sugar daddy arrangements are indeed prostitution, but also that many sugar babies would find that life hard to walk away from later: “The more you make, the harder it becomes to transition away from,” says Weitzer, “just like high-end sex workers anywhere.” And Barb Brents of University of Nevada, Las Vegas, concurs with my analysis: she says that escorts and brothel girls “…tend to be from working-class or middle-class backgrounds, but a good number are from upper-class families, too,” and adds that women often turn to sex work when they’re unable to make ends meet. “When people think about sex work, they think of a poor, drug-addicted woman living in the street with a pimp, down on their luck,” says Brents…”In reality, the culture is exceedingly diverse and college students using these sites are but another example of this kind of diversity…These college women [don’t] see themselves as sex workers, but women doing straight-up prostitution often don’t see themselves that way either…Drawing that line and making that distinction may be necessary psychologically, but in material facts it’s quite a blurry line.”
But though a few of the sugar babies to whom Fairbanks spoke were honest about their trade, the majority were not; one particularly self-deluded young woman called “Jennifer” said,
I’m not a whore. Whores are paid by the hour, can have a high volume of clients in a given day, and it’s based on money, not on who the individual actually is. There’s no feeling involved and the entire interaction revolves around a sexual act…My situation is different in a number of different ways. First of all, I don’t engage with a high volume of people, instead choosing one or two men I actually like spending time with and have decided to develop a friendship with them. And while sex is involved, the focus is on providing friendship. It’s not only about getting paid.
It would be difficult to pack more fallacies and rationalizations into one paragraph than “Jennifer” has managed here; I won’t break it down, but I suggest she A) talk to a couple of escorts, and B) read about courtesans like Aspasia and Madame de Pompadour, who restricted themselves to one client for many, many years. In the end, these young women are only fooling themselves; their clients know exactly what they are, and by choosing the path of self-delusion they sell themselves very short: the average one interviewed got only $500 for an entire night, while most escorts make that in two hours or less. And Miss “I’m not a whore” took home a paltry $1000 for an entire weekend.
Because the word ‘prostitute’ carries such a stigma, some women will deny it in any way possibe. The label doesn’t fit into the image they have of themselves, so they go into denial.
Dear guinevereschampion, some women don’t want any part of prostitution for non-stigma reasons. I’m 1 of them. This doesn’t mean there aren’t some like you’re talking about. I know there are from personal experience. But, there’s also some who don’t fit this. Personally, this “sugar baby” thing is something I hate and don’t want any part of either.
i remember a friend of mine,who went to sweden to see her sister and mentioned that inside a bar she went , women who were not interested in a hook up sat on the tables,while the ones who did sat on the bar.men walked up to them and offered them drinks to have a chance to be the ones to take them home.so in that case,i guess we deal with 10 euro per night hookers and men who should be persecuted under the swedish law.my friend said that she was told thats how swedish hook up culture is like ,which makes swedish model the most hypocritic kind of criminalization,because i beleive that the behavior of many women ”giving it up” after beeing offered sth material,whether be drinks,dinner,jewelleryetc. is very close to prostitution,as well as the behavior of men picking up on this and bribing them with material things to get in their pants,is really close to being a client.
As far as I’m concerned, there’s NO difference except for the fact that these women have neither self-respect nor ethics.
“…fact that these women have neither self-respect nor ethics.” This is something that can be disproved in at least a few cases of non-whore women (like in my case.) I call myself a “wild woman” and that’s my own term for a woman who personally hates prostitution and wants no part of it but has also chosen to be non-conservative sexually. I know 1st hand there’s some non-whore women who DON’T have any restrictions on who they’ll have sex with, date, etc. I’m not 1 of these and have worked to never be (yes, I’ve screwed up a few times on my own standards in the past, but have resolved to never do so again and have done that for a while now). As far as getting money, gifts, etc., for sex how I’ve handled my sex only friendships and how others like me have also disproves that we don’t have self-respect and ethics. I’m going to have some leave time from work in the next few months and will then explain fully what I said above plus get fully caught up on here and other websites I’m on. It feels wonderful to me to be “fully out” in this area of my life and talk about these things openly. Thanks for listening.
They’re not talking about you, Laura. They’re talking about women who do give sex in exchange for material goods, but jump through a lot of their own mental hoops to avoid calling themselves prostitutes. That’s not what you do.
Some men who see hookers on a regular basis call what they do “the hobby,” which is fine because for them it is a hobby, like anime is for me. But for her it’s not a hobby, it’s a job, like it is for Studio Ghibli.
For you, it’s a hobby. You don’t do that much of it, you don’t make money at it (or jump through hoops to get something material so you can say “I’m not getting money so I’m not a hooker”), in fact it costs you money, and you’d do more of it if you didn’t have to hold down a real job that pays your bills.
You’re like the anime fans who draw pics of their favorite characters and share them online for free, or like people who sing at karaoke. Doesn’t pay a cent, but it’s fun in its own right, and it feels good to make others feel good.
I’m with Sailor on that last part; girlfiend, fwb, wife, whore regardless, I’m not just sexing with you for me, I want you to feel good too; seeing you respond to me, in turn, makes me feel even better.
Runaway feedback 😉
The real damage that I saw in this HuffPo piece was – although these sugar-babies don’t consider themselves to be prostitutes, any common reader who read that article would.
And – it’s easy to really “dislike” these particular girls in this story – because, they don’t garner a lot of empathy. I just hope that the article doesn’t add to the typical “stereotype” that’s normally held about prostitutes. I’m afraid it does though.
Another thing that gets to me – is the duplicity. First – a lot of women would tell you that they don’t know how a prostitute can have sex with strange and sometimes unattractive men – as if that would be the hardest thing in the world for them to do personally.
Then they turn around and claim that prostitutes are taking the “easy” route to money. LOL – which is it? Is it “hard” or is it “easy”.
And … if it’s “easy” … who cares? Joe Perry doesn’t look like he’s doing anything that’s really difficult for him while he plays his guitar – and he’s made a lot of “easy money” doing it (having to deal with Steven Tyler not withstanding).
I don’t know see – Maggie, these articles are what DOMINATE the main stream media when they write about prostitution. There’s rarely any balance. I can’t name anyone out there who does what you do to bring balance to this argument. The problem is – though you’re very successful at what you do here – you’re still not on a high enough hill for Americans to hear you. I mean – not putting this all on you – no one expects you to change the world, but we need more voices at the national level lending their opinion and experiences to this debate.
Dear alchesay, there’s also unfair stereotypes about non-whore women (like me) who choose to be sexually non-conservative but don’t want any part of prostitution for themselves. Anyone who says these women don’t get any ###*** is in willful denial. Speaking of strange and sometimes unattractive men, 1 of the rules I had when I had sex only friendships was that me having sex was a “guarantee” after the 1st date and/or our 1st meeting. There was only 1 time this didn’t happen and that was because I started to not feel well on the way to my place. There was also 1 case where the man and I didn’t do everything I usually did sexually with everyone else. But, we did do 1 thing at least. It took me some time to admit that the sex with the 1’s I was least physically attracted to still felt wonderful, etc. This was something I couldn’t admit for a while for a few reasons. As far as how “hard” this was to do, it was way less hard than other things I’ve done in my life. Please don’t take this to mean it was some “breeze” all the time and that I ONLY had ALL “good times” during these years (I didn’t in a few cases).
OFF TOPIC: I wish Madame de Pompadour was alive today. She created jobs.
Mme. de Pompadour for Senate!
And she did it without a teleprompter!
Well. “In denial” is something I no longer am, thanks to Maggie.
I do understand on some level the aversion some might have to calling it what it is, but that’s because people have a hard time facing the truth about human sexuality. As Maggie has said, it’s designed to continue life on the planet, just like with other mammals, so the male has a natural tendency to spread his seed as much as possible, with young females…the females have a tendency to value security and ‘guard the egg’ as it were, so good providers are more attractive than any other males.
Even *I* got it, and I’ve only known Maggie a short while, relatively speaking. So I guess people can dress it up as much as they’d like. Changing the words doesn’t change the bottom line.
Dear the humanscorch, some women don’t want any part of this stuff. Some women don’t want kids EVER. They have the right to that and I’m sick of people giving them ###*** for it. Some women also choose the men they want a relationship with the standard of not what he has MATERIALLY (like what kind of job does he have, how many $ in the bank, etc.) but what kind of man he is INSIDE. I’m 1 of these. This doesn’t automatically mean that if Sailor Barsoom was a millionaire when I met him I wouldn’t have wanted a relationship. I still would have. But, I would have made sure to keep up my job skills at all times, etc. There’s reasons this is the only way I’ve chosen to live as far as finances go. I’ve made my OWN security and never want to change that. I see all this as just more of what I call “safe little category boxes”. Why should even the majority follow this stuff if they don’t want to? Sailor Barsoom has said before on here that while the human body does have a pain tolerance, there’s still people who PUSH PAST that boundary on purpose (I love these people!) and achieve their goals. Why can’t people push their ways out of other mindsets, categories, boxes, etc.? Even if a few don’t want any part of what you’re talking about, that doesn’t mean the choices of the 1’s who do are horrible, wrong, etc.
Laura, it doesn’t matter whether you want a child or not. What Scorch is referring to is simple human biology.
Dear Lailah, I say why do we have to be some kind of slave to biology? There’s more to people than that (thank God!). All through history there’s been men and women who don’t accept the limits of biology (thank God!). Sailor Barsoom has pointed out before that while the human body has pain limits, etc., there’s people that purposely push themselves PAST that. I think that’s wonderful. They’re not just accepting it. It reminds me of athletes who keep trying to break past records. That’s great. They don’t just accept the thinking that “well, that’s how it is. The human body just can’t do any more, etc.”
Just becuase you arent beholed you the general biological imperitves of other women doesnt mean other women in general arent. Also ever consider that there is something worng with one of your genes which turned off the urge for children?
Ever consider the reason you are able to suppress the biological urge for kids is becuase you personally have no biological urge for kids?
Please note I am not attepmting to insult you or your gene map – I’m just wondering if you’ve ever stopped to consider the posibility that your lack of want for kids isnt soley due to your breaking natures chains on your womb?
Dear lujlp, nowhere did I say I am 1 of these women who don’t ever want kids. I was speaking in general terms. The truth is I did want kids years ago, but chose not to have them for at least a few reasons. The biggest 1 was during these years I was an alcoholic and knew that having them in that state would be abusive to them. I wouldn’t put anyone through what I’d been through as far as abuse went. Yes, my drinking was a high priority in my life for too many years, but I’m also proud I wouldn’t put any child through having an alcoholic parent. I have nearly 12 years sober now and believe I made the right choice to not have kids. When I talked about the women who get ###*** for choosing not to have kids I wasn’t talking about me. Again, it was just in general terms.
Fair enough, the way you wrote sound as a first person perspective not a third person. But still the question stands, while some of us override the instinct to have kids, some dont have it all. And not wanting to have kids may be a biological instict as well
Actually, the example I’ve given on this blog of people pushing past their natural pain aversion isn’t athletes breaking records but decorative scarification.
The biology thing is real. It’s why I have more of a wandering eye than you do. Not that your lovely jade eyes don’t wonder, they do. But you know it’s more of a constant thing with me. That doesn’t mean that I must screw everybody around, or even that I can or would want to, but the biological influence is there and I respond to it.
In fact, withstanding the pain of tattooing or scarification wouldn’t be a demonstration of toughness if it weren’t for the natural tendency to avoid pain.
The most powerful forces in the universe: gravity, electromagnetism, electroweak, strong nuclear, human capacity for self-deception. If we could harness the latter, our energy problems would be over.
Related to this subject. There’s a study by Roy Baumeister on sexual economics that is stirring the pot. He essentially argues that sex is a resource women have and men want and so there is a natural transactional relationship, ranging from marriage to outright whoring. In the past, women have enforced sexual codes on each other to keep the price high (I would argue that powerful men have done more in this vein, to keep the “price” of sex too high for us common folk). He then says women’s liberation, by giving women resources of their own, has lowered the price of sex. This sounds similar to what you were saying about how women today are married to their job or government and men take the place lovers used to.
Predictably this is provoking the usual gnashing of teeth and rending of garments. My favorite is Amanda Marcotte (http://tinyurl.com/3t9agjn) being her usual self. She says his hypothesis assumes that women don’t want sex and so the entire theory is garbage. I guess we can add an ignorance of economics to her ignorance of law, history and sexuality. The question isn’t whether women want sex or not; it’s whether they want it as much as men or as unconditionally as men. I like doing science but I won’t do it for free! I don’t to work as much as my employer wants me to work. Otherwise, he wouldn’t need to pay me.
Has there ever been a society where male prostitutes catered to women and could make a living that way?
Lowering the price of sex-YES! 1 of the life goals I set as a teenager and I’ll always practice it. Men have been through enough HELL being USED as literal BANKS for too long and to me the sexual area is included in the whole mess. Please don’t take this to mean I’m literally ordering anyone to do things the way I have/still do.
Men should pay for services provided (including sex). They should NOT be roped into a lifetime expense, such as child support, for decisions they did not make.
In fact, many men find paying for sex to be a huge turnon. When I was escorting, most (nearly all) of the men I was with were kind and attractive, and would have no trouble finding “free sex” if that’s what they wanted.
They understood that the most expensive sex in the world is “free,” so they turned to a pro.
Are you sure it was a turn-on for them .. or just easier to pay for sex?
For instance – any smart married guys knows that if he’s going to “stray” – it’s better to do it with a professional than to have an affair. Affairs are WAAAY more risky than simply paying a pro.
Of course, not all patrons are married – but most are … aren’t they?
Few of mine were married, actually. Some, but far from the majority. (At least, they were talking about girlfriends, not wives.) And several clients told me it *was* a turn on for them. They had a thing about “taking care” of women.
Of course, there were the married businessmen in town who preferred a professional. They tended to purchase the services of a pro because it was just easier. However, they enjoyed the “caretaking” fantasy as well.
Dear krulac, you can have sex only friendships with NO risk of an “affair”. I did it for years. I get so tired of this mentality that the ONLY 1’s people can do this with are whores. They’re not the only 1’s who do this type of thing. I also don’t buy that all through history there’s never been even 1 whore who’s split up a relationship. Before any screaming starts, I know for a fact there’s been at least a few NON-whore women who HAVE. All it takes to find that out is to read some true crime books! But, to see others for sex only involves some risk. How about instead of just thinking the worst right off and giving into that take a chance instead? There’s room for both whores and non-whores to do things certain ways to NOT risk an affair.
Laura, most people arent emotionally or mentally mature enough to quanitify the emotions generated by sex as a biochemical byporoduct of the act itself
Dear Lailah, I say why SHOULD men or ANYONE have to literally “pay” in any material way? Haven’t they been put through ENOUGH? Used as literal banks for years? Going out with ###*** who say behind their backs “I don’t even like him, but I’ll go out with him for a free meal?” I started hearing this ###*** when I was a teenager and resolved to fight it the rest of my life. I was disgusted (and still am) that they weren’t even embarrassed. I’ve heard over and over how the most expensive kind of sex is the free kind. Really? It never has been in my case! I was NEVER a danger to anyone I saw as far as an “affair” went. I didn’t WANT 1! I already had a boyfriend (he wasn’t my fiance when I started having sex only friendships). I purposely did things so it was pretty much they’d come to my place, we’d have sex and then they’d leave. That was IT. Overnight visits were rare. I also put in all my personal ads “NO married men”. Yes, I compromised on that a few times. It still makes me sick to think of it. But, the few times I did I broke off contact, etc. after. I quit doing it and plan to never do it again OR be with anyone who’s in a relationship, isn’t legally married and doesn’t have an arrangement. Speaking of turnon, I had my share. I had so many answer to my ads I couldn’t have met all the people unless I didn’t work a regular job. Please note I don’t say this to be like “I’m so great, smart, pretty, etc.”. I’m only saying it to show how it really was. So the truth is there’s also many men who find it a turnon to get sex for as little “cost” as possible. I was proud to provide this and always will be. If I choose to see anyone besides my fiance again (the option is always there) it’ll be the same way. Isn’t there room for BOTH types of men?
Laura, a lot of men WANT to pay for sex! For some of them, the act of paying is itself a turn-on. For others, paying isn’t a turn-on or a turn-off, but they find it easier than wading through all the gold-diggers, meal-ticket-hunters, husband-hunters, and so on hoping they run into you instead.
It’s a lot easier to just hand over $300 (assuming of course that he can afford it) and know what you’re getting than to play the dating game. If he isn’t looking for a girlfriend, but just a girlfriend experience, then why shouldn’t he pursue that goal in the fastest, easiest (though perhaps not cheapest) way he can?
In short, you’re railing against a situation that the people involved are pretty happy with. It may be that the clients don’t really want to be rescued any more than the whores do.
Dear Sailor B, 1 of the biggest reasons whoever I met was GUARANTEED to get sex from me was because of all the evil lying, game-playing, etc., I saw men being the victims of from the time I was a teenager. It made me sick and always will. I resolved to NEVER BE PART OF IT. And I kept my word. All the men I met and also the few women I met had sex with me except for 1. On the way home from our date I started to not feel well. I waited a little while when we got to my place to see if I’d feel better, but I didn’t. He was very kind about the whole thing which I’m thankful for. Other than the 1st man I met (I’ll call him “E”) all the rest I had FULL sex with. With E I only did 1 thing, but it was still a form of sex. I rail because I want to stand up for the women like me. WE NEED IT! I want to fight the ###*** about us every chance I get. I’m now seeing this as important as standing up for the MVS and have seen it that way for a while. Yes, I’ll admit it takes less time and effort to hire a whore. I’ll give credit where it’s due. But, there’s some issues that need to be talked about more: some men DON’T WANT TO be with whores. They have that right and no one should give them any ###*** about it. There’s also men who can’t afford them even with a discount. Another thing is if they don’t have a lot of $ and because of that can’t afford to travel to a whore who will give them a discount. These men are as deserving as the 1’s who can afford whores. Seeing woman like me can also lead to happiness. I got a lot of compliments from my sex only friends. The 1 I saw most often that you liked (I’ll call him “T”) was very upset when I told him I was taking a break from seeing anyone. What’s wonderful is we had no hard feelings when we saw each other again a few months later (the time he stayed over at my place and he and I didn’t have sex). I love that I met men who HAD HOPE! They took chances like I did. They were willing to spend extra time/effort to get sex the way THEY wanted to. I could have EASILY given up on my quest after my date with E! That was ENOUGH to make 1 give up. NEVER! I kept at it until I met a few who had manners/didn’t lie, etc. Many times in life the extra efforts we make have HUGE rewards. I spent too many years before I started seeking these friendships NOT making efforts. ###*** that! I’ll never go back to that way of life.
Dear Sailor B, you know I also had my “guarantee” because I personally think sex should be as free of literal cost as possible at ALL times. Please note I’m not ordering anyone to do things this way. No one should order me to not do things this way either. This mentality I have is inspired in part by Christianity. 1 reason I chose to be a Christian is the emphasis on giving as much as possible. I love giving and my love for it grows over time. I also saw men being put through HELL so many times (unfortunately, still see it all over the place) by ###*** using them to get free meals, free drinks, etc., while putting on an ###*** act like the men had a chance to get sex when in their evil minds they were laughing at them, etc. Or they act like they only want a sex only thing but are lying about that also in their minds and then that starts to show in their actions. Or they’re doing the husband hunting thing like you said earlier without the decency to say that from day 1. You and I started as “friends with benefits” and note I never put any pressure on you from the beginning to call a certain # of times, visit this amount of time, etc. That was on purpose per the above stuff I saw plus how I wanted to live, etc.
Sigh. I wish we could meet, Laura. You seem to fit my idea of a perfect woman.
She can be pretty wonderful.
Dear Sailor B, YOU are pretty wonderful. Thanks for the complment, though.
ComplIment, oops!
Move your mouse over the picture of the Thark. Read it and grin.
That was cool (lol)! I noticed it before, but hadn’t commented on it yet. You did forget my cat in that list (lol).
Cat now added to list.
And removed last year. Cats are as mortal as the humans they own, if not more so.
Dear guinevereschampion, WOW! THANK YOU! Your words are the kind that can “keep a person going”. I get upset at times that the way I do things in some areas are seen as literally stupid (eyeroll), boring, that purposely not making $ off sex only friends is always seen as a negative by some, etc., etc. But, the good news is the work I’ve done on my self-esteem causes me to laugh, etc. at these things. I’d rather be hated and laughed at than follow many of the things in the world system that we’re told are “right” and “how things should be”. ###*** the world system. Anyway, thanks again. You’re welcome to ask Maggie for my e-mail address (I don’t put mine in the open on any board I’m on).
Dear guinevereschampion, I want and need to say that I’m not looking for a new relationship. I let all men friends I make (if we end up being physical or not) know this up front. Thanks for your understanding.
Not in large enough numbers for it to be anything more than a footnote, no. Human nature doesn’t vary from culture to culture.
I loved this post. I make this point to everyone all the time, about the moral ambiguity of human sexuality. My SO has finally accepted the logic of this and is beginning to see our relationship for what it is – an understanding of a partnership based on a transaction of various kinds. Not all of this is financial, though some of it is: She fell for me hardest when I spent 3 months more or less organizing her life, shortly after we started seeing each other, and I helped her finish her master’s thesis, which wouldn’t have been done otherwise. I also helped her get her first post-degree job, in my own industry, for which she is ideally suited – again, which she recognized. These acts of both respect and love illustrated my investment in her. In those terms, she says, it was a transaction.
In fact, most human interaction is transactional. Also true, for that mater, for apes.
Another anecdote:
Korean woman I know does this, too, but more openly: her interest is in wealthy men; the more men spend on her or impress her, the more fancy vacations they get, the more she “puts out”. When I point this out to her and say, hey, you seem particularly whorish this month, she gets upset. She does have sex with others, but that’s for other benefits: Emotional, personal, convenience, anything else.
But for her, sex is pure exchange, no matter how you want to calculate it. Dominating her such that the exchange is in my favor is a huge psychological game; smart whores, I guess, are those that can make sure they dominate this or dictate terms.
There’s a whole world of male psychology that’s developed to de-feminize men, called “game”. Decry it all you want, on women who aren’t consciously selling sex, it works absurdly well: especially on neo-feminists (straight ones). The whole point of “game” is to reframe relationships such that women don’t know quite why, but they’re giving up their sexuality to men – who seem to be benefiting from the exchange at least equally. It’s shockingly effective.
Ultimately, when all players are fully aware of their own natures, sex is openly transactional.
The trick both sides use to gain power in this transaction is to hide the nature of it, and of their interest.
I guess whores are clever that way.
And know for the crap starter question of the day:
By all this logic, this means that husbands should be able to dump their wives when they get older, because they are no longer bringing NEARLY the same value to the table. Men don’t pay the same for old women as they do for young.
Correct then, that women should be dumped when they get older?
Ouch.
I seem to recall many of the male posters here objecting to the price of putting your old wife out to pasture. Oh, if only there were a “farm sanctuary” for used up old wives where marketable men could drop them off – perhaps overnight in a crate or drop box, secure in the knowledge that their former companion and lover would live out her last days in comfort.
Well, Tonja, it just makes sense. We’ve spent the whole post and all of the comments talking about how it’s clearly a trade…and there is absolutely no arguing that, for the most part, 55 year old coochie doesn’t have NEARLY the same value as 25 year old coochie.
So as women age, it just seems fair that they should not continue to receive the same level of benefits since they are indisputably not bringing the same level of value to the exchange. They use their sexuality, when it’s at its highest level of value to snare a man, and then that man has to KEEP PAYING, long past the expiration date of what he initially bargained for. Tell me in what other field people would stand for that kind of a deal?
Again, that’s only fair and logical.
I disagree strongly with this.
It’s not all about the sex – a lot of it involves LOVE also. It may not be the primary factor – but it’s a factor.
My wife is older than I am … she’s 53 now, went through menopause – and, now has a greatly decreased desire for sex. We still have sex, and when we do – it’s awesome, just the way it always was (no actually, it’s better I think) – but it’s a lot more rare these days.
My wife raised my kids pretty much – while I was off saving the world in the military. She moved the household from town to town. I put her through college – and she got a good job and worked also but, due to the fact that I got orders to move every three years – every three years she had to find another job when we moved. Her career suffered for this.
We’ve been a team and we’ve been through a lifetime together.
She’s still a beautiful woman to me. I’d have sex with her five times a day if she’d let me … and, she would let me … but I know she’s not interested and I don’t want to put pressure on her. This ensures that when she is “interested” the sparks fly!
I’ll never leave her though – she’s my best friend. She’s the one individual in the world who knows me inside and out.
My mother recently confessed that she was jealous of my wife because my wife had spent more time with me than she had while raising me.
Humans do have emotional connections. And – I know that eventually I’ll ascend to an age where I desire sex less frequently – and, eventually not even be able to perform at all. What do I do? Kill myself at that point? I don’t think so – I have a very fine lifetime friend here in my wife that I love.
And the strange thing? I have a picture I took of her on our honeymoon when she was 25. I look at the picture and I swear to God – she doesn’t look any different to me today. A co-worker looked saw the picture in my office once and asked if it was my “daughter” … LOL, I thought – to me the picture still was representative of my wife as she is today.
Well I suppose she’s older … and she has a bit more cellulite … maybe a bit more weight … but I tell you – she is still a freakin turn on to me when I watch her wash her hair in the shower …
Dear krulac, THANK YOU for speaking up for LOVE. I think it’s literally funny that some think THEY won’t age. Talk about arrogant denial! If anyone in this world is immune to aging I’m sure they’d be mentioned in every form of media there is! Yes, sex isn’t everything in a relationship. It’s very sad to me that many in the world think it is. To me it’s like how money is thought about by many. It’s like the ultimate goal and if you choose to not make the most you can at a job, etc., you’re “inferior”, “literally stupid”, etc. So sad and arrogant. I personally think that the love people have for each other “lives” forever (not in the material sense). Making a commitment to another person to want to be with them when you both may not want sex anymore/can’t physically have it, etc., is great.
Laura is a damn fine lover, and she’s a pretty lady to boot. Yeah, I know I’m looking through love goggles but I’ve heard people who aren’t in love with her say that she’s a pretty lady. And her sex friends know she’s good in bed.
And when she’s as old and wrinkled as my only surviving grandmother currently is (she’s 94), Laura and I will still be together. Because as good as the sex is, we wouldn’t still be together NOW if that was all we had. I wouldn’t trade her for a high school cheerleading squad.
I’d be happy to fuck the pom-poms off of that squad or die trying, but I wouldn’t trade my Laura for them.
It’s the natural end result of “no fault divorce”, isn’t it? And that’s the flip side of what we talk about so often: modern marriage is a loser’s game for women as well, because it allows men to walk away from their commitments.
The problem is that the “fixes” to this are largely to hold men responsible for both their own choices and the choices of women. If women wish to leave, that’s fine: but then making men pay for a woman’s choice is revolting.
Men will eventually revolt by choosing not to get married. A record number of young, urban males are choosing this strategy. Any man with moxy is avoiding marriage.
The birth rate for white people in this country is apocalyptically low. The no-punches-pulled gender war is a huge reason for this.
[The problem is that the “fixes” to this are largely to hold men responsible for both their own choices and the choices of women. If women wish to leave, that’s fine: but then making men pay for a woman’s choice is revolting.
Men will eventually revolt by choosing not to get married. A record number of young, urban males are choosing this strategy. Any man with moxy is avoiding marriage.]
TA-DAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
[The birth rate for white people in this country is apocalyptically low. The no-punches-pulled gender war is a huge reason for this.]
Because white males still have most of the resources, and why the HELL would a man want to give up HALF of what he’s spent his LIFE building, because:
-His wife has decided she’s no longer interested in sex
-His wife told him that one or more of their kids aren’t his
-His wife decides to fuck someone else
-His wife lets herself go and gets fat with poor hygiene
-His wife becomes a controlling banshee that is never satisfied
No matter what SHE does, HE still has to pay, and see his kids on scheduled intervals.
FUCK. THAT.
(‘scuse mah French)
That’s why I say it’s good to be the girlfriend. Each of us could walk away at any time without enriching attorneys and courts.
TA-DAAA!
Tonja’s got the right idea.
Those of you who think living together without a legal marriage ceremony has no risk for legal issues may want to check into what’s called “common law marriage”. The last time I checked online 13 states in the US have these laws. They basically say if you live together that’s enough to be considered legally married even though you didn’t have a legal ceremony. Unfortunately, Sailor Barsoom and I have had to look into these laws because of the situation we’re in with legal marriage and Sailor B. being on disability. These laws are important to know about for those who live together.
Yeah I’ve thought about that too, Common Law kicks in at some point.
I believe it’s usually around the seven-year mark.
And I know that in California, there’s something significant about the ten year mark when it comes to property division.
Marriage is so economically based it just again makes it beyond stupid for prostitution to be criminal.
I’m about to use a trigger word wrt a legal value judgement here : its the old “reasonable” chestnut.
Common law marriage kicks in after x years because it’s *reasonable* to assume that a consentual, mutually accepted and supporting relationship has evolved over an extended period of co-habitation.
The implied thinking is that yes, the nature of the bond here is liable to last, so it is reasonable to expect that, “in all but name”, this is a marriage.
I would argue that it might be a sign of a much *better* relationship than some of the “transactional whore” ‘marriages’ that maggie and laura talk about. Those seem like marriage “in name only”.
Like, the second kind is the *letter* of marriage, but the first is the *spirit*.
My preference is clear; good luck to Laura and her Sailor 😎
Thank you. We are a strange pair in some ways. But we are, in all of that, a pair.
Not a pear.
I’m not concerned with any arrangements people make for their own sex lives. Marriage, pay for it, make whatever arrangement you want.
What irks me is the moral certainty of men and women who want to tell others what to do.
Our species has a natural tendency to do what it does.
If people want to give it up for free, more power to them. For money, again, whatever turns you on. Want to go to swinger’s clubs and just watch? Fine. Engage? Fine. Whatever consensual activity you want to engage in is fine. Pretend it’s not consensual? Also good if the parties involved concur.
Even public sex is fine if the public is fine with it.
But stop telling other people what they can or can’t do. It’s truly not anyone else’s business.
The real problem is this: We’re obsessed with what other people are doing in bed. This is just as true for chimps, by the way: Just who is doing what is part of social regulation. Breeding is a brutal, savage game, and as social animals. we need to know where we stand. If we can interfere with others, all the more power for us.
I’ll Bet this social war has been going on for the whole history of social primates, let alone homo sapiens.
So my word is: Get the fuck away from my business. Not to be too crude about it. But crude is what it deserves.
And as for marriage: It’s an institution that once represented a binding and mutually satisfying social contract, meant to guarantee paternity in exchange for guaranteed maternal support. It had no other basic function. Everything else was gloss.
Hence: Abandoning a wife and children was the biggest crime; men were often hunted and had to go “wild” to free themselves. Or remove the woman from the equation. And cuckolding was the biggest crime for women. The punishment was usually death; in the case of queens, it broke a family line for rulers and hence was also justifiably treason, punishable by death.
Complain all you want, but this was the purpose of marriage.
If these terms are onerous, then freedom from them means freedom from both OBLIGATIONS and RESPONSIBILITIES.
Right now, women have the benefits of the traditional marriage but none of the responsibilities. Men have all the responsibilities but none of the benefits. You can’t kill or disenfranchise your wife for cuckolding you or abandoning her family. But you can still imprison or harass your ex-husband for not paying you, though actual killing is no longer on the table.
if we want the government out of our bedrooms, equality means equality.
A marriage contract should be negotiable. No more reference to tradition. Couples should be able to write their own contracts.
And if I want to pay a woman to service me, I should be able to. If we want to sit around and watch movies instead of having sex, I should be able to do that, too. If I want to hire some hot chick to walk on my arm and impress my male buddies with my wealth, prestige or power, then leave me the hell alone.
On the other hand, if some girl wants to exchange her goods for other goods – if she can work 9-5 in an office for pittance and sell her skills that way, she should be able to sell anything.
There’s always some moralistic busybody who’s overly concerned with what other women are doing to undermine their monopoly on sexual power.
And with all due respect, I have only one thing to say to them, and they deserve this level of commentary:
Fuck off.
A stiff finger and a “get lost” should also be forthcoming.
Either we have civil rights or we don’t. Stop couching deceitful lies in a warm blanket of “protecting women”, because it’s got nothing to do with it.
These days, I am dependent on one man for my income. I have a straight job, and he’s my boss. Many people are in the same situation.
And it makes me nervous as hell.
Over the years, I met those women who “Only saw two or three men”. I would have hated that. Lose one and there goes one third of your income. With many clients, I could refuse to see one or more more than once if it didn’t work out.
I’ve never wanted to depend on one man, or woman (other than myself) to support me.
It sounds odd. But back then, I never had to choose a lover because they had money because I had sex for money. I did fine, and chose my lovers because of how they made me feel, emotionally. My pairings were built on love. There were no strings.
Now days, of course, I may not have that kind of luxury, but in my mind, I’m still a free woman, a whore in spirit, and not sorry about it.
lujlp,
Exactly. Much of this is biochemical: people think it’s love, when it’s not. The ancient Greeks had a handle on this: agape: True, binding, almost spiritual love; eros: lust and passion, philia: admiration/love of family or abstract values (Virtus was vaguely similar in Rome – manly respect; though not the same), storge: resignation at / loyalty and acceptance for relationships that are unavoidable (parents, children, rulers, etc.).
I think this is a good model.
Most of the time, we choose based on sexual desires: Eros. We require eros.
In fact, we all deeply desire Agape, but this is rarefied and difficult to find. You can find it with anyone: It could be your grandmother, or the young boy down the street. I had it with a mate, once. We were deeply inappropriate for each other. The age gap was a killer. But we remained connected even after an absence; the true bond was deeper than sex, friendship or even life Storge is weird but accurately describes general civic tolerance of others, which is a kind of “love” that we practice and need to practice in order to get along with family and strangers. And Philia is genuine affection for those people and things that make life worth living: you can love the Constitution or the notion of Liberty or Order or your friends and family.
Then there’s the love of God and religious figures. I consider this a kind of mental disorder: abstract notions or non-existent anthropomorphisms take on one or all of these roles.
The problem emerges when we make decisions based on eros. Eros is obviously and absolutely chemical.
I dated a “working girl” as a non-customer. We were (I considered) completely unlikely and shouldn’t have been involved, but I admired her spirit and personality and I was more than sufficiently attracted to her.
She had as much “Eros” in her life as she could ever possibly have needed. The very last thing she needed was to seek this out from any man. But what she wanted was “Philia” and “Agape” – she wanted someone to hang out with, be ugly with, look after her, to look after, argue with, call when she was lonely, discuss news with, hang out with. The fact that sex was involved was fine, but there was a remarkable clarity about her, emotionally.
*Unfortunately*, for me, Eros inevitably leads to some kind of attachment and irrationality.
The difference was best shown as our relationship developed. We were friends for about half a year, after I found out what she did and stopped trying to get into her pants (I was put off, to say the least). By the time we started “dating”, we were fast friends and extremely close. She was more honest than most women I’d ever met: Why? She *UNDERSTOOD* Eros better than any woman I’ve ever known. She was unimpressed with it, maybe even cold about it, even though she felt its power. In fact, she loved it: but she was under no illusions that it was anything like something you’d base your life around.
AND YET
So many men and women base their relationship decisions solely on Eros. They seek Immediate Gratification. Past ages were smarter: Men and women could cheat/see whores/explore if they were “bored” – but their mates were their reliable partners, who saw them to death, held their hands, walked with them, talked with them, understood them.
These days, women are encouraged to explore every aspect of their sexuality and men are expected to deliver tingling excitement but be all the other things women need. There’s a lot of talk about what women need to be fulfilled, but NOTHING about how men might want similar things.
The truth is–
Once you’ve tasted enough pussy, I don’t know about women, but you realize how juvenile and base it is to keep dipping into new territory for the sheer sake of doing it. You begin to feel the deep, inner aching that comes when you’re alone even when you’re with people, even as you’re touching someone.
Agape: When you find it, you grab it and hold on for dear life.
That said, one thing Agape is NOT about: Sex. It can be there, … but it’s not key.
So Laura may say what she likes, but sexuality is like a language: You can use it to say many things. You can order fast food, buy spare parts for your car, waste time because you’re bored or compose beautiful poetry.
What bothers me is that many people want to tell you what you can and cant’ use this language for. If I want to write a laundry list, I should be able to. If I want to write a sonnet, I should be able to.
Busybodies want to judge. Laura, for example, for all her talk about sex and free sex relationships, wants to draw false distinctions between what she does and what prostitutes do: it’s somehow fundamentally different.
Maggie is always making the clear point: All sexual behavior is in a continuum. There is no variance in “type”. In many ways, it’s like a Sprachbund or geographical population cline, much like many things in nature: Gradations on a curve.
Prostitution can even be intimate. My ex once told me, when I was jealous, that she was often very affection with a number of men who were really decent people, and genuinely liked a number of them – even felt great affection, often staying for longer than necessary or making sure they were happy. She was paid for her emotional bonds some of the time. Sometimes it was crude, I’m guessing.
Maggie:
Was this the case for you? I’d be curious to know.
It can be hard to have sex with women, for me, and not get attached.
Dear Gorbachev, months ago I asked you nicely to drop talking about how I run my sex life, etc. Now you’re doing it again with the same old ASS-umptions, etc. Once again you don’t even have the decency to bother to ask me WHY I do things the way I do. You think ###*** about my life choices/actions and don’t even have the full information. You CLAIM to be for everyone to do what they want sexually but once again you prove in my case your hypocrisy in that area. I imagine any other women like me you’ve run into (the 1’s who truly believe and practice a form of free love-the horror…eyeroll) have heard the same ASS-umptions, etc., and they weren’t even given the courtesy of being asked why they do what they do, etc. Could you please drop it? Also, when I wished you the best months ago: you’re welcome!
1 last thing: months ago I said I wouldn’t bring up to YOU this stuff about my choices, etc. I’ve done that and the only things I’ve written specifically to you about were things like movies about politics, etc. I’ve not once mentioned YOUR name and/or actions in any post besides those mentioned above. I’ve shown you I’ve dropped the talk about my life choices/actions and haven’t said a word to you or anyone else about YOUR life choices/actions in the sexual area either. Could you please show me the same courtesy? Thank you.
Oh, definitely; I think it’s the case for most working girls and for most people in any business. One can feel affection for particular customers and give them better treatment than others of whom one isn’t as fond.
So – I may have been jealous with a particular point when I was with my Korean ex. She had a client that worked for a big company and had a very shrewish wife, apparently, in another country (common), where their kids were going to English schools. He worked literally insane hours, sometimes for 16 hours a day, 7 days a week. He loved his job, but it was killing him.
She had very few customers when I was seeing her, but this guy she saw about once every two weeks. What disturbed me and led me to distrust her protestations that she always waited to see me was this:
She would cancel *our* dates or time together to see this guy, even though her hard rule was 2 days notice at all times. On a Wednesday-Thursday when we were supposed to go to another town to lie around on the beach and eat fresh crabs (tiny ones you catch and then cook – she was brilliant at this), that I’d been looking forward to for a while, she canceled at the last minute because this guy called her.
He had two days off and wanted her to spend time with him. I was cheesed.
I later learned that he paid her for her evening, which was substantial, but it was half the price or less that she would usually have asked, about 2 million won (maybe $2000). She spent both days with him. At first, I was just annoyed that she canceled. I figured: Work first, even if work = sex with another man. I did the same, and intellectually whored myself out. When she told me about it later, though, I was much more upset. If he was just having sex with her, I wouldn’t have been annoyed.
but she charged half as much and voluntarily hung out with him: she payed “girlfriend” or “best friend”. When I asked her why, she said – I’m human, he’s human, he needs support, he has a hard life, he’s incredibly lonely, he really likes me and we get along very well, etc. And he saw her regularly, from the time she was more active in the “entertainment” industry and they had a rapport.
Basically, it sounded a lot more like a paying boyfriend than a client. I’m sure the distinction is academic.
But it made me jealous. That was towards the point when I was getting too attached, and it added to my feelings of misgiving: I was supposed to be her “buddy” in my mind, not her lover / partner, which I was very rapidly becoming. That and a bunch of other stuff led me to leave.
I have no idea what other relationships she had were like, but I know that before me she had a serious boyfriend, not a client, who was even older than I was (she was 22 when I met her, 23 when we started seeing each other, I was 32). She was heartbroken about him even when I got to know her.
I will say this: You need an iron stomach to be able to wade through the crazy emotions that play on you in these situations. It likely takes a more mature or balanced person to do this than I was.
Which is why I wonder:
How can whores avoid getting attached to customers they like?
I’ve dated women for a few weeks who I get too attached to. I has just a FWB for years that I got way too attached to. The reverse was also true.
How do you wade through this soup of emotions? Is it all just removed from it? I never did really explore this topic in any detail with my ex. She was private about that sort of thing.
I’d like to know your take on the emotional side of things.
Most girls who aren’t good at keeping it under control are forced by necessity to hold clients at arms’ length.
The WONDERFUL stereotypes about big (fat) people are alive and well! There’s no such thing as eating disorders. It’s only people who just don’t care about anything and “let themselves go”. That’s all there is to it! For some strange reason the # of people who find others attractive despite their size isn’t some tiny group. What a bunch of losers! For some reason they actually are open to seeing positives in others despite their appearance (looking at what’s below the physical)…gasp!
If somebody says “people who let themselves get fat and lazy have poor hygiene,” then that person is not talking about somebody who takes care of her appearance and keeps clean and works hard but just happens to have too many excess Kg on her.
He wasn’t talking about you.
Besides, you’ve lost twenty-two lbs. and are now losing more.
My old lady is letting herself get thin in her middle age; just don’t know what to do with her. Oh wait; yes I do. 😉
Dear Sailor B, I know he wasn’t talking specifically about me. I apologize if I gave that impression. I’m defending the many big people who ARE “in transition” and ARE working on losing their excess weight, getting treatment for eating disorders, etc. I’m speaking against the mentality that many or all big people just don’t care, etc.
Dear Laura,
Thanks for responding to me warmly. This is a fascinating column, isn’t it? I learn something new here everyday.
Bright blessings,
Gawaine
This has been a great place for me to “come out” FULLY with being sexually wild for many years (with the option to do that again if I like) and also as a bisexual Christian. I’ve come out on another website besides this 1 and will also do that on other websites I’m on over time. I’ve learned here also. I’ve had a needed change as far as how I see whores now.
The idea of that is far from my mind. I can barely afford to travel across town and I’m courting a woman in jail. And I’m not a stalker, either. I can’t even operate my cell phone.
Dear guinevereschampion, thanks for your understanding. I say the same to all men who I have a new friendship with. A big reason is I don’t ever want any confusion in the future. It isn’t because of an ego thing on my part (i.e., I get told constantly how smart and pretty I am so men are constantly coming on to me, etc…lol). I know what you mean about travel! I’m working on finding a way to finish my schooling in medical billing/coding. It’s a challenge. My finances don’t allow hardly any $ for travel at this point. At least I can say this is from things that aren’t my fault! When I was drinking the amount of $ I had was my fault at least in part. Anyway, once I finish my schooling I hope to travel a lot more! I wish you the best with your courting! I have a strong feeling you’re going to get ###*** for it from some. These are the 1’s who think all in jail are guilty, scum, etc. Some have made bad decisions and jail gets them to change their lives for the better, etc. At least some do have remorse for their crimes if they’re truly guilty also and really do change over time. Am glad to hear you’re not a stalker! I went through that HELL at work a few years ago from a co-worker. She got fired over it. She never threatened me and things could have been a lot worse, but it was still HELL. It’s my hope you never go through it! Don’t feel bad about your phone…I was intimidated by mine at 1st and asked friends at work to help me turn it on, etc…lol. These phones with a ton of features I still find it intimidating to even think about using 1!
The sugar babies probably view lower earnings as further proof that they are not doing sex work. it’s more than sex for money because if it was just sex for money then they would have more clients and would earn more . lower earning makes their motives purer, in their estimation
[…] professional “cuddlers”, nude maids, waitresses catering to sexual fantasies and even sugar babies insist that they are different from strippers, hookers and fetish workers in some real (and […]