What I did is not such a great harm, with all these surplus women nowadays. – Rudolf Pleil (“The Death Maker”)
Though idealists prefer to deny it, Man is a predatory animal in whom the killer instinct is as natural as the sexual impulse. An infant, given the power to do so, would destroy anyone who displeased him; it is only through maturation and socialization that we learn to curb our murderous impulses, or at least to restrict them to non-humans. And thereby hangs the tale; some humans never internalize the wrongfulness of violence and only avoid it out of self-preservation (i.e., to avoid being caught and punished), while others find socially-sanctioned outlets for their violent impulses or sublimate them into non-physical forms. But in all these cases there is still usually a thick enough layer of civilization that the individual is reluctant to attack others he perceives as being like himself, and this is where the process of dehumanization comes in; if he can convince himself that someone is somehow deserving of violence, or better still is less than human, he thereby shakes off the psychic fetters imposed by his upbringing which prevent him from attacking (or even killing) other humans.
Cops provide the classic example of this syndrome; though most of them are capable of functioning normally in society without victimizing others, many of them rationalize brutal, animalistic violence as acceptable if their victims are “criminals”, and with the vast expansion of laws in the past century that classification is no longer limited to genuine malefactors.
But even most cops reserve their most murderous rages for those officially (or personally) designated as subhuman, such as Jews, Gypsies or black people. Many police departments use the slang term “NHI”, meaning “no humans involved”, for crimes committed against individuals that police consider not worth investigating; the term seems to have originated in Southern California in the 1960s and gained more widespread usage in the ‘80s and ‘90s. Does anyone doubt that if crimes committed against such individuals are ignored by police when a stranger commits them, that they will not be actively covered up when committed by a “brother officer”? And since prostitutes are included in the “NHI” category, we are all too often raped, robbed, beaten or otherwise victimized by cops with almost complete impunity.
Because of our “outsider” status, it’s very easy for the weak-minded to dehumanize whores. Under a criminalization regime we are “criminals”, according to Judeo-Christian tradition we are “sinners”, to aging wives we are “homewreckers” and to insecure men we represent the unacceptable truth that women are in control of the sexual sphere; even neofeminists like Melissa Farley represent us as helpless, passive, faceless victims of men, thus justifying their constant attacks on our lives and livelihoods despite their claims of universal sisterhood. Sometimes dehumanization is very subtle, as in the case of the clients who raped me or the trafficking fanatic in my column of one year ago today who was quick to attack a real prostitute for daring to be something other than an undifferentiated thing to be “rescued”; other times it’s horribly overt, as in this hate-comment I received on the same column.
But the most extreme dehumanization of prostitutes occurs in the minds of serial killers, who target us with terrifying regularity. Sometimes the reason is practical; as the Green River Killer, Gary Ridgeway, expressed it, “I picked prostitutes because I thought I could kill as many of them as I wanted without getting caught.” Few people notice missing streetwalkers, and because of “NHI” attitudes police aren’t usually very eager to investigate such cases until mutilated corpses start turning up.
But in other cases such as that of Jack the Ripper, the killer’s psychosis is specifically focused on prostitutes, probably because they are living representations of a female sexuality he hates and fears. And recently-identified serial killer John Boyer, whose story appeared in the Huffington Post on September 18th, appears to have been somewhere in the middle:
Long-haul trucker John Boyer…[is] accused of at least three slayings and is suspected in a fourth. Boyer has pleaded guilty to killing a woman in North Carolina and faces murder charges..in Tennessee and South Carolina…The similarities of the cases and the apparent lack of remorse from Boyer have investigators encouraging their counterparts along highways around the Southeast to review unsolved killings and missing person files. Even his own attorney in the North Carolina case felt uneasy around him and wondered what else he might have done.
“I think there are a lot more. There’s no telling. This guy traveled all over the country. Hopefully we’ll get more of these cases solved through DNA,” said detective Scott Smith of the Hickman County, Tenn., sheriff’s office. In the case Smith investigated, Boyer picked up 25-year-old prostitute Jennifer Smith in April 2005 and brought her to an abandoned parking lot just off Interstate 40. The two argued over money, and Boyer strangled the victim with the seat belt of his truck, dumped her body from the cab, and drove off…her body was found in 2005 by a highway worker, but it took two years for investigators to match DNA found on her body to a sample Boyer gave after pleading guilty in North Carolina. Boyer confessed to the killing…but he also went on a tirade against women…
The investigator was chilled by the hatred toward women from a man who had never been married and lived with his mother near Augusta, Ga…Darlington County, S.C., Sheriff’s Capt. Andy Locklair immediately got the same impression when he stepped into an interview room to question Boyer about a killing in that state. The first thing Boyer said to him was: “What [bitch] are you here about?” [The body]…of 34-year-old Michelle Haggadone…was found in April 2000 beneath pine straw at a parking area on Interstate 20 near Florence, about 30 miles from the truck stop where Boyer had picked her up. Boyer immediately denied killing Haggadone, lashing out at Locklair and an investigator with him. “He said he had slept with a lot of prostitutes and a lot of them were detectives’ daughters or prosecutors’ daughters,” Locklair said…”I’m not a behavior science expert, but he has some deep, deep issues with women.” Haggadone was strangled with a wire or cord after the two argued over the price of her services, authorities said. Her body went unidentified for a decade, until a DNA sample from a relative matched a sample from her body…Locklair and another investigator realized several aspects of the crime, like what the victim was doing and where and how she was killed, matched the earlier slayings linked to Boyer…[who] will be taken to Tennessee to face a first-degree murder charge after his North Carolina sentence ends. Boyer is serving a sentence of up to 12 years…after pleading guilty in 2007 to second-degree murder for killing Scarlett Wood in Wilmington four years earlier. Boyer said he was doing drugs with the 31-year-old prostitute when they had an argument, he pushed her, and she struck her head on furniture…but an autopsy found Wood suffered broken ribs and facial bones, and her pelvic bones showed signs of a stabbing.
…Boyer is [also] a prime suspect in the death of 26-year-old Rose Marie Mallette, who was reported missing in 2001, said New Hanover County Sheriff’s Det. Ken Murphy, a cold case investigator in Wilmington. The reported prostitute’s remains were found wrapped in a blanket in an industrial area of the city a year later, the back of her skull crushed…Monica Caison, founder of Community United Effort Center for Missing Persons in Wilmington, said investigators need to look at three cases where women disappeared over five months in 1995 in Brunswick County, N.C., just west of Wilmington. “We have a lot of unsolved missing persons in the general area…Mr. Boyer was known to frequent… that alone warrants a second look,” Caison said. At least two of the unsolved cases involve woman who were small and slightly built, like Boyer’s other alleged victims…
According to this two-year-old story from the Telegraph, Boyer’s not alone; the FBI suspects a number of serial killers are working as long-haul truckers, the better to cover up their monstrous deeds. Undoubtedly Boyer is responsible for at least a few of these 500+ unsolved murders, but the others are still out there. Still, as an FBI agent quoted for the article said, “Many of the victims have been prostitutes and other women with high-risk lifestyles…We don’t want to scare the public and make it seem like every time you stop for gas you should look over your shoulder.” And though he tacked on the obligatory “they didn’t deserve to die,” I think the general gist of his statement is clear; it isn’t real women who need to worry, only surplus ones.
Deny the human status and the aggression is WNL. I suspect the disconnect goes back to the role of the mother ( forgive me Sigmund) and the resulting rage and violence. Too bad “stump hanging” has gone the way of the buggy whip ( for the non southerners that’s when the testicles of the offender are nailed to a freshly cut pine tree stump replete with the caustic sap) I am told that down in the “glades that seemed to really alter behavior. Treating the beasts that prey on the “other society” members with anything less than absolute brutality has no real impact. So until society readily admits that the prostitute is a real person and an economic reality, there seems no other alternative
You do realise that your reasoning follows the same trail of thought as the NHI?
They’re murderers, you can do inhumane stuff to them! Will soon lead to: They’re rapists, we can do inhumane stuff to them, wich will lead to things like: He’s unemployed, sick, black, jewish, blabla.
Every instance of softening up human rights or legal procedures will make the next crass measures all the more likely.
Lock people up for life, educate the people and instill a humanistic worldview – that’s what we need, not nailing peoples’ testicles to trees 🙂
Dear archont, THANK YOU! It’s wonderful to hear this! I’m so tired of the “let’s attack and/or kill 1st without even a fair trial”. YES! Let’s go back to what I call “the good old days”: kill, torture, etc., with no trial! Yes, what a great way to do things! Along with the popular ###*** of doing this to whole groups of people. Isn’t it GREAT to read online stuff like: A lot of people need killing. WOW! They should be PROUD! I wonder: do these people ever think of the possibility of a family member and/or friend of THEIRS will commit a crime? Seriously? THEN will they be screaming “KILL”? I’ve learned 1st hand that when you’re in this situation it’s sure a lot more drastic than when you’re never been in it. Thank you for speaking up for education. I’ve found in my personal experience and the experiences of MANY others how much good education does in this area. THANK YOU again for standing up for decency, fairness and restraint.
That’s my girl!
There are many reasons I love you, and your sense of decency is one of them.
The question would need be asked what makes men murderers and rapists in general. The question would need be, what is special in the lives of men who venture down this path, and end there. The one common link appears to be single mothers and abuse at home. This seems most especially when the abuse was at the hands of their mothers for crimes that especially target women. What then is your answer for child abuse? What about abusive single parents?
Unfortunately, the vicious, arrogant, cruel personal attacks on murder victims has gone on for years. It isn’t just whores who get this. 2 other examples are people who are homeless at the time they get murdered plus those who are either in gangs or former gang members at the times of their murders. Isn’t this JUST GREAT? Then there’s the 1’s who see these victims and their surviving family members and/or friends as their own form of ghoulish entertainment. However, thanks to wonderful groups like Parents of Murdered Children a LOT of progress has been made. 1 of the most wonderful things about POMC (and there’s a whole list of wonderful things about them) is how they treat all victims EQUALLY. This is the ideal. They don’t just care about the victims who are trashed that are just like them. They care about ALL. A lot of progress has also been made by the surviving family members and/or friends of murder victims (I call them MVS) who have spoken out against this ###*** for YEARS and won’t ever stop speaking out. The 1’s who do this know how much education really does help (and thanks again to Archont for pointing this out also). There’s still a lot of work to be done and some will willfully refuse to be reached, but this should never discourage any of this very needed work. Something I just remembered: in 1 of the made for TV movies about the Green River case (the 1 that was on A&E channel) I loved how the writers took the time and effort to point out that at least 1 detective on that case was totally disgusted by the fact that some (not all, thank God!) could have cared less about the victims in the case because they were whores. This also proves that there’s many great, caring detectives out there (I also know this from 1st hand experience). I’ll never forget this part of that movie. The ideal is that all victims be cared about and treated equally and not be personally attacked for whatever job, etc., they had at the time of their murders. Thanks for listening.
I agree with you that these people who do these horrible things to prostitutes and prostitute customers, and regard them as less than fully human are horrible people. In some sense, they truly are the modern day Pharisees and not good Christians because Jesus hated sin, but never the sinner and told them that He had come to save the tax collecters and prostitutes. What they never seem to get around to do is to agree that prostitution should be decriminalized and even legalized to reduce the worst aspects of it. You can outlaw human behavior, but you can’t change it.
My attitude has always been if you can not entertain the concept of harm reduction the way St. Augustine of Hippo and St. Thomas Aquinas advocated us to do, it is you who have reduced your own humanity. Even if this person chose to be a prostitute or her customer does not excuse the torment the law and those outside the law have put them through. Note I never said such people would necessarily make good boyfriends, girlfriends or spouses:, but I didn’t say they couldn’t either. Even if such people have a higher probability of being poor for romantic or sexual relationships in no way diminishes their humanity. It truly is appalling to see how few people percieve this.
Sadly too many people will make any excuse to cause harm to an individual who has never harmed anyone just because they enjoy watching others suffer. It is also sad that people lack the sense of who to blame too The anti-prostitution laws are really about people making excuses to indulge in their wanton cruelty.
Because of our “outsider” status, it’s very easy for the weak-minded to dehumanize whores. Under a criminalization regime we are “criminals”, according to Judeo-Christian tradition we are “sinners”, to aging wives we are “homewreckers” and to insecure men we represent the unacceptable truth that women are in control of the sexual sphere…
I think there’s another reason for the hatred of prostitution. You mentioned “women are in control of the sexual sphere.” Well, prostitutes short circuit that by allowing any man with the means access to sex. So what this does is undercut the average women’s power to choose which men get access to sex according to whatever whims and preferences she has. This is a MAJOR source of power for many women.
Whores essentially offer a “meritocratic” deal for sex — “earn the money and you can have me” — as opposed to other women, where all sorts of other things matter. You might think that in this society, which is an alleged meritocracy, prostitutes would be appreciated, but it’s not that way.
So why do the Men in Blue harass prostitutes so much? Because in doing so is their way to defend the “honor” of regular women — and to curry favor with them. In other words, the few men in charge and all the women want to control the sexual marketplace for **everybody.**
This sort of thing runs counter to much of what society has become, esp. in the era of eBay and the internet, when we all have access to both goods and knowledge like never before in any society. It also runs counter to the spirit of our anti-discrimination laws because what the cops and women are saying is that only a **certain** type of man gets to have sex, and that’s often based on looks, social status or even whether the man has a disability.
I hope all this makes sense. What I’m trying to say is that prostitutes offer a certain type of equality in the sexual marketplace that threatens both women and powerful men. Whether or not a man hires one, just the idea that someone is out there saying “$250 for guaranteed sex” is enough to make entire segment of the population tremble with insecurity and that’s why prostitutes are targets. People claim “morality” “oppression,” etc., but I think this is the real reason.
Actually, it’s not that prostitutes short-circuit it; it’s just that we choose to profit by it without giving up our freedom. This does devalue low-quality women’s sexual capital, but it doesn’t affect that of high-quality women at all…which may be why those women with the biggest axes to grind against us are the low-quality ones.
Both you and Days of Broken arrows are correct, but for different reasons. Both of you are looking at the same coin, but one is looking at heads and the other is looking at tails. He’s looking at it from a male and possibly john side and you are looking at it from a woman and prostitute side. Low quality woman hate the competition and I’ve tried to say it before. However, he is right that it’s also about controling the men’s access to high quality women.
Prostitutes are usually good looking, and women all hate how men can access them whether they choose to do so or not for the monetary price. The police act like white knights and are loved by the women for either ridding the competition, the prostitutes, or by destroying “bad men”, the johns. Any woman can easily access a high quality male for physical satisfaction whether or not she wants to or not. Many men simply don’t have this option. Even those high quality men who do have the option to access high quality women may want to hire prostitutes to aviod disrupting their marriage or because they simply don’t have the time to seduce women The dissollution of marriage today is by far more of a disaster for a man than it is for a woman on average in today’s USA.
Although you know well the shaming that goes on against prostitutes especially if they are female, men like me know well the amount of shaming that goes agianst the male johns. The attitude is a real man would be able to able get a woman without having to buy her. Frankly, I detest men who try to shame man about going to prostitutes especially when they single specific men out(whether or not such men ever want to prostitutes or not). I also detest anyone who tries to shame woman by calling them prostitutes whether it is true or not. I fail to see how it is healthy to criticize or destroy women for how they choose to make a living and fail to see even more how it is healthy to criticize or destroy a man who was simply looking for relief sexually speaking.
It’s very common among women to hate prostitutes not only because they are competition. They hate that they can not either emotionally do what prostitutes do to make a living, are not physically attractive enough to be a prostitutes and assume everyone must be told to do as they are told to do and live as they live without throwing competition their way. They in essence don’t like truly independent women such as prostitutes because such women free men which is what they really hate too. Too many women and a lower but still too high of percentage of men assume that their must be a slave and master relationship. the idea of truly independent people infuriates them. You can choose any combination of the above. Your other reasons are valid, but so are mine.
Good points Doclove.
There is a song by Pink called “U + Ur Hand” that sums up the attitude of a lot of women towards men: do it my way or “you won’t be gettin’ none.”
The song is a lot less effective if you re-title it “U + Ur Choice of Any Blondes, Brunettes or Redheads U Can Afford.” It’s this aspect — this lack of control — that I think infuriates a lot of women. And thus follow the Boys in Blue, ready to bash some heads in to defend the “honor” of those little ladies — the honorable ones that threaten such sweet ladylike things as “U + Ur Hand.”
I like your response. Let men add that what these women really want more than anyhing is for you to be left with your hand for mastabatory fun more than being able to hire a bonde, brunette or redheaded prostitute. Again, too many men and a higher percentage of women don’t know nor understand nor want anything other than a master and slave relationship along with all of the humiliation and degradation that come along with it. Sadly, there is no such thing as freedom much less equality and if they are not the slave you must be.
They don’t even truly understand the concept of if you want respect, you must not only give respect(until their is a good reason not to do so and even then it’s best to err on the side of giving respect) and you must expect respect. There’s no do unto others as you would have them do unto you. There’s not even don’t do unto others as you would not have them do unto you. It’s all about me, me, me all the time until they are pummelled literally or figuratively.
My response to women who say it’s my way or your hand or whatever you can pay for is simple. There are simply more honest more respectable and cheaper whores in the world than you. Congratulate yourself for making it known that you are an overpriced, dishonest and dishonorable prostitute. See you later or better never! Bye!!!
I forgot to add to my last paragraph that there are also whores who are more professional, more respectable and better at their jobs than you too.
Just wondering, have you ASKED the women who hate prostitution why they do? I hate it for at least a few reasons and none of them are the reasons you’re listing. While I personally hate the institution of prostitution, that doesn’t automatically mean I hate the women who practice it. In other words, you can hate whatever kind of institution for YOURSELF (want no part of it), but not hate those who are in it. If I hated these women because of what they do I wouldn’t have made a friend here (1 of the whores who used to post here regularly). I’m also for decriminalization of prostitution and have been for years. There ARE women who aren’t whores who DO have sex without emotional attachment (I’m 1 of these and there’s more than me, thank God). I get tired of hearing whores are the only women who do this. NOT true. There’s also independent women who aren’t whores (I’m 1 of them). As far as being attractive goes, that isn’t completely fair either. I’ve had compliments on my looks and so have many non-whore women I’ve known and currently know plus have read about others through the years.
Women usually tell you the reasons if they are socially acceptable to say such as it’s dirty, dangerous, difficult and immoral etc. My reasons are not meant to be all inclusive. I simply stated what I believe to be the real reasons. I love to see the expression on their faces when I state what I did in my previous comments. They virtually always deny it. I tell them to stop lying and tell them that their pretty lies came to die before me as I expose the ugly truth about them. If you have anything you would like to add, then add it and enlighten us. you never stated what any of your reasons are. What are they?
Dear doclove, I’ve stated a few of my reasons on here before on other entries (1 of them being that I think the concept of “free love” is wonderful and I believe that sex should be as free of literal cost as possible), but don’t mind telling you all of them when I have time.
Dear doclove, before I give the reasons I hate prostitution for myself, I want to put a disclaimer. When I come out with all these reasons, please don’t think I’m literally ordering anyone around and/or saying “stop what you’re doing”. I also hate drug use EXCEPT for true health problems, but that doesn’t mean I want to order people to stop or won’t give them a chance to be my friend, etc. I just don’t want to join in any drug use WITH them just like I don’t let alcohol in my apartment since getting sober (with rare exceptions). My biggest reason is: I love the “free love” beliefs and and have practiced this for years including with my fiance (Sailor Barsoom). Too many men have been literally used as “banks” for years and I see prostitution as doing this also, i.e., literally profiting off the sexual frustration of MANY men. I think sex should be as easy to get as possible for men and for me that includes the least amount of literal cost possible. I think this way about food, medicine, shelter and clothes also. Some of this comes from my Christian beliefs and I love how in Christianity we’re told to give as much as we can. I also can’t live with the morality of it. I won’t have any part of lying in anyones’ relationship. There’s men who use whores who lie and hide it from their wives and/or girlfriends and I won’t join in with that. I’ve said before on here how a few times I did compromise on that when I had sex only friends. I haven’t done that again and also broke off contact for good with the few married men I saw. It make me feel nauseated to think of it now even though it was years ago. I see it like you’re the “getaway driver” for a bank robbery, but say “it’s OK because I didn’t plan the robbery, didn’t pull a gun on anyone and didn’t go in the bank”. Sorry, but to me you’re still part of a crime. Being part of ANY lies in anyones’ relationship is horrible to me and I see adultery as adultery no matter what the rationalizations/excuses and the same goes for men who lie and hide what they’re doing from the women they’re not legally married to also, i.e, cheating and not technically adultery. ###*** lies! They destroy and are disgusting. I don’t want any part of the above with the non-whore women either (i.e., they don’t put any restrictions on seeing married men, etc.). I also don’t want part of a system that says it’s OK to lie to the men (fake orgasms, etc.) even if the men do want this. Also that it’s OK to lie about your weight and age to make more $ by getting more customers. Also with the men who are poor it makes it even harder for them to get sex. They deserve sex also even IF they’re poor through their own actions. I have learned on here there’s whores who do give discounts and that was wonderful to learn. I’m not being sarcastic here. I’ve also learned that whores DO help many sexually frustrated men. I just don’t want to be part of the way they do it. As far as my Christianity goes, that isn’t the ONLY reason I’m against prostitution for myself. I get so tired of the Christian women who don’t want to do it being accused of: that’s ONLY because you’re a Christian. It’s NOT this way in many cases (including my own). My dislike of adultery and cheating also comes from the reading I’ve done, what I’ve seen in real life and what I’ve seen in other peoples’ lives. I do still have an arrangement with my fiance but it’s only for non-married men and men who aren’t married and it’s OK with their girlfriend, etc., for them to see others. If I found out the single men lied about the girlfriend approving, I’d break off contact for good and tell them ###*** you for lying and thinking that would be OK with me. My reasons also have nothing to do with me being jealous of how many whores are pretty and/or prettier than me. I get tired of that 1 also. It also has nothing to do with me wanting men to be sexually frustrated because I’m REALLY (eyeroll) 1 of the horrible feminists who thinks all men are scum and shouldn’t ever have sex. I get tired of that being projected right off on women who are against prostitution for themselves also. I have learned on here that many whores do help men be less sexually frustrated and I’ll give credit where it’s due on that. Again, I just don’t want my helping the men also to be done the same way. It’s also easier for men to use whores than non-whore women because it does take more work to meet non-whore women through the personal ads, etc. The small % of women who can have sex without emotional attachment truly DO help many men. I just want to go the “free love” way for the reasons listed above.
I wanted to add that I DID think of how I could have made $ off my sex only friends in the past at times. I had so many answers to my ads I couldn’t have worked a full-time job and met all the men who answered. Please note I don’t say this to be like: I get told I’m so sexy, beautiful and smart all day long (I don’t get told that all the time, actually, which I LIKE!). I’m just saying it was a factor in my thinking I COULD make a lot of $. I’ve also thought of it through several hard times I’ve had financially. But, for the reasons above, I chose not to. There goes that WONDERFUL thinking (eyeroll) that women who hate prostitution for themselves don’t think of the possibility of being whores and/or are so literally stupid they don’t think of the possibility of making $ off sex and also getting gifts, free meals, etc. if they want to get material things also. For some women, the whole “free love” mentality, etc., is something they love and want to practice and not just for their egos. Thanks for listening.
Dear Sailor B, I only had 1 “date” per day. There were a few times I saw more than 1 person at a time (which you were a part of a few times). Most weekends I did have dates OR saw the friends that really DID want what I did which was to NOT just have a 1 night stand. All the effort it took to find those few men was worth it (although HORRIBLE at times!). I would see people during the week also as I was working temporary jobs a lot during those years which were less demanding. Also, all the wonderful (eyeroll) sugar in the alcohol I was drinking gave me a lot of energy.
My point is that the hookers take richer men out of circulation and thus out of competition for the rare Lauras out there. We po’ boys can use every break we can get, and hookers make it a little easier for us.
Yes, I get your point. I also give credit where it’s due now with whores. They DO help many men. I just want my help to be done differently. Yes, the poor men like you deserve sex also. You’re poor through no fault of your own and there’s many men like that (especially in this economy). I think the poor men who are poor through their own actions also deserve sex. You can have sex with them and let them know from day 1 you’re not wanting a relationship just like with rich men. I met a few rich men during my wild years and that was OK also. Most I met weren’t rich which was fine with me also. Yes, the women like me are rare, but we truly help. We help the poor men PLUS the men who don’t want to see whores. Those men shouldn’t get any ###*** for wanting to see non-whore women. The truth is the % of women who can have sex without emotional attachment IS LOW, but the way I see it is the most rare jewels are the most precious. Imagine how much worse it would be for men without us!
OK. I can see that.
I know there are men who see whores that are honest about being married and also have arrangements with their wives. There’s also single men who do this. I don’t want people on here to think I think all of them lie when I gave my reasons for not doing prostitution. They don’t. This is 1 of the things I’ve leared here which was NEEDED. It’s the same with the men who use personal ads, etc., to meet non-whore women. I’ve had married men answer my ads and thank them a LOT for their honesty when they say in their ads, etc., they’re married. This also proves that not ALL men are liars like many BITCHES love to think.
This is my last post on why prostitution isn’t for me. A few things I forgot from the other day: another reason I don’t want any part of it isn’t JUST faking orgasms. I don’t want any part of putting on smiles, pretending to be a girlfriend for a while, etc. Some might then say: but when you had what you call your “guarantee” (I’d have sex with you guaranteed if you answered my ad and/or I answered yours and we then met) so didn’t you fake that at times? The truth is when I wasn’t greatly attracted to the men I met, I would STILL come during the sex. I would come LESS with these men compared to the 1’s I was very physically attracted to. I had 1 friend that I saw regularly that my physical attraction for him GREW over time which I was very glad for. None of the men I was less attracted to ever remarked on anything. There was never anything like “you don’t come much” or “you don’t seem to be into this” and I’m very thankful for this. I also didn’t WANT to be anyone’s girlfriend or pretend to be 1. I kept it as “you come to my place, we have sex and then you leave”. I did this for a lot of reasons and 1 of the biggest 1 was to NOT RISK getting emotionally attached. Also want to bring up what I call the “bravery issue”. I find it very upsetting that some believe that women like me just “aren’t brave enough” to do full-on prostitution. The truth is when you’re meeting men for sex only, that ALONE takes bravery! I also want to point out I’ve never in my life “picked up” anyone in a bar. Even during my drinking years that wasn’t my thing. I still love personal ads because you can just be fully honest about everything you’re looking for, etc. 1 reason I never wanted to meet men in bars, etc., was because it was too “anonymous” for me for at least a few reasons. It TAKES bravery to meet men to BE your sex friends. There ARE risks involved and not all of them are physical risks. I want to thank Doclove for actually ASKING me what my reasons are. This is a breath of fresh air. Also, answering him makes my resolve stronger to keep defending the women like me. We have some stuff to defend ourselves against, unfortunately. This is 1 of the reasons I’ve fully “come out” in the past few years in this area because I really see now how we DON’T get enough credit from some for helping out sexually frustrated men and there’s also a need for education against the unfair stereotypes, etc., about us. Thanks for listening.
“It’s just that we choose to profit by it without giving up our freedom.”
Until an undercover nabs you.
There are so many things one can profit from in this world. Why choose your dignity?
Only a lawhead believes that right and wrong can be determined by legislatures and enforced by armed goons. Following what one knows to be right, is dignified; allowing someone else to determine it for one is not.
I’m perfectly happy with my choices, and my “dignity” is fully intact, thanks. The idea that providing a service for money is “undignified” is medieval, and the idea that for a woman to have sex for any reason somehow diminishes her is outrageously sexist because it is based in the notion that sex is all she is.
Yes, one of those wonderful undercover cops, who go around busting men and women for $250 transactions, while leaving the folks who stole (and continue to steal) billions on Wall St. untouched.
The laws is a tool by the rich to keep the non-rich “in line” and “shamed” and feeling like they “don’t have dignity” or whatever the meme is this year. The fact is, prostitution is all but legal in the spheres of the very upper class. They just call it gold-digging. The difference is in what the law recognizes (it excuses the rich, of course) and in the honest of the women involves (whores are at least honest).
I don’t want to speak for Maggie here, but viewed in this light, I personally think she has a hell of a lot more dignity than the phony criminal class because she’s upfront with what she does.
In some future year, the rich will decide poker is “moral” and legalize that when they can tax it. Then maybe pot. Then maybe prostitution. I hope your head doesn’t explode when the people who had no “dignity” on the Monday when things are illegal suddenly realize they have it on Tuesday when things magically become legal.
Am wondering: what “quality” are the women like me who hate the institution of prostitution and don’t want any part of it but are FOR decriminalization? What “quality” are the women who have practiced forms of “free love” through history?
A) You’re an exception, though you seem to forget that.
B) Prostitution isn’t an “institution” unless you call stuff like cooking, sports, acting, and herding livestock “institutions”. It’s just a job, a way to make money. That’s it. No grand philosophy, no overarching structure, no criminal conspiracy to bring down Western civilization, no constants. Just a way to get by. That’s why the Japanese call it “The Water Trade”; it takes many forms and has no set structure, and is always changing; that’s practically the opposite of an institution.
When I said “institution” what I meant was a group of behaviors that are common to prostitution (which I’ve learned about on here). I use this word for that at times and apply it to my own job also in regards to behaviors I’ve seen/experienced over the years in the corporate world. I apologize for any confusion. My tendency at times to use words a certain way is part of my wanting to break out of what I call the “safe little category boxes” thing. The % of women who can have sex without emotional attachment is small. BUT, we do a TON of good. Imagine how many MORE sexually frustrated men there would be without us. It’s another example of a small group of people really changing things for the better.
Can you define or describe the spectrum of low- to high-quality women? What makes a woman “high quality”?
Also, from the first response to this post, what on earth could a woman/mother do to her son to create such a monster? Is it really simple as saying the serial killers who focus on women/prostitutes had “mommy issues”?
In the realm of mating (which is what we’re talking about here), I would define a “high quality” woman as one who has no trouble attracting potential mates. Women who have no trouble attracting men don’t tend to worry about competition from other women all that much.
No, it’s not that simple. There’s a lot of factors that cause people to become serial killers and/or even murder just 1 person. Many murder cases have a lot of factors that are direct causes for the murders. There’s also factors that are OUTSIDE of the murderers minds (abuse is 1 example and abuse is VERY promiment in the background of MANY serial killers). There’s not many cases that have 1 cause (true self-defense is 1 example, though.). There’s some outstanding books about why serial killers are the way they are along with NON-serial killers. The books of John Douglas and Robert Ressler are examples of these.
Maggie, how do you determine a “low-quality” woman and a “high-quality” woman?
Absolutely, men would want to fuck the woman on the left far more than the woman on the right. But as a society, shouldn’t we eventually have to evolve beyond fuckability as a requirement for physical survival? In this point I agree with the woman the right, even if I don’t agree with her prohibitionist politics.
It’s not a requirement for physical survival now. I’m sure the woman on the right has a job and can support herself, and furthermore would clearly be the sort to insist on her ability to do so. In a world where women can work at outside jobs, the only thing “fuckability” is strictly necessary for is getting a man.
Did anyone on here think the woman with the sign might look a ton better with her hair done, sexier clothes, makeup, etc.? That there might be some potential there?
I’m absolutely certain she would. The greater part of ugliness is an ugly attitude.
More important than whether or not a woman looks like a young man’s dream is the fact that she cares to look the best she can.
I’m no Adonis myself, but when we go out, I shave and comb my hair. And that makes me sexier to you, not so much because I look so awesome, but because I’m making an effort to look good for you.
The woman holding the sign isn’t so much unattractive as she doesn’t want to be attractive. Her sign says so, and so does her get-up.
There’s also women who don’t charge a cent for sex and don’t play any of those WONDERFUL games that the world system loves (like golddigging, putting on a fake front to get free drinks, meals, gifts, etc. while inside their minds they’re laughing at the men they’re literally using as banks while with their phony words they’re making the men think they have a chance at sex, etc.) and thank God for them! The truth is there’s at least a few men who can’t afford whores (even with a discount). They DESERVE SEX ALSO. There’s also men who don’t WANT to see whores. They deserve that right and no one should give them ###*** for it. Also, with the men who don’t want to see whores they have OTHER reasons for that besides thinking they shouldn’t have to pay for sex. It gets tiring to always read the same old they think they shouldn’t have to pay. For a lot of years when I had sex only friends, I had a “guarantee” that when I met you, you were going to get sex. This was done on purpose for a lot of reasons. I still have this arrangement with my fiance and can act on it at any time and I won’t ever change this even if I decide to not ever act on it again. The truth is whores aren’t the only sexual option there is. I say they shouldn’t BE the only option just as the women like me shouldn’t be the only option either. Whores also aren’t the only women who can have sex without emotional attachment. There’s also the women like me (my name for us is “wild women”). This has also been shown by the women who are into free love (YES!) all through history.
Laura,
My comments about women who resent prostitutes mostly were directed against the women on the blogs that Maggie calls “neofeminists.” Their views on this subject are well known. The effects of their ranting is making prostitutes into “victims” they often don’t want to be. They also seek to control men, not just through denying sex via prostitution but through a wide array of “shaming” techniques.
Nothing was meant to be taken personally. I know all sorts of decent women in the real world who take the point of view “whatever floats your boat.” If you’re cool with what we discuss here, I definitely don’t have any gripes directed toward you and have met many open-minded women such as yourself.
Dear Days of Broken Arrows, I didn’t take anything personally and apologize if I gave that impression. I think it’s wonderful you’ve met many women who are open-minded! Even though these women are a small % of women, we DO help greatly with the men who are sexually frustrated and also victims of game-playing by BITCHES. Thanks for your kind words and I do enjoy these discussions on here a lot.
The simple fact of the matter is that even with a doubling of sluts, not all men would get sex when they wanted. A man still has to have some seductive skills in order to GAME sluts into bed. Not all men have this. Even those men who do have it, they may want to go to prostitutes to avoid destroying their marriage, they don’t have time to seduce women or they don’t like destroying women’s psyche by using them for pump and dump sport sex. There are however men who are unable to seduce women effectively for whatever reasons and need to hire prostitutes to have their desires which border on needs met. Men may also want to hire prostitutes to ask for the kinds of sex which would be difficult to get anyone to agree to or would be to embarrassing for them if discovered what kinds of sex acts they like. Examples may include but are not limited to 1) sado-masochism, or 2) orgies of multiple men and few or one woman, or 3) orgies or multiple women and few or one man.
Another good point, doc. Let me add that even those who have the skills to game women into bed (ahem) might want to go the hooker route so as not to have regular women upset and/or crazed when we don’t call them back.
The saying “you pay them to go away” was invented for a reason.
There is no perfect sollution. Some men will not be able to afford whores no matter what you do. Legalization would tend to reduce the cost though and allow men options to satiate desires bordering on needs to a much greater degree. If a man can not seduce a woman, he would need to save his money and go to a whore for sex or do without. Legalization, easier accessability to prostitution and less social shaming would encourage harm reduction in regards to prostitution.
The men who can’t afford whores even with a discount deserve sex also. There’s many men who are poor through no fault of their own. There’s men with disabilities who have tried to work and literally can’t because of their physical health problems (my Dad was 1 of these) and also have tried to work but get fired because of their disabilities. Within the current economy there’s many who get laid off from their jobs through no fault of their own. I was reading an article not long ago where a man who’d been laid off (not his fault) couldn’t get a date of any kind. What an outrage! These BITCHES think they’re too good for this man and the 1’s like him? ###*** them! Or it could just be he’s not a BANK they can literally use at this point in time. Whatever the reason this is disgusting, arrogant and mercenary because these men need the support of people (whether it’s sexual or not) during their hard times. While I agree with you that there’s no perfect solution, that shouldn’t mean that people just not do anything. The small group of women who can have sex without emotional attachment can and DO help. Also, some women don’t want to be “seduced” and don’t NEED to be. Some of us are fine with no “seduction”. In other words, it’s OK to just come out and say you want a “sex only” type of thing. Why can’t people just say what they want? ###*** the world system that says men have to put on these seductive “acts”.
If nothing else, hookers take the affluent men out of competition for wild women. Imagine how much worse the poor men would have it if they had to compete with a bunch of upper-middle-class to super-rich guys for what few wild women there are.
Consider: a working girl can easily see five men a day, four days a week. That’s twenty guys a week. She can see more than that if she’s healthy and willing to be a workaholic. Ten hookers can thus easily see two hundred guys a week, maybe more. And when we start to talk about thousands of harlots… That’s a lot of guys the poor men no longer have to compete with for the wild women.
Thus, whores benefit even the men who can’t afford them.
Five men a day is pretty high for most whores, though streetwalkers and brothel girls do usually see that many. Most escorts see two to three at most, and some have a one per day rule. It’s really, really hard to estimate how many men the average prostitute (including all types) sees, though I’d guess three per day in the U.S. is probably not too far off.
Ah. I took my best guess, but reached a bit high.
Well, then one hooker seeing twenty a week becomes one hooker seeing ten a week, ten girls seeing two hundred a week becomes ten girls seeing one hundred a week, and thousands of harlots seeing thousands of men a week remains thousands of harlots seeing thousands of men a week… men po’ boys like me no longer have to compete with in the dating game, where finding the rare Lauras hidden among the game-players, the utterly confused, and those trying to be gold-diggers where no gold is to be found is hard enough already.
Maggie,
I’m curious if you ever read The Rainbow Cadenza by J. Neil Schulman? If so, what did you think of it?
No, I don’t believe I’ve even heard of it before. But the Amazon description certainly doesn’t sound like anything of which libertarians would approve!
Schulman was a libertarian. I believe he wrote the book as a deliberate reply to the conservative idea that the military draft was justified because of the benefits to society and to the (surviving) inductees. He just swapped the sex of the coerced parties and the underlying rationale.
Oh, I was referring to the book synopsis saying that the Libertarian Party was in control of this fictional world, yet their society doesn’t seem very libertarian to me.
I’ve answered this for you, and you’ve rejected my answers, generally with anger. I don’t know that anybody else should try, though perhaps some here are better explainers than I am.
The non-whore women also have lies, etc., said about them. It’s as bad as the lies about whores. Many of the lies are the same about both groups of women.
“the FBI suspects a number of serial killers are working as long-haul truckers, the better to cover up their monstrous deeds”
Peter Sutcliffe of Broadmoor Secure Hospital would like a quick word with the FBI.
This is the ultimate form of sexual objectification. Whores are of course highly sexual, as so according to many objects. I think it started about the same time as the industrial revolution. Western society got it into their/our collective heads that a proper woman is asexual. Thus a highly sexualized woman isn’t really a woman (and obviously not a man) and thus some other creature or thing deserving of violence.
With such potentially horrific consequences it’s little surprise that some feminists are paranoid about sexual objectification. They claim that anything that sexualizes a woman also objectifies her. Of course a lot of that is just feminists buying into the same ideas they claim to oppose too.
Of course even before the industrial revolution sexuality was limited. People who broke certain rules and scripts were seen as sinners, unclean, dangerous and less human. The rules of course came from Judeo-Christian tradition. No sex outside of marriage. Sex is for procreation, not recreation. etc. Whores of course broke this script. Even is a good wife was supposed to exchange sex for survival, do it without a legal and religious blessing and you were a subhuman criminal.
Today there is more freedom, but we still focus on monogamy. Marriage is still damn important. Any break of monogamy, especially in marriage, is seen as a personal injury to your partner. Maybe it’s not a realistic expectation, but it’s what you encounter. You’re not only supposed to resist the urge, but if you REALLY loved her you wouldn’t even notice other women!!
Yes, sex is only for getting pregnant for Christians. RIGHT! Laura beats head against wall…an FYI: many preachers through the years have exposed this lie. The truth is that within marriage for Christians sex is for pregnancy PLUS fun (like expressing love, etc.). I know the official stand of the Catholic Church is that sex IS only for pregnancy. But, for Christians OUTSIDE of the Catholic Church it’s for fun also. The “Song of Solomon” in the Old Testament is a great example of this and disproves that WONDERFUL lie that all Christians are to never think of sex, never want it, etc. RIGHT! Again, many preachers have preached AGAINST this lie through the years and also fight the lie by heretics all over that sex is ALSO evil WITHIN marriage. I’ve heard at least a few of these sermons and am very thankful I did. Thanks for listening.
Ironically I did read a book that talked extensively about these things. “Catholic Sex” I think, gave it away to my devout cousin after her wedding. Specific dogma about sexuality was actually besides my point. Rather I’m worried about how it limits sexuality. The book emphasized how sex should be fun and how it should re-affirm the love between man and wife. However it also emphasized that every sexual act should have the potential for conception and even claimed that sex and marriage were synonymous. Which isn’t very kind to anyone who has sex outside marriage or used a condom, let alone prostitutes.
In the “Catholic Sex” I read they said that sex should be used for babies AND fun AND to re-affirm your love. But what is somebody doesn’t do all three?
For all the slamming away against Catholicism about stating that sex is supposed to be about the possibility for procreation, Catholicism is a sight better than many Protestant sects. The Catholic church is right that it is supposed to be about procreation because no matter what kind of birth control contraceptive technology is invented, it will never 100% prevent pregnancy. I’ve known people who have used condomns and pills and the woman still got pregnant. In the pure state of nature without this technology, pregnancy is always a possibility. Sex is also meant to spiritually and emotionally bond two people according to Catholic Church teaching. However, the Catholic church although it frowns upon sex outside marriage was never into enforcing monogomous marriage sex as much as many Protestant denominations. The Catholic church knew man was a fallen creature and to forgive him. It always understood harm reduction. St. Augustine of Hippo and St. Thomas Aquinas both good brilliant Catholic philosophers stated that although prostitution was against God’s law, it should not be against man’s law. Too many Protestant philosophers never understood that there is a difference between man’s law and God’s law as there always should be, and never understood harm reduction.
A relevant and excellent book by Jack Olsen:
http://tinyurl.com/3p9ed8v
Jack Olsen is an outstanding true crime writer. Thanks for this link. His books are NON-exploitive which is very needed in the true crime genre.
Laura,
You’re welcome. Jack Olsen’s work is an undiscovered country; most “literary” types will never read a word of him.
While it’s true that Olsen doesn’t exploit his subjects, I think his greatness as a writer relies less on his moral sense and more on his sheer ability to hold the reader’s interest on whatever subject. He does atmosphere as well as anyone, and with such relaxedness.–
Here’s an almost unknown, scandalously unknown, early book by Olsen that contains some richly memorable prose:
http://tinyurl.com/5tgkla2
Enjoy.
Dear n/a, thanks for the link! I didn’t know about this book so plan to check it out. Thanks again! Have you read “Cold Kill”? It’s my favorite of his so far. That case happened in a city I used to live in which is 1 reason I had a strong interest in it. I also own “The Man with the Candy” which was another case from the same city.
Many men and even more women will call men who go to prostitutes losers and the female prostitutes losers for giving sex to these men for an agreed upon price. Never a word about the men who seduce and pump and dump women for sport sex is said, or if it is, it is feeble by comparison. This is really all you need to know about their wanton cruelty to people who never deserved it.All they are is bullies and because bullies have either dehumanized themselves or never humanized themselves in the first place, they think it’s great to go after the easiest prey they can to show how great they are. They aren’t and should constantly be reminded of it. Shape up or ship out or be figuratively or literally pummelled is my motto. I want to note that physical violence is always a last measure of resort and I personally try to never use itas I full well know the horrific consequences of such actions.
To those who still believe in the tooth fairy, the ability to perfect society with education and soft kisses I would suggest that you relive the experience of Jessica Lunsford and the in your face attitude of John Couey. Go ahead and try and convince your self that stump hanging that sub species would not have been a much better resolution. Be my guest
False dichotomy. There are options besides “education and soft kisses” and “stump hanging.”
Dear John, yes, the Couey case is a disgusting outrage that should have never happened. However, this mentality of just torture and/or kill people without a trial is very dangerous. What if the people are truly innocent? What if they were literally framed? These are a few of the reasons that trials are needed. Also, what level do you put yourself on condoning and reveling in the torture/kill without a trial thing? Isn’t that exactly what Couey did to Lunsford? Making himself some kind of “god”? Please realize that many who want ALL who are accused to get a trial don’t want these people free if they’re truly guilty. This is an unfair stereotype. It’s the same as saying those who are against the death penalty in every case want the people to be free. I’ve personally seen the OPPOSITE over and over. The “tooth fairy” remark is an example of this stereotyping. Also, have you ever thought it’s possible for you to have a family member and/or friend accused of a crime? What if they were FALSELY accused? Should they then be tortured and/or killed with no trial? Even if they were truly guilty, would you then revel in their being tortured and/or killed? Those of us who know education does a lot of good also know that we’re not going to reach everyone and/or change everything for the better. But, should we then just give up? Not try? Say the system is ###*** and not fight it? NEVER! You do what you can do and if even 1 person is reached that’s better than NONE. In the Couey case justice WAS done in that he died in prison. He was going to be executed if he’d lived longer. That was a fitting sentence for him. Are you not satisfied that he wasn’t ever free again and didn’t kill anyone else?
Yes, hanging from a live oak tree in front of the county courthouse would be one. For the readers who seem to have no concept of what these repeat pedophiles do, I suggest that some serious review of the histories of these slimes would be worthwhile. And to those who really believe that this errant behaviour can be corrected and modified by anything on the market today, good luck. If you really have faith in that replace your front door lock with a “Please do not enter” sign. While it really is barbaric and “inhumane” to do that hanging it does have a certain effectiveness to it.. If it were my daughter I would even supply the rope.( or nails even)
Constantly telling us that there are bad people in the world is a waste of time, because we already know that. We all know what a child molester is. So that needs no further comment.
On your next point… are you saying that there is no middle ground between hanging or castration and a “Please do not enter” sign? Prisons do not exist?
Look, all this tough guy chest thumping is either intended to impress us, in which case you’ve failed with at least two of us, or you just like the idea of killing and castrating and are reassuring yourself that it’s OK because after all, you only want to do it to BAD people.
Dear Sailor B, it’s possible John has lost someone to violence.
Yes, I suppose so. I should consider this more than I do.
Thanks for calling me on it. Sometimes I need that.
“Yes, hanging from a live oak tree in front of the county courthouse would be one.”
Permit me to doubt that lynching will be any better an idea the second time around than it was the first.
Wow. A lot of hatred here.
Across the world, men decide what women can and can’t do, in Saudi Arabia, women can’t drive. In Afghanistan, the religious rules won’t permit battered women’s shelters without all sorts of terrible restrictions.
Many men have an attitude that they have a right to sex, and women are wrong for refusing to give it to them.
If you can’t afford a prostitute, and you get angry, ask your self this- If you can’t afford a plumber, do you expect all plumbers to do it for free?
Scum like serial murders can prey on sex workers because of the anti-sex attitude fostered by religion.
So much to address here, but I haven’t the time right now.
Dear Comixchik, I’ve never had anything against people who work for pay (I’ve done that for years and currently am also). What I personally have a problem with is any business that is making a profit not doing ANY charity work. Also with them literally gouging money out of people (like what were once called “robber barons”). Another example: there’s a tornado and all of the food in the town is destroyed, blown away, etc. Then a grocery store owner brings in food and charges at least triple the usual price to people who have just had the devastation of a tornado. I personally don’t want to support any business that doesn’t do any charity work (which for me includes giving some services away for free and/or give their products away to people truly in need). I’m only speaking of the 1’s who HAVE made profits, not the 1’s who are new, struggling, etc. With your plumber example: what if the person is poor through no fault of their own and their plumbing breaks? Is it OK for their place to be flooded? Should they get no help? Just stay there as mildew, mold, etc., grows? Is that OK? A lot of the time these poor people don’t have any money to MOVE. Sometimes things aren’t so “cut and dried”. What if the plumber HIMSELF falls on hard times? Should no one then help him? Just ###*** you, you don’t have the $ so rot? Again, things aren’t always so “cut and dried”. Speaking of the Saudi Arabian women, there’s groups there that are fighting the no driving ban. There’s also groups in Afghanistan working for change. They’ve made some progress. What doesn’t get talked about enough is that ANY religion and/or belief system is dangerous if there’s no church/state separation. There’s groups in the predominently Muslim countries fighting FOR this separation. There’s also many Protestant clergy in the US that belong to groups against non-church/state separation. Yes, many serial killers pick whores as victims. This is disgusting. Actually, any murder except in a just war and/or true self-defense is disgusting. But, the whole serial killer thing has more things to it than JUST anti-sex religious stuff. I’m not saying that’s never a factor (it IS in SOME cases), but there’s usually a lot more factors in most murder cases.
Shouldn’t everyone have the right to get sex? I say YES and I hate this ###*** world system with all its ###*** that makes the issue complicated.
Everyone has the right to get sex if he can fairly convince someone else to give it to him. Rights are individual, not collective; each person has rights over himself, but not over anyone else. So everyone has the right to masturbate, but not to force himself sexually on someone else.
When I said “everyone” that didn’t mean TRUE child molesters and rapists. Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough.
great post Momma, but I must disagree with your premise on this:
“Man is a predatory animal in whom the killer instinct is as natural as the sexual impulse. An infant, given the power to do so, would destroy anyone who displeased him; it is only through maturation and socialization that we learn to curb our murderous impulses”
Sexual instinct is completely instinctual but I don’t think man is motivated by any killer instinct or is necessarily predatory. Instead, man is motivated by self-interest, and his tool for it’s achievement is his conscious mind.
Most humans have a “conscience” that would trouble them if they were to murder another human and I think conscience comes from development of the conscious mind, not from social influence. It is innate. The higher an animal’s consciousness, the more developed is his conscience.
True sociopaths, those with no conscience, have something wrong with their brains. They are physiologically different from other humans.
To operate from the premise that man’s natural instinct is to destroy and that it is curbed by socialization is epistemologically incorrect. It is saying that man’s conscious mind isn’t capable of discerning good (that which forewords life) from evil (that which destroys life) on it’s own.. It is to assume that man and therefore the world are basically malevolent – that suffering is the norm. It’s not.
Or perhaps I’m simply an idealist 🙂
I agree that part of self-control is innate; that’s why I wrote “…it is only through maturation and socialization that we learn to curb our murderous impulses” rather than simply crediting socialization. After all, even subhuman animals don’t go around murdering their own kind without reason.
The sad fact is that prison time does not alter or prevent the sociopathic behavior of those who prey upon the most defenseless among us. Reverting to ad hominem remarks towards those who have been forced to accept the reality that incarceration does not deter acts of violence and it most often is a “finishing school”, does not alter the facts.. The concept that these murderers and beasts that prey upon the children,, the defenseless outliers in the society and those that are easily targeted are somehow changed by a tour in the prison system is a myth. ( That’s why they have the sexual predator lists to “warn” the citizens) Why, there are even attempts to chemically castrate some of these ( isn’t that so much more humane?) The thugs that prey upon prostitutes as serial murders do not fear the prison time. Thankfully most prosecutors are able to get life sentences that keep these beasts away from society. Some do get out and society is again at risk.
Nobody has found the perfect prevention tool yet. All we have learned is that a form of aversion therapy that is based on punishment that is painful, certain quick and publici seems to work best. I suggest that those who really want to learn about this pattern read the facts about Ted Bundy and then read the Jessica Lundsford story. The Jessica saga even includes how just how cruelly brutal John Couey really was. Not widely known is that the folks who lived with him in the trailer lied to the law enforcement officers who came looking for Jessica. They knew she was in a bag in a closet, alive, and lied to cover for that SOB.
If any of the readers know families of victims of these types of crimes, they can hear the real life stories of just how ineffective the “system” is about protecting those who need it most.
Bodies are being found it seems daily. Many of these are of children and women who have been declared ” missing” and some never reported at all. It goes on. Sometimes the murderer gets caught, more often than not the case stays open and the killer lives his life with no remorse or fear. Sending your child to school now involves risk assessments of local pedophiles. Daughters now are advised to take self defense classes. But little attention is paid to the efforts needed act as deterrents to the preying on women and children and most vulnerable.
Relying upon the criminal justice system to deter the acts of violence against the most vulnerable in our society is a misguided hope.
For those who don’t get caught no punishment matters, now does it? Whether you’re talking a $10 fine or flayed alive in the public square, it isn’t happening to the guy who isn’t caught. Anyhoo, I’m done with this. The recommendation that I read gory murder stories so that I’ll understand that these are really, really bad people* has convinced me that we are talking past each other.
Now, for prostitution, I think an appropriate punishment would be, um… nothing, actually. Shouldn’t be a crime in the first place.
* I already know that these really, really bad people and I don’t want them ever walking the streets again.
Dear Sailor B, to be fair, you know that at least a few MVS do benefit from reading true crime books, etc., after their tragedies. I’m 1 of those. I wanted as much information as I could especially from the other MVS. I think John COULD mean well when he suggests reading these books to learn from them.
Yes, I can see that. Still doesn’t help us understand each other in any way. He keeps telling me that these killers and child molesters are really, really bad (I know that), and I’m coming from the perspective that how we deal with criminals also says something about what kind of people we are, not just what kind of people they are. This view of mine is dismissed as “education and soft kisses” and another round of trying to convince me that no, these killers and child molesters are really, really, really bad. Well, I already know that.
So we might as well be speaking Greek and Swahili.
Dear John, if you don’t mind my asking, have you lost someone to violence?
I notice he never answered.
Reblogged this on SaneSurvivor.
The truth is that the alpha males want all the desireable (alpha) females to themselves, and the alpha females don’t want competition (“filthy whores”, “ugly tramps”, “promiscuous sluts”, i.e. beta females) getting the alpha males.
You know, animal level shit. It’s that simple.
Everything else is window dressing, trying to plaster 500 generations of “citification”, religion, morals and intellect over the top of 12000 generations of instinctive tribal behaviour.
“If you’re not one of the Elite, you’re basically fucked, here’s the scraps, runt.”
Of course that offends us, at this point, while still being the raw truth. Anger, misery and rage results.
It’s suprising that the rate of *violent* rape isn’t worse with all the frustrated beta males about.
Luckily for us chaps, there’s the Maggies & Lauras of the world : both practicing sexual liberation and exchange, *shorn of any pretenses*.
While the Maggies are exchanging sex for money as a service, the Lauras are exchanging sex for the sheer joy of it (Common and Sacred prostitution respectively, if you will).
❤
We trick ourselves into our own cages with or without bars. The original sin and sinner starts a ripple effect. There by threw a process of transference continues the perpetuation. A self fulfilling doctrine based on a lie of self preservation. Leading one back to the cage he/she has created for themselves. I.e. the ostrich head in sand routine.