would you ever pay for sex?
- Thread starter ~*MEOW*~
- Start date
- Status
Mariposa
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2002
- Messages
- 24,741
I have no moral problem with paying for sex, but if I were looking for a fling, frankly I'd get more out of making a conquest at a bar (which would probably be a lot easier than finding a male escort who doesn't work with other men) and going shopping at Burberry for a pair of delicious stiletto boots on the morning after "walk of shame" than I would paying some guy an equivalent amount to fuck me.
To the people who've made negative comments on escorts: it's the oldest profession, it's never going to go away, and if you don't like it don't do business with them. I am friends with two escorts (one male who works with males and one female who works with males), both of whom have college degrees and are doing it because of the shitty economy and the scarcity of jobs in their respective fields. It is not a life either would have chosen given other options, but they make the best of it- and there are even some perks every once in awhile, including gifts, travel opportunities and sometimes, yes, even pleasure.
My boyfriend would probably kill me if he knew I posted this but he was with a prostitute a number of years ago. He liked the "no bullshit" approach and even became friends with her.
Bottom line: I wouldn't, but I have no problem with those who do.
To the people who've made negative comments on escorts: it's the oldest profession, it's never going to go away, and if you don't like it don't do business with them. I am friends with two escorts (one male who works with males and one female who works with males), both of whom have college degrees and are doing it because of the shitty economy and the scarcity of jobs in their respective fields. It is not a life either would have chosen given other options, but they make the best of it- and there are even some perks every once in awhile, including gifts, travel opportunities and sometimes, yes, even pleasure.
My boyfriend would probably kill me if he knew I posted this but he was with a prostitute a number of years ago. He liked the "no bullshit" approach and even became friends with her.
Bottom line: I wouldn't, but I have no problem with those who do.
Belisarius
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Dec 13, 1999
- Messages
- 11,029
Never; I have my pride. Besides, I know the whole time I'd be thinking, "She's faking it all, she really hates my guts, I'm just another trick, etc." Screw that.
psychoblast
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2000
- Messages
- 3,693
As a guy, you really can't help but pay for sex in one way or another. Girls rarely "give it away."
I mean, consider the word "slut." Basically, a "slut" is a girl who gives away sex TOO CHEAPLY. Which is why such women are also called "cheap." If a girl views being a "slut" as a negative, then she wants to make sure THE PRICE OF ADMISSION to her vagina is high enough so that people won't call her a slut. That price of admission can be money or it can be some less tangible hurdle she puts in the guy's way, such as feigned resistance she wants him to overcome or wear down, or a period of non-sexual fun she demands the guy show her before she'll lower herself to sexual fun, or whatever.
The point is, sluts do it free (or very cheaply), prostitutes charge something tangible, ordinary women charge something intangible. That's not an insult -- I recognize it is a product of evolution rather than a personality flaw.
And if you doubt me, how about considering for a moment why "slut" seems an odd, wrong-sounding word to apply to a man. It is because, genderally, we all understand that men inherently are willing to GIVE AWAY sex with no charge. So the question of whether a man gave away sex TOO CHEAPLY is simply inapplicable. Men give it away for free.
So, it is very ridiculous to try getting women and men together to discuss whether paying for sex is okay. Women and men inherently must come at this from completely different planets (mars and venus?) with respect to this issue. Since women are not confronted with an attraction to a gender that most always charges for sex in SOME way, that holds it out as some kind of carrot, some kind of compensation you get if you do the right tricks, if you play your cards right, if you show her a good time first, if you "show" you care in some tangible way... Since women live every day surrounded by an attraction to a gender that is ready to give her a freebie just for asking, no strings attached, women have a huge blind spot in their ability to comprehend where men are coming from when they pay for sex.
Also, to make it even more difficult, women and men look for different things from sex. For a man, it is the quenching of lust allowing him to focus his attention elsewhere. Horniness is a huge distraction that will not go away unless we do something about it. Orgasm quenches it completely, but temporarily. For a woman, orgasm does not necessarily quench horniness. If anything, she may feel MORE eager for physical closeness with a man after orgasm than before. Plus there's realistically a good chance she won't orgasm anyway from sex with a man, so she may just get some nice rubbing leaving her still horny. So the idea of sex with some one who will then disappear has some inherent flaws for what a women would want in a sex partner, while it fits very well for what a horny guy may be looking for.
And women are much more concerned than men with validation of their own attractiveness. A guy wants to look good for the goal of bagging a hot girl. A girl wants to look good because IT IS TIED CLOSELY TO THEIR SENSE OF SELF-ESTEEM -- much more than for a man. You can say it is a product of our culture, always showing images of perfect female beauty. I tend to thing those images are, themselves, a product of the evolution. Regardless, if you ask men and women whether they'd rather be attractive and have an ugly spouse, or vice versa, most women will choose the ugly spouse while most men would choose the attractive spouse. Women want to feel attractive much more than men. This affirmation of our own beauty is a minor part of what men get from sex. It's part of it, but a small part. For women, it is a much larger part. For women, they still have the other parts -- for example, part horniness or desire for the sheer physical pleasure of the act -- but it is clear to me that the affirmation of attractiveness is a much larger part of what women get from sex than men. For some women, it may even be the STRONGEST reason they go have sex (particularly if they have difficulty achieving orgasm).
Another part of the reason both men and women have sex is to progress the development of a relationship. To move towards something more serious ala marriage. Now we all know that this is much more often a big part of the female's reason for sex than the male's.
So we have men who primarily look for sex for a short-term physical thrill and to a much smaller degree look for sex as an affirmation of their beauty and as a method of progressing a longer relationship. And we have women who to some degree also look for sex as a short-term physical thrill, but who are driven much more by the second 2 reasons for sex than men are.
And then we have a prostitute. Obviously the prostitute cannot in any way shape or form assist in the latter 2 reasons. Sex with a prostitute cannot affirm your beauty. They are being paid to have sex. If anything, sex with a prostitute seems to do the opposite -- it would seem to confirm your unattractiveness (it really doesn't, but that is how women think). And obviously sex with a prostitute is not a means to progress to some higher level of emotional intimacy that can help progress a longer relationship.
So then you ask women and men if they would pay for sex and all the women say "No way, why would anyone do that? They must be sick, I pity them." And men say, "No," because they don't want to offend the majority of women who they want to sleep with who will think them unfit for copulation if they have been with a prostitute or if they even find the idea inoffensive.
I mean, we all can see that on some level people could associate paying for sex with being physicall unattractive. The reasoning would be, "If they were attractive and confident, they could find sex for free." Well, even if guys are not as hung up on their own looks as women, they still don't want to be seen as ugly or insecure or inept at the art of seduction, so they will generally deny going to prostitutes, even to other men.
But the truth is, there really are not that many reasonably attractive women out looking for no-strings sex on any particular evening. I've heard women deny this, try to convince me the bars are full of such women. Invariably they resort to an anecdote about themselves or girlfriends who, on this or that occassion or in this or that period of their life, occassionally went out looking for a one night stand. But do the math. If the average woman is only SOMETIMES out looking for no-strings sex, and if most men are ALWAYS out looking for it, then you are going to have a much smaller supply than demand. If a woman says that 10% of the time she is at a club she is looking for no-strings sex, then you can roughly estimate that 10% of the women in a club are looking for no-strings sex. And if 100% of the men are, and if you already have more men than women at the club, you can see you have a ton of men trying for a handful of women. Now weed out the less attractive ones, and what's left? And from those left, you probably STILL have closet prostitutes...girls who THINK they are looking for sex, but really they are holding out for the guy who looks rich or who might be able to offer them a line of coke...you know, those tight, tan, materialistc party girls who think they are sluts when they are really closet prostitutes.
And speaking of not knowing what you are, sometimes a girl may totally think she's into no-strings sex with a guy she meets...they go have sex and she gets emotional. She can't help it, I'm not blaming her. But the point is then she might think, "Maybe I do want to see him again, maybe I do want him to call me." Now you have that drama to deal with, hurting her feelings.
More often, though, because it really is difficult to be the guy who ends up taking home the hot, slutty girl looking for no-strings sex who is not a closet prostitute, guys generally only have 2 other choices for sexual relief -- date and start a relationship so you can satisfy your lust or go see a prostitute. And sometimes it may just seem cheaper and easier (not to mention quicker) to find a prostitute.
I mean, for guys, the main deterrent on soliciting sex is not (or should not be) the stigma, what it says about their attractiveness or their skill at seduction, but rather the (1) girl's attractiveness, (2) cost, (3) health risks, and (4) other risks.
Just because a girl is attractive, does not mean she is hot. Through my last job (law-related) I gained some knowledge of this and there is a lot of bait & switch (particularly here in Vegas). You have escort magazines with models' pictures and guys call thinking that girl is who they will get, but it is some old, saggy crack addict who shows up at the door. I mean, I'd estimate that for a truly beautiful woman, like a model or something, you'd pay over $300... That's about the same price as a weekend cruise from LA to Ensenada. Which brings up cost. For me, and for a lot of guys, the cruise seems more attractive. Or custom wheels. Or some new electronic crap. And of course we know of health risks. I mean, how much more risky can you get than sex with a prostitute? That's a serious deterrent these days -- the one that pops first into my mind. Even with a condom, you've got to feel kind of nervous about hitting that. And then there are the vague, other risks. I mean, you are associating with a known criminal engaging in criminal activity...will she pull out a knife or gun and rob you? Will her pimp show up and beat you up and rob you, or even kill you? Will cops burst in and arrest you? Will she try to blackmail you? You can think up lots of scary scenarios when you go down that path. Even on a lesser note, will you notice after she left your place that you have various small valuable stuff missing?
So, yeah, I don't go to prostitutes because right now I have some one in my life so that pent-up horniness is not an issue. But if I didn't have her, I probably would still not go to prostitutes for the above 4 reasons (mostly the last 2). But my avoidance would certainly NOT be based on the idea that going to a prostitute signifies a guy is an ugly loser who cannot score with women. Sorry, but even attractive, witty and successful guys have trouble scoring with women outside the boundaries of some kind of dating relationship because of simple statistics of supply and demand.
Anyway, to answer the original question, if the 4 problem issues I identified were dealt with, and I was single and horny and not looking for a relationship and not looking for sex as a form of affirmation of my own attractiveness, I would pay for sex.
But mainly I think there is a fundamental flaw in men and women acting like they have a common perception of this issue, like their is some objectively "right" perspective on the issue. Really, the best you can do is try to see both perspectives (or all perspectives, if there are more than 2).
Lastly, I would point out that women generally may resent the idea of a prostitute because men who pay for sex are generally not worried about pleasing the hooker. So they can be totally selfish. And, basically, the man winds up having another sex partner without gaining any knowledge on how to please a woman. There is already tension when men and women get together as far as how different their "number" of prior lovers is. Women usually have less and may be touchy if a guy has had too many more than them. But they may accept the larger number -- even appreciate it -- to the extent it means their man is that much better at pleasing women. More lovers make a better love-maker, right? Well...not if the lover was a prostitute. So, in a way, women may get some advantage from a society where men are forced to make love only to women they do not pay, so that the men will have to come into the experience with concern for pleasing the woman. That way, a man's prior sexual affairs are all a form of training for him. The bottom line is that the availability of prostitutes to men is counterproductive to generally improving a man's skill at love-making as a function of the number of sex partners he's had. This is a rather complicated idea, but I think it may have some validity at the subconscious level. At the very least, it shows how women have a vested interest in stopping men from going to prostitutes, how it is selfishly tied to their own interests (note I'm not saying women are more selfish than men).
~psychoblast~
I mean, consider the word "slut." Basically, a "slut" is a girl who gives away sex TOO CHEAPLY. Which is why such women are also called "cheap." If a girl views being a "slut" as a negative, then she wants to make sure THE PRICE OF ADMISSION to her vagina is high enough so that people won't call her a slut. That price of admission can be money or it can be some less tangible hurdle she puts in the guy's way, such as feigned resistance she wants him to overcome or wear down, or a period of non-sexual fun she demands the guy show her before she'll lower herself to sexual fun, or whatever.
The point is, sluts do it free (or very cheaply), prostitutes charge something tangible, ordinary women charge something intangible. That's not an insult -- I recognize it is a product of evolution rather than a personality flaw.
And if you doubt me, how about considering for a moment why "slut" seems an odd, wrong-sounding word to apply to a man. It is because, genderally, we all understand that men inherently are willing to GIVE AWAY sex with no charge. So the question of whether a man gave away sex TOO CHEAPLY is simply inapplicable. Men give it away for free.
So, it is very ridiculous to try getting women and men together to discuss whether paying for sex is okay. Women and men inherently must come at this from completely different planets (mars and venus?) with respect to this issue. Since women are not confronted with an attraction to a gender that most always charges for sex in SOME way, that holds it out as some kind of carrot, some kind of compensation you get if you do the right tricks, if you play your cards right, if you show her a good time first, if you "show" you care in some tangible way... Since women live every day surrounded by an attraction to a gender that is ready to give her a freebie just for asking, no strings attached, women have a huge blind spot in their ability to comprehend where men are coming from when they pay for sex.
Also, to make it even more difficult, women and men look for different things from sex. For a man, it is the quenching of lust allowing him to focus his attention elsewhere. Horniness is a huge distraction that will not go away unless we do something about it. Orgasm quenches it completely, but temporarily. For a woman, orgasm does not necessarily quench horniness. If anything, she may feel MORE eager for physical closeness with a man after orgasm than before. Plus there's realistically a good chance she won't orgasm anyway from sex with a man, so she may just get some nice rubbing leaving her still horny. So the idea of sex with some one who will then disappear has some inherent flaws for what a women would want in a sex partner, while it fits very well for what a horny guy may be looking for.
And women are much more concerned than men with validation of their own attractiveness. A guy wants to look good for the goal of bagging a hot girl. A girl wants to look good because IT IS TIED CLOSELY TO THEIR SENSE OF SELF-ESTEEM -- much more than for a man. You can say it is a product of our culture, always showing images of perfect female beauty. I tend to thing those images are, themselves, a product of the evolution. Regardless, if you ask men and women whether they'd rather be attractive and have an ugly spouse, or vice versa, most women will choose the ugly spouse while most men would choose the attractive spouse. Women want to feel attractive much more than men. This affirmation of our own beauty is a minor part of what men get from sex. It's part of it, but a small part. For women, it is a much larger part. For women, they still have the other parts -- for example, part horniness or desire for the sheer physical pleasure of the act -- but it is clear to me that the affirmation of attractiveness is a much larger part of what women get from sex than men. For some women, it may even be the STRONGEST reason they go have sex (particularly if they have difficulty achieving orgasm).
Another part of the reason both men and women have sex is to progress the development of a relationship. To move towards something more serious ala marriage. Now we all know that this is much more often a big part of the female's reason for sex than the male's.
So we have men who primarily look for sex for a short-term physical thrill and to a much smaller degree look for sex as an affirmation of their beauty and as a method of progressing a longer relationship. And we have women who to some degree also look for sex as a short-term physical thrill, but who are driven much more by the second 2 reasons for sex than men are.
And then we have a prostitute. Obviously the prostitute cannot in any way shape or form assist in the latter 2 reasons. Sex with a prostitute cannot affirm your beauty. They are being paid to have sex. If anything, sex with a prostitute seems to do the opposite -- it would seem to confirm your unattractiveness (it really doesn't, but that is how women think). And obviously sex with a prostitute is not a means to progress to some higher level of emotional intimacy that can help progress a longer relationship.
So then you ask women and men if they would pay for sex and all the women say "No way, why would anyone do that? They must be sick, I pity them." And men say, "No," because they don't want to offend the majority of women who they want to sleep with who will think them unfit for copulation if they have been with a prostitute or if they even find the idea inoffensive.
I mean, we all can see that on some level people could associate paying for sex with being physicall unattractive. The reasoning would be, "If they were attractive and confident, they could find sex for free." Well, even if guys are not as hung up on their own looks as women, they still don't want to be seen as ugly or insecure or inept at the art of seduction, so they will generally deny going to prostitutes, even to other men.
But the truth is, there really are not that many reasonably attractive women out looking for no-strings sex on any particular evening. I've heard women deny this, try to convince me the bars are full of such women. Invariably they resort to an anecdote about themselves or girlfriends who, on this or that occassion or in this or that period of their life, occassionally went out looking for a one night stand. But do the math. If the average woman is only SOMETIMES out looking for no-strings sex, and if most men are ALWAYS out looking for it, then you are going to have a much smaller supply than demand. If a woman says that 10% of the time she is at a club she is looking for no-strings sex, then you can roughly estimate that 10% of the women in a club are looking for no-strings sex. And if 100% of the men are, and if you already have more men than women at the club, you can see you have a ton of men trying for a handful of women. Now weed out the less attractive ones, and what's left? And from those left, you probably STILL have closet prostitutes...girls who THINK they are looking for sex, but really they are holding out for the guy who looks rich or who might be able to offer them a line of coke...you know, those tight, tan, materialistc party girls who think they are sluts when they are really closet prostitutes.
And speaking of not knowing what you are, sometimes a girl may totally think she's into no-strings sex with a guy she meets...they go have sex and she gets emotional. She can't help it, I'm not blaming her. But the point is then she might think, "Maybe I do want to see him again, maybe I do want him to call me." Now you have that drama to deal with, hurting her feelings.
More often, though, because it really is difficult to be the guy who ends up taking home the hot, slutty girl looking for no-strings sex who is not a closet prostitute, guys generally only have 2 other choices for sexual relief -- date and start a relationship so you can satisfy your lust or go see a prostitute. And sometimes it may just seem cheaper and easier (not to mention quicker) to find a prostitute.
I mean, for guys, the main deterrent on soliciting sex is not (or should not be) the stigma, what it says about their attractiveness or their skill at seduction, but rather the (1) girl's attractiveness, (2) cost, (3) health risks, and (4) other risks.
Just because a girl is attractive, does not mean she is hot. Through my last job (law-related) I gained some knowledge of this and there is a lot of bait & switch (particularly here in Vegas). You have escort magazines with models' pictures and guys call thinking that girl is who they will get, but it is some old, saggy crack addict who shows up at the door. I mean, I'd estimate that for a truly beautiful woman, like a model or something, you'd pay over $300... That's about the same price as a weekend cruise from LA to Ensenada. Which brings up cost. For me, and for a lot of guys, the cruise seems more attractive. Or custom wheels. Or some new electronic crap. And of course we know of health risks. I mean, how much more risky can you get than sex with a prostitute? That's a serious deterrent these days -- the one that pops first into my mind. Even with a condom, you've got to feel kind of nervous about hitting that. And then there are the vague, other risks. I mean, you are associating with a known criminal engaging in criminal activity...will she pull out a knife or gun and rob you? Will her pimp show up and beat you up and rob you, or even kill you? Will cops burst in and arrest you? Will she try to blackmail you? You can think up lots of scary scenarios when you go down that path. Even on a lesser note, will you notice after she left your place that you have various small valuable stuff missing?
So, yeah, I don't go to prostitutes because right now I have some one in my life so that pent-up horniness is not an issue. But if I didn't have her, I probably would still not go to prostitutes for the above 4 reasons (mostly the last 2). But my avoidance would certainly NOT be based on the idea that going to a prostitute signifies a guy is an ugly loser who cannot score with women. Sorry, but even attractive, witty and successful guys have trouble scoring with women outside the boundaries of some kind of dating relationship because of simple statistics of supply and demand.
Anyway, to answer the original question, if the 4 problem issues I identified were dealt with, and I was single and horny and not looking for a relationship and not looking for sex as a form of affirmation of my own attractiveness, I would pay for sex.
But mainly I think there is a fundamental flaw in men and women acting like they have a common perception of this issue, like their is some objectively "right" perspective on the issue. Really, the best you can do is try to see both perspectives (or all perspectives, if there are more than 2).
Lastly, I would point out that women generally may resent the idea of a prostitute because men who pay for sex are generally not worried about pleasing the hooker. So they can be totally selfish. And, basically, the man winds up having another sex partner without gaining any knowledge on how to please a woman. There is already tension when men and women get together as far as how different their "number" of prior lovers is. Women usually have less and may be touchy if a guy has had too many more than them. But they may accept the larger number -- even appreciate it -- to the extent it means their man is that much better at pleasing women. More lovers make a better love-maker, right? Well...not if the lover was a prostitute. So, in a way, women may get some advantage from a society where men are forced to make love only to women they do not pay, so that the men will have to come into the experience with concern for pleasing the woman. That way, a man's prior sexual affairs are all a form of training for him. The bottom line is that the availability of prostitutes to men is counterproductive to generally improving a man's skill at love-making as a function of the number of sex partners he's had. This is a rather complicated idea, but I think it may have some validity at the subconscious level. At the very least, it shows how women have a vested interest in stopping men from going to prostitutes, how it is selfishly tied to their own interests (note I'm not saying women are more selfish than men).
~psychoblast~
Mysticalis
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2000
- Messages
- 6,544
~*MEOW*~ said:
No, I wouldn't. It'd feel cheap and ungratifying for me due to the simple fact that there isn't a shred of intimacy involved, just an exchange of money and bodily fluids.
As for the second question, it's not my place to judge another person's sexual habits, so long as they're safe and satisfied.
I have nothing against prostitution. It's just not my cup of tea.
Psychonaut777
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2002
- Messages
- 2,362
I wouldn't pay for sex for the same reasons as Belisarius. Also because I am highly concious of disease, specifically STDs and I would just not be able to live with myself for putting myself in a potentially life threatening situation for something as shallow as a quick fuck. Not to mention its illegal here.
Last edited:
PsychicSpy
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2004
- Messages
- 12
Most of the people posting here...
Don't appear to have much experience with Paid Sex...
And therefore have an unrealistic view.
It's all in the way you go about it.
If you go about it intelligently...
It can be fabulous...
While if you are inexperienced...
It can be extremely degrading.
Here's how you do it right...
At a cost of between $150-$250...
For one hour at your place.
(1) Go to a major escort review site.
(2) Find 2 or 3 girls you like...
In terms of body type, personality, and services offered.
(3) Always try to get girls "new to the business"...
Like "normal" university students trying it out...
As opposed to jaded hardcore pros.
(3) Call a reputable agency... and have her delivered to your place.
(4) Treat it as you would a normal date...
Make atmosphere as romantic as possible, etc
(5) Host her... and talk to her... for 15 minutes... and be charming.
(6) Then move things to bedroom... and enjoy the sexual experience.
(7) Repeat with girls you have chemistry with.
If you become good at this...
It's like nothing you would imagine "prostitution" to be.
Most dating is a game...
And often very manipulative.
This kind of "date" is refreshing...
Because it's totally honest and transparent.
There are no agendas.
This is also infintely better than using porn...
Which is a HUGE addiction problem...
And much more corrosive and degrading...
Than spending an hour with an interesting young lady.
And a lot of people...
Can afford to spend... oh... $10,000/year on this.
And prostitutes, per se...
Are not a high risk group for HIV.
Drug addicts and gay men are.
Your much more likely to catch an STD...
From some slut in a bar...
Than from a high class hooker.
%) %) %)
Don't appear to have much experience with Paid Sex...
And therefore have an unrealistic view.
It's all in the way you go about it.
If you go about it intelligently...
It can be fabulous...
While if you are inexperienced...
It can be extremely degrading.
Here's how you do it right...
At a cost of between $150-$250...
For one hour at your place.
(1) Go to a major escort review site.
(2) Find 2 or 3 girls you like...
In terms of body type, personality, and services offered.
(3) Always try to get girls "new to the business"...
Like "normal" university students trying it out...
As opposed to jaded hardcore pros.
(3) Call a reputable agency... and have her delivered to your place.
(4) Treat it as you would a normal date...
Make atmosphere as romantic as possible, etc
(5) Host her... and talk to her... for 15 minutes... and be charming.
(6) Then move things to bedroom... and enjoy the sexual experience.
(7) Repeat with girls you have chemistry with.
If you become good at this...
It's like nothing you would imagine "prostitution" to be.
Most dating is a game...
And often very manipulative.
This kind of "date" is refreshing...
Because it's totally honest and transparent.
There are no agendas.
This is also infintely better than using porn...
Which is a HUGE addiction problem...
And much more corrosive and degrading...
Than spending an hour with an interesting young lady.
And a lot of people...
Can afford to spend... oh... $10,000/year on this.
And prostitutes, per se...
Are not a high risk group for HIV.
Drug addicts and gay men are.
Your much more likely to catch an STD...
From some slut in a bar...
Than from a high class hooker.
%) %) %)
MaliceNwunderland
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2003
- Messages
- 2,394
No, not with crackwhores/streetwalkers. I'd only want a really high priced prostitute. Like if I won the lottery I'd go to the Bunny Ranch and get it on with a Playboy bunny or a Laker girl or something.
The physical act of busting a nut isn't that big of a deal for me. I'm satisfied sexually with my hand or the bevy of "ordinary"
girls out in the world. I'd only hire a prostitute under very special circumstances.
The physical act of busting a nut isn't that big of a deal for me. I'm satisfied sexually with my hand or the bevy of "ordinary"
girls out in the world. I'd only hire a prostitute under very special circumstances.
dj2tall_wunderboicv2
Bluelighter
- Joined
- May 18, 2004
- Messages
- 1,833
nope wouldnt pay for sex, spend to much money buying shoes!!
FestiveCheez
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2003
- Messages
- 3,244
I gave a speech on why I think prostitution should be legal, but as for myself being able to go through with it...I won't know until I'm in Amsterdam, money in hand, will I?
quiet roar
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2003
- Messages
- 4,990
If I was single and horny, yes.
Why? Because I would be single and horny.
Why? Because I would be single and horny.
Molybdenum
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2003
- Messages
- 542
No. It's expensive and it's risky. But the main thing that gets to me is the look in the eyes of hardened prostitutes. PsychicSpy recommends getting people new to the game. That's because the game tears people apart.
That said, I think it should be regulated and legal. It's certainly more dangerous to have streetwalkers than it would be if everything ran through bunny ranches or whatever.
That said, I think it should be regulated and legal. It's certainly more dangerous to have streetwalkers than it would be if everything ran through bunny ranches or whatever.
You're so money
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 10
~*MEOW*~ said:
MEOW, I imagine you're asking this question for a particular reason, perhaps the third part of your question hints at this. Don't feel it's my place to say how you might feel, were you to find out that someone you cared for had done what you suggest. But being Bluelighters, I'm sure we'd empathise with you, if that's what you wanted. Personally, if I found out that my SO had recently felt a need to avail themselves of such services, I'm sure I'd feel a bit saddened or upset by it. I couldn't help but wonder why they couldn't talk to me about what it was they had needed, what aspect of our relationship wasn't fulfilling some need they had.
As to the broader topic, the question might gain fresh value were I to suggest opening it up by rephrasing it this way:
>> What if all sex was free? <<
Back in October 2002, psychoblast covered this ground when he raised the idea of a robot.
Let's fast forward to the year 2096. Tyrell Corp unveils the latest model in a long line. Blade Runner has finally come true, but even more so. Finally, after decades of iterations, we have robots that are complete replicas of humans for the purposes they are intended.
To honour the flavour of the argument I'm putting forward here, I mean that these robots are COMPLETE replicas. For $SumBucks, you can have a robot woman (or man), authentic in every single way (except that he's/she's manufactured), totally programmed for your intimate and soul-deep pleasure, and has none of the downsides that real human partners often involve when in relationships. A veritable Turing machine, indistinguishable by test from a 'real' man/woman (as your preference may be), except in that they exist only to please you.
Endless pleasure at no 'emotional cost' is finally possible. Now, you finally have to face an awful decision: which do you want, a real person, or a hassle free variety instead?
Can a true Bluelighter resist the ultimate temptation of a feeling of 'cost'-free bliss, even if achieved by 'artificial' means?
- Status