WTF is up with this "entitled to sex" meme?

Post Reply New Topic

Miners don't usually choose their work; that tends to be a default, "those are the jobs we have here," type of career. I would rather we not ever send anyone underground to dig up coal.

But my friend's son is a fisherman on the open seas, and it is quite dangerous, but he LOVES it. I've never heard anyone say they come alive servicing a complete stranger with their bodies, but I have heard people (no one said these dangerous jobs have to be done by men) say they come alive on a stormy sea.

You are the one assuming I was talking about men comparing to other dangerous jobs. I NEVER said I was. In college a whole bunch of my female friends did the trek to Alaska for the high paying summer jobs, all of which are dangerous. They were proud of themselves for facing their fears head on, and very happy counting their earnings upon return. They could never have gotten that confidence and emotional lift from prostitution.

Sorry, but to me you keep seeing things the way that allows you to justify your pre-existing assumptions, instead of the way they actually are.

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 17 Jun 2014, 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Decided to dig your "page 2" post up.

Basically, you aren't winning here. Layering this on top of your later arguments makes me think even less of them.

You simply decide the expert's arguments "ignore" certain things? Proof? Your personal world view and assumptions?

You know what? I probably spend 70% of the money in our household. Why? BECAUSE MY HUSBAND HATES SHOPPING. HATES HATES HATES HATES IT. You REALLY think I enjoyed taking my son shoe shopping as he whined about every shoe being wrong? Or that somehow that spending was for MY benefit? Or that when I am bumped 5 times out of an on-line order I shouldn't consider it a "duty" because, geez, it was on-line and so convenient (and, NO, I cannot shop on my bosses time from my work computer)? Really? Lots of men are like my husband, and in a marriage the duties tend to fall over to whoever minds them the least. I don't spend more on me than my husband spends on himself, not at all. But I do the holiday gift shopping (this requires a LOT of thought and searching), I plan and book the vacations (days and days of research), I buy 75% of the groceries, I choose the furniture (research, research and more research), I buy the children's clothing (whining kids shopping, or returns for what they don't like), and so on. Why? Because he does not want to do these things (he has tried, he hates them all). He selects and buys all our electronics and computers; that he likes doing, and does better than me.

I don't think I have ever stepped foot in a Walmart, btw, although I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. My husband is picky about his brands and sometimes that means any of three different grocery stores.

We both earn money, although yes he works more hours and earns more. By agreement. And he CHOOSE this life. I didn't trap him into marriage and kids. You write as if my husband should be considered my indentured slave, that he exists solely to satisfy my shopping whims (and he has never thought of me as someone there just to satisfy his sexual ones). Sorry, buster, but that is not the way marriage works. We both contribute everything we can to the partnership. We make choices together. I talked him out of the grander house, actually, fearing it would trap us too much financially. Because, right, it is always the wives strangling the family with fancy choices.

We also have several friends where the dad does not work full time, and the mom does. Simple choice there: the wife had the higher earning potential and enjoyed her career more. So, they did what partners do: let the duties fall to where they naturally wanted to go.

You are so off base referring to this all that it really is offensive

Eh, I just take them a little more seriously than most people and can't help but point out faulty reasoning, it's like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.



I can appreciate that, but what I haven't seen is anything supporting the idea that the majority of prostitutes are coerced, and my own reading suggests quite strongly that the perception is very inflated, and there are a lot of elements of moral panic to the way the entire topic is discussed.

Here is an example article, from the same author I posted earlier:
http://reason.com/archives/2014/01/26/t ... super-bowl



Is anyone arguing for underage prostitution? In fact, a major point in favor of legalization is that it would bring an at the moment completely underground market at least partially into the light, which would help prevent underage girls from falling into the industry; I'd liken it to the current situation with the pornography industry, which does not have much of an underage worker problem. You're also illustrating a bit of a Catch-22, as you don't want to "legitimize" an industry that you feel is preying upon young women, but as prohibition has failed, legitimizing may well be the best way to prevent said victimization.





Eh, he's not the best at analogies, but I tend to grade on the curve for non-literal communications on an AS site.



I've never argued that men are "owed" a supply of willing women, just that prohibiting prostitution helps no one and harms many, to say nothing of infantilizing all the participants.

I'm not so sure, I've had a few friends that had a very positive experience with stripping, both from the earnings and from the power of desire that they wielded through their performances, and I don't see why a similar dynamic could not occur in prostitution if we were not so stigmatized against it.

Holy dystopian future scenarios, Batman!

Dox, I'm actually neutral on legalization. I just didn't like the connections NobodyKnows was trying to draw. He sees the industry far too rosily, IMHO. There are dark elements and his suggestion to legalize had nothing to do with trying to reduce the risks to women and control inappropriate exposure. Increasing safety for the women involved would be the only I would consider legalizing, if it would truly help.

You should really tone down your accusations. Where did I say that it was 'rosy?'

I know a few people who work as escorts, and we've talked about the risks. Some carry a Taser. Two of the women that I know are better shots with pistols than I am. Some have big dogs. They usually screen new clients.



If I weren't so desensitized to this kind of petty crap-throwing, I'd be ticked at you for making that accusation.

I said earlier that women who escort (including friends of mine) are at a higher risk because "(1) they tend to have lots of cash lying around, and (2) they're afraid of reporting crimes against them because they would have to tell the authorities what they were doing. If they were in a legal business, they would (a) know the names of their customers, (b) have the option of electronic payment, and (c) have no fear of dialing 911."

Those are all things that they've told me. How in the heck does that show a lack of concern for women who choose that line of work? It's doesn't.

Can you really not rebut someone without stooping to word-twisting, name-calling and attacking straw men with your opponent's name pasted on them?

In a way I might Dissagree if it was to be forced and made mandatory, nobody would want to have sex ever and the population would drop! Those who would oppose would get a death sentence! Imagine a global population of forced asexuality! Nobody would be raped, everyone would be able to concentrate on work 24/7 and nobody would want to have sex ever and nobody would be sexually harrassed!

Why not just medicate all males from time of pubescence with something that turns off their sex drive? think of all the benefits!

Less aggressive males.
Woman would no longer need to worry of rape.
Woman would no longer have to dance at night clubs for men.
Woman would no longer be treated as sex objects.
No need for prostitution.
No more porn.
No more unwanted males hitting on the women.
No more, or less need for abortions,
No more child molestation.
Males would take an honest interest in women for their minds and personality's.
No more demeaning beauty pageants.
No more having to hide their bodies or faces.
No more mind games to get women into bed.
No more frustrated and horny lonely men.
Students would study more and the work force would focus more on getting their jobs done.
No more unwanted teen pregnancies.
No more over crowded prisons because of sex offenders.
More equality in the work place, and less sexual harassment.
No more males going off on the deep end and trying to mass murder everyone because of sexual frustrations.
Populations would drop from not having unwanted children so there would be more work to go around. and more food for a starving world.

And I am sure much much more, a lot more pro's then con's

Everything a woman can want, I see nothing wrong with that.
And when a woman does pick a man to be with he can either stop taking the medications or just take some Viagra.

Its been a mans world long enough and we pretty much screwed it up, let the women take over for a change. Man can not have child or family without woman, they are the gate keepers. let them have it all.

Last edited by AspergianMutantt on 18 Jun 2014, 2:28 am, edited 4 times in total.

I apologize if I misread what you were trying to say and that you feel I responded inappropriately.

I am way too distracted to express my thoughts clearly and accurately and I should know better than to post when I'm like that. But sometimes I find it engaging to try ...

Anyway. I'm not interested in debating it any further. I know where I am coming from but none of this directly affects my life at the moment.

But then the tumblr fems will complain they can't find their "bad boy."