3 ms·
I found this very interesting. The thing that I can't stop thinking about is: Where is the line between prostitution and a relationship? I'm not talking about
by cool-RR 18y ago
I found this very interesting.
The thing that I can't stop thinking about is: Where is the line between prostitution and a relationship? I'm not talking about the legal sense; I don't find that interesting at all. I'm talking about the moral sense.
For example, if I paid a woman for sex right now, I would feel bad about it. This would be the case even if she was not whorish at all, even if it was the first time she ever had sex for money. I would feel that it's fake and that she doesn't really "accept" me.
On the other hand, I'd be completely okay with supporting a wife financially for the rest of our lives.
It makes sense that the man gives money to a woman who mates with him. But I think that the uneasy feeling that you'd get if you'll pay directly for sex is a real problem. I think it's more than just an uneasy feeling that can be ignored--I think it signifies that something is wrong, but I can't put it into words exactly. Maybe one of you can?
I think that "Sam", the sugar daddy who is mentioned in page 5 of this article, boiled it down to a pretty good formula:
Sam is also more determined than most to try separating a sugar baby’s affection and the money she’s paid to provide it. In his arrangements, he says, he establishes a trust in the woman’s name that pays a monthly stipend of at least $5,000 for the length of their contract. If the woman decides to quit sleeping with him at any point, he may quit serving as adviser and pamperer, but the stipend continues regardless. “If I didn’t do that, then it’s like a leash I’m putting on somebody, and that seems really unfair,” he said. “Besides, then I’d never know what the relationship was really about.”
Any thoughts?
- radu_floricica 18y agoIt's the sex separation thing: men and women do stuff differently. Evolutionary speaking it's a very interesting and complicated game. I recommend "Why is sex fun?" by Jared Diamond for a crash course. Any short answer I'd give would be wrong in some way, so I'll just say once again: sexes are different. Don't make the mistake to think this is less important in modern times. It's not. It's just a bit more complicated.
- jimbokun 18y agoI find it somewhat pathetic that these are men looking for a prostitution service, then going to great lengths to psychologically justify to themselves that this is something other than prostitution.
- modoc 18y agoThey're looking for the convenience of a prostitute, without the hassle (logistical, legal) and the "worry" that might come with a normal prostitute (guilt, higher disease risk, whatever). I'm happily married, but I don't think calling these people "pathetic" is appropriate. Everyone's sexuality is different, and their own. Judging someone else like that doesn't seem right.
- hapless 18y agoIt's very simple: transactional sex is less pleasurable than a sexual relationship. It seems only natural that a market for a higher-end service than simple prostitution exists. These men could pay for sex, but they are willing to pay extra for the feeling that they are not paying for sex.
- neilk 18y agoIf you were in the hospital for an extended period, you could pay someone to sit and talk with you. But you couldn't pay them to do it spontaneously because they cared. You can pay someone for sex now. You can't pay someone to think about you all day and be consumed with anticipation just before you meet. You can pay someone to go out with you to a social occasion. You can't pay someone to share a knowing glance across the table when you have some shared observation of the behavior of a third party. When you know before you look that you're going to have this shared observation. And I'm not putting sex work down; it also has its place. It's just not the same as a relationship.