Ponzoli Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 I have a friend. His name is "Gus" He is 26 years old, single, and has said that he has regularly paid for sex with various escorts over the past 3 years. He tells me that it is much easier for him to pay an attractive woman for her time rather than approaching and asking attractive woman out. He says that he has accepted the fact that he is not physically attractive, and that he enjoys the opportunity which these escorts afford him. He says that they all come from reputable escort services and that they are all extremely attractive. My questions are these, and please do respond to them. Please. Gus has been called everything from a "pervert" to a "pathetic loser" because he pays for sex. Why do woman react this way or feel this way about men who regularly pay for sex? Why are they so looked down upon? It seems to me he isn't hurting anyone, it is all consensual, and he seems to be happy with the arrangement. What is so wrong about that? Please help. Thanks!
Trialbyfire Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 I'm anti-hooker for a number of reasons. Disease, the use of their bodies in such a demeaning fashion for cash, disgusts me. When a man consorts with this type of lowlife, I don't see him as any better than the hooker. If anything, he's worse. Without the Johns, there would be no hookers.
lost4ever Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 IMO it's a social stigma forced to keep the masses in check...don't you know you are only to have sex to make babies or because you really love someone--geez:rolleyes: seriously, i wouldn't care as long as I didn't have to worry about any of the crap he might bring home....
woodsfield Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 i can't say that i am TOTALLY anti-hooker, but i would look down upon someone who only "tried" to get laid in this fashion. without getting too political, i've always thought it was a waste of time trying to inforce this. legalize it, regulate it and TAX THE HELL out of it. make money instead of wasting money. like TBF said, without nasty Johns and there'd be no scanks. i don't condone it, but i damn sure never would do it....as for Gus, he is a little pathetic and perverted, IMO.
kymberann Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Sex shouldn't have to be something that is "bought". I think it degrades the act. When you pay for sex it isn't consentual, it is then a business transaction for services rendered and you get what you paid for. I am not saying whether it is right or wrong. People do what they have to do. When it comes in to question is whether the behavior is pervasive enough that all other relationships are being impacted. Morals aside sex is sex that brings physical gratification. For me though when the relationship is strong on an emotional level then the sex is stronger and vice versa.
Fancee Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Gus is alright, but he needs to shush his mouth. Lots of men do this. Probably a lot more have tried this. But I know not one that has admitted to it. Thats his problem- talking about his private business that no really cares to here.
Trialbyfire Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Even worse than an honest John, a John who lies/lies by omission about it. Ick.
Darkzen Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 I've had dealings with prostitutes (no, I never used their services). When in Bosnia on deployment, I went on pass to Budapest for 4 days. The second I got off the bus at the hotel, guys were passing out fliers to all the GIs for two different whore houses. My battle buddy wanted to go and I had to go with him. The whole thing was pretty disgusting IMHO... I couldn't fathom how many different GIs were up inside these girls (besides, I had a GF at the time and feel cheating is utterly wrong). Over all, prostitution serves a purpose. I'm sure if guys had the power in the game of sex, women would be the ones paying for sex. It doesn't hurt anyone, disease spreads from stupid people... not prostitution. If your friend is cool with it, I don't see a problem with his choice. I may not agree with prostitution for myself, but it's not my place to hold it against someone (unless of course it personally affects my life). So if this guy is single and not hurting anyone, why should anyone care?
Kerewin Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Woman here. I don't think your friend is doing anything wrong Illegal, yes, but I think that's silly anyway law--most of us sell our souls for our jobs, yet our bodies are more sacred? sheesh. To suggest that it degrades sex---well I don't get that either. For those who've ONLY had sex when they're in love and in a loving mood towards their partner, maybe. For the rest (most) of us--who've had sex at times because we're horny, lonely, want to feel wanted, angry, etc.--I don't know why having it because you're being paid is any different. If your friend is genuinely happy--I'd say he's doing no harm. (So long as he's not patronizing underage/ otherwise oppressed--pimped out--prostitutes) If he's not happy and just "settling", then the only harm I'd say he's doing is to himself.
jcster Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 I believe that prostitution should be legal, just think of all the problems it would solve! I don't think there's anything wrong with what your friend is doing, but I do wonder what made him give up on relationships at such a young age! 23 is far too young to decide he's too "ugly" and just give up.
wizer Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Gus is a loser because he has to pay for something that most guys can get for free. He risks disease, incarceration, and ridicule. He rationalizes his behavior using twisted logic. Who thinks the OP is "Gus"? (besides me, of course)
Kamille Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 I agree that prostitution should be legal, this to protect sex-workers. The problem I do see with prostitution is that, in my city at least, most prostitutes don't so much choose to be prostitutes as become prostitutes out of necessity, most often because of drug addiction. Not only that, but I worked for awhile in a health care facility and most sex-workers were stuck in a downward spiral of addiction and depression. So it's delusional to think that because the house is of good reputation, the girls within are of good quality. I also believe that legalizing prostitution could enable more intervention, which is perhaps not what all sex-workers would want, but it might have an impact on their quality of life, their "working conditions" and their access to health care and disease prevention.
allina Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 I don't take issue with prostitution but I would look down on a guy for regularly using them. I think it's mostly because I feel like a guy has such low self esteem that he feels he can only get sex this way it's unattractive to me. Plus what woman wants a man thats been through a ton hookers?
muse27 Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 though there is a thin line between a prostitute and an escort, i dont see a problem with your friend 'gus'. if he wants the company of an attractive female then by all means..enjoy. he knows he's paying for a service, so as long as he's aware to becareful about himself physically AND mentally (becareful when falling for someone youre paying) then its beneficial both ways. many men do it for lots of different reasons. even affluent men who are attractive do it. some dont want to deal with the drama that comes with a regular relationship. some have lots of money and know their looks alone wont get them the eyecandy they want. lets not forget that sex can be just a carnal act of pleasure seeking as well as a delicate melding of bodies.
andersks Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 It sounds to me like Gus has very low self-esteem if he is so intimidated by approaching women that he'll only pay women to pretend they are interested. In my opinion, gus is not happy. He is just prolonging the vicious cycle of feeling rejected and unworthy of a women's love. He probably already feels "pathetic" and this could be what drives him to pay for a women's false love. It breaks my heart to think about how he is just reinforcing this feeling by his actions. Gus is pretty much self-medicating by buying sex. This is supposed to make him feel better but he'll actually always need more because he'll never feel better until he feels loved. I think gus needs to face his fears and try to approach women again. If he doesn't he is fulfilling his own prophesy of rejection. Gus, you will only find someone to love if you are looking and making an effort.
Darkzen Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Actually I believe "Gus" doesn't have low self-esteem, as much as he has too high of standards and isn't willing to settle for less. Regardless of how ugly he is, he can find a woman... he doesn't want just any woman though, he wants attractive ones. Another good point brought up was the lack of drama from an escort. No games, no compromises, no commitments, no settling, etc... women aren't the easiest thing for men to handle (and vice versa). Although, there's better avenues IMHO. "Gus" should go find himself a mail-order bride and cut down on his health risks. If it's a purely business arrangement, he gets all the benefits of an escort... but doesn't have to deal with risks of sleeping around and it's probably cheaper in the long run. It would also remove the shadier side of prostitution (no pimp, the prostitute doesn't have to sleep around, etc...).
Author Ponzoli Posted October 11, 2007 Author Posted October 11, 2007 Darkzen, regarding the lack of drama, etc. in transactional nature of the arrangement. I had not thought about that before.
Trialbyfire Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 I hate to break the news to you gents but the majority of hookers aren't all that attractive, considering what the lifestyle choice entails...
Author Ponzoli Posted October 12, 2007 Author Posted October 12, 2007 Trial by fire, thanks for your thoughtful responses, I appreciate them. You do reaise some good points. Could you maybe explain what you meant by your comment below? I was just curious. Thanks again for your input. I hate to break the news to you gents but the majority of hookers aren't all that attractive, considering what the lifestyle choice entails...
Trialbyfire Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 Living la vida loca has its issues, in that many of these women are drug addicts and are also governed with an iron fist by pimps and assorted criminal elements. Also, when a woman spends so much of her time in servitude of this nature, there's a hardness that comes with the turf. The hard lines tend to reflect in their faces.
Fancee Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 Gus is a loser because he has to pay for something that most guys can get for free. He risks disease, incarceration, and ridicule. He rationalizes his behavior using twisted logic. Who thinks the OP is "Gus"? (besides me, of course) You are dead wrong Wizer( no real offense intended). Sex comes with a price especially good sex. It just pitifully misfortune to think of getting something for nothing. Is that right? Everything comes with a price. All good relationships and bad ones come with a price. You be good to me and I be good to you, type thing. You are going to have to do the math yourself. I'm not talking lying and coniving and misleading ppl. You will always have criminal minds among us. If you really think about it, how much of yourself did you have to give in order to receive so forth and ect,. The more you like it the higher it gets. Its keeps going up! On the flipside;I'm not a man and I can't relate but I have heard guys say its cheaper to buy it like that. I don't know what they mean. It will all be alright.
roxy_1980 Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 I would probably not call him a pervert if I knew him, but I do find it SAD. To feel that he has to resort to hooker that early in life. TBF is right though, hookers are not the most attractive girls. Neither are strippers. There are usually on the slimmer side, maybe have some boobs to them and dress up more revealing clothing, but that's it! These women are just those that have run out of options (or at least think they have) and the johns mostly don't care what they look like. They just wanna know what they will and will not do. Course, if this guy were trying to date me, it would give me pause. I don't care how some random guy views hookers, but the guy I am trusting with my health is different. I don't think I could accept someone who is that cavalier about their sexuality (and the risks that come with it) as my BF.
Darkzen Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 I hate to break the news to you gents but the majority of hookers aren't all that attractive, considering what the lifestyle choice entails... Point understood, but from what the OP said, it's probably better than what "Gus" could manage on his own. Beauty is beauty and ugly is ugly. Realistically though, there are leagues in which people must play. Brad Pitt types aren't knocking down the Roseanne Barr types' door, but the Tom Arnold types are. I guess what I'm trying to say is... hookers may not look like Angelina Jolie, but if you look like [sIZE=-1]Quasimodo, you'll be happy with someone that looks like Rosie O'Donnell. Even so, most high class escorts are much better looking than Rosie. My ex was cute, but I had better looking girls to choose from. I went with my ex for reasons other than purely looks though. So yes, sometimes people will play up a league or down a league. But very rarely will people play completely out of their league (such as Seal and his wife for example). Let's at least be honest here, looks matter, but can be over looked if other qualities bridge the deficiencies. "Gus" is just paying to play ball out of his league IMHO. [/sIZE]
Author Ponzoli Posted October 12, 2007 Author Posted October 12, 2007 especially Dark. I think you have brought up a number of valid points that I had not yet thought about, and it has made me re evaluate my personal stance on the issue. This board is all about free and open discussion so I appreciate your input.
Trialbyfire Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 Realistically though, there are leagues in which people must play. Brad Pitt types aren't knocking down the Roseanne Barr types' door, but the Tom Arnold types are. I don't believe in leagues. You restrict yourself.
Recommended Posts