KathyM Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 He's already divorced, so technically he isn't cheating. Already divorced, and still needing to pay $500 to have sex. What a loser. 1
KathyM Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 When get up here and argue that they are destructive to marriage you make them the bad person and paint this depiction of them being these evil seducers. That attitude totally goes against this wanting you help attitude you are talking about now. That attitude also creates an environment where people could think its ok to use force or violence. It makes me wonder if you really want to help these women or be an advocate for them. I don't like what they are doing, but I would want to help them get out of a lifestyle that is destructive to themselves and to others, much the same way as I would counsel people who are involved in other crimes to turn their life around and seek a healthier life that is not destructive to themselves or to others.
KathyM Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 It would be useful in this discussion if you would stop misusing the word "enabler." A person selling sex is not enabling infidelity. They are, if anything, enabling sex. Though I would still not choose to use that word. I would, more correctly, say that they are providing a service for sale. Just like, as it's been pointed out here over a dozen times by now, a liquor store is not "enabling" an alchololic to drink, nor is MacDonald's "enabling" me to be unhealthy, and, particular to my situation, Zappo's is not enabling me to overspend on shoes. You pick your terminology, I'll pick mine. A prostitute is enabling a man to cheat on his wife, just like a drug dealer is enabling a drug addict to use drugs. I'd call him an enabler also. I'd also call a woman who engages in an affair with a MM an enabler of his affair. Just because one is paid and one is not does not make it any less of an act of enabling infidelity. I don't understand how you and Donna can be such outspoken women against infidelity on the infidelity and OW/OM board, but think this type of infidelity with hookers is all good. That makes no sense. They are both acts of infidelity. They are both enabling men to cheat on their wives. No difference. I think you lose your credibility on both positions when you advocate for one and against the other. They are both acts of enabling infidelity. Having sex with someone else's husband without regard for whether he is married.
Mme. Chaucer Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 Kathy, your insistence in equating prostitutes with cheating is obtuse. Certainly there are prostitutes and other people who capitalize on weaknesses in marriages. I think that is bad, and I "think lowly" of people who do that. But it's not a prerequisite or an inherent feature of being a prostitute. It's exactly the same as if you said all lawyers are sleazebags because they profit from the troubles of other people. In fact, I have heard this many times. But many lawyers don't profit from the troubles of other people, and others do but not in a predatory way. You pick your terminology, I'll pick mine. So … when in a discussion with you, those involved just get to make up what words mean? Because you are MISUSING the word "enabling." If you want to stick by this, please explain why MacDonalds' existence is not enabling me to be overweight. Or any of the other examples given by people here who are clearly quite a bit more literate than you appear to be. 2
Mme. Chaucer Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 Come on don't include Zappo's in this. I am currently figuring out what shoes I want to get now on there. My shopping cart is overflowing. They should be outlawed! 1
Mme. Chaucer Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 I detest infidelity and cheaters, and if this thread was entitled "Why Do People Think Lowly of Women Who Knowingly Pursue Married Men For Sexual Encounters For Money / Fun / Gifts / Ego Boosts" I'd be all over thinking lowly of them. 1
KathyM Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 Are you or are you not advocating that prostitutes be put in jail and/or council programs against their will? Are you or are you not advocating that patrons of prostitutes be put in jail and/or fined? That, by definition is advocating the use of force against them. Yes, I advocate that prostitutes and their customers be put in jail and/or fined, just like they are now in countries where it is illegal, such as the U.S. And as part of this, they be required to get free counseling to help them deal with whatever issues led them to this, just like I would advocate for drug dealers and illegal drug purchasers to get jail time or fines and access to counseling to help them turn from a destructive lifestyle.
KathyM Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 I don't need a mechanic if I wanted to cheat. And a MM doesn't need a hooker to cheat. This very forum is proof of that. There are gullible women EVERYWHERE who would have sex with them for free! Yes, there are. And there are also women who charge money for it. Neither one is better than the other. They are both enablers who have no concern for the destructiveness of their actions.
KathyM Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 Kathy, your insistence in equating prostitutes with cheating is obtuse. Certainly there are prostitutes and other people who capitalize on weaknesses in marriages. I think that is bad, and I "think lowly" of people who do that. But it's not a prerequisite or an inherent feature of being a prostitute. It's exactly the same as if you said all lawyers are sleazebags because they profit from the troubles of other people. In fact, I have heard this many times. But many lawyers don't profit from the troubles of other people, and others do but not in a predatory way. So … when in a discussion with you, those involved just get to make up what words mean? Because you are MISUSING the word "enabling." If you want to stick by this, please explain why MacDonalds' existence is not enabling me to be overweight. Or any of the other examples given by people here who are clearly quite a bit more literate than you appear to be. How is it that you think badly of people who capitalize on the weaknesses of marriage and you think lowly of people who do that, but yet you see nothing wrong with the legalization of an industry whose primary work is to do that very thing? That makes no sense. All prostitutes cater to married men. Married men make up more than half of their business. They are doing the very thing you claim to think lowly of, yet you advocate for them being legalized in doing so. Your analogy about lawyers is not the same thing. The vast majority of lawyers help people to resolve their problems, whether it be regarding real estate, estate planning, personal injury cases, or any number of other helpful services that lawyers engage in. Because a small segment of lawyers are dishonest shisters doesn't make the whole profession bad. Hookers, on the other hand, ALL cater to MM without discriminating. They don't care who they hurt, as long as they get their money. Most of their customers are MM. And I'd hardly equate selling a hamburger to someone as the same thing.
aj22one Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 Yes, I advocate that prostitutes and their customers be put in jail and/or fined, just like they are now in countries where it is illegal, such as the U.S. And as part of this, they be required to get free counseling to help them deal with whatever issues led them to this, just like I would advocate for drug dealers and illegal drug purchasers to get jail time or fines and access to counseling to help them turn from a destructive lifestyle. So like I said, you advocate the use of force against those who engage in prostitution rather than seeking voluntary measures to address what you feel is a social ill. And, on top of that, you expect the population at large to fund the enforcement of your personal morality. Fair enough, I just thought I would point that out to you.
Robert Z Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 Yes, I advocate that prostitutes and their customers be put in jail and/or fined, just like they are now in countries where it is illegal, such as the U.S. And as part of this, they be required to get free counseling to help them deal with whatever issues led them to this, just like I would advocate for drug dealers and illegal drug purchasers to get jail time or fines and access to counseling to help them turn from a destructive lifestyle. It isn't illegal everywhere in the US, such as in some parts of Nevada, where I go. Yes, free counseling will help girls a lot who have been forced out of school, thus ending any chance of what was a promising career post graduation, and instead be marked for life and thrown in prison with hardened criminals, in order to satisfy people like you who are so afraid of other women's very personal decisions that you would have them jailed. You must be incredibly threatened by this. Why? Why is what strangers do with other strangers such a threat to you? Why are you so afraid?
Robert Z Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) Regarding feelings. I must admit that it takes a fair amount of effort to avoid becoming infatuated. How could I not? They are so beautiful... and fun. Normally the thought of the other men can be ignored. But at times it makes me a little sad and jealous. Uhhhh, it goes with the arrangement. And I'm lucky to be with these girls. I wanted to see my favorite this weekend and I can't make it. And I know who she will be with instead. But at least I know he's a good guy. I know because she really wanted to see me instead of him and was holding out until I knew for sure. Edited June 28, 2012 by Robert Z
KathyM Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 So since the issue is cheating (again, not what this thread is about), you should petition for cheating to be illegal. You could get rid of every prostitute, and cheaters would still cheat. How is it that you don't grasp such a simple concept? I realize some men would still find a way to cheat, but by your same argument, why would you criticize any women who has an affair or a ONS with a married man? By your logic, she should not be considered at fault, because if it weren't for her, it would be somebody else. Why criticize those women, which both you and Madam Chaucer routinely do on this board? They are no different and no worse than the hookers you try to support and legalize. The hypocrisy makes no sense. 1
Robert Z Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 (edited) I realize some men would still find a way to cheat, but by your same argument, why would you criticize any women who has an affair or a ONS with a married man? By your logic, she should not be considered at fault, because if it weren't for her, it would be somebody else. Why criticize those women, which both you and Madam Chaucer routinely do on this board? They are no different and no worse than the hookers you try to support and legalize. The hypocrisy makes no sense. Why do you care? Why do you want to legislate morality? Isn't this between the man, his wife, and the prostitute? Why is this your business? Can you answer that or don't you have an answer? And what about me? I'm not cheating on anyone. Should I go to jail as well? If so, why, because I'm a single man having great sex? Edited June 29, 2012 by Robert Z
Eclypse Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 Making prostitution illegal means these men will cheat elsewhere. They are still scum and it has nothing to do with prostitution. I can think of only one solution: make all infidelity punishable by hanging, drawing and quartering in the town square. It can be a weekly spectacle! 2
Els Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 What really threatens women about all of this is the idea that they could be replaced by a hooker. I don't see anyone here feeling threatened that they could be replaced by a hooker. The idea is asinine. (well, perhaps except Kathy) I just find it laughable how you see sex as a 'survival need for men and a duty that women owe their men' instead of an expression of love, intimacy, and pleasure that is enjoyed by both parties... and then wonder why your wife wasn't bouncing off the walls to have sex with you. There's only one reason a woman would ever have sex with a man like that, and it starts with MO and ends with EY. Guess what it is. Given your approach to sex, I certainly agree that prostitutes are your best bet for sex and 'affection' (hey, feigned affection is better than none, right?). Nobody is dehumanizing them by saying that the only reason they're being affectionate towards you is because you pay them. To think otherwise is just being deluded. If you really want to test it out, go to one of them and tell her that you'd love it to be just the two of you tonight, no money changing hands. See what you get. That doesn't make her NOT HUMAN or a GREEDY BITCH, that just makes her a businesswoman, like anyone else.
Mme. Chaucer Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 It isn't illegal everywhere in the US, such as in some parts of Nevada, where I go. If you are having call girls up to your hotel room, it's illegal EVERYWHERE in Nevada. There are legal brothels ONLY in certain rural areas of Nevada, and prostitution is illegal elsewhere in that state. There is also a lot of effort used to keep the illegal prostitutes out of the "classy" Nevada hotels. You might as well just get the escorts to come to your house wherever that is.
Mme. Chaucer Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 I realize some men would still find a way to cheat, but by your same argument, why would you criticize any women who has an affair or a ONS with a married man? By your logic, she should not be considered at fault, because if it weren't for her, it would be somebody else. Why criticize those women, which both you and Madam Chaucer routinely do on this board? They are no different and no worse than the hookers you try to support and legalize. The hypocrisy makes no sense. PROSTITUTION AND CHEATING ARE NOT THE SAME THING. You've taken your theory of designing your own terminology to a new level. Unfortunately, nobody else is on board with your terminology in this discussion right now.
Mme. Chaucer Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 Originally Posted by Robert Z What really threatens women about all of this is the idea that they could be replaced by a hooker. Dream on, Robert Z. I think that Kathy and maybe one other woman who has participated in this discussion might have that fear, but it's the last thing that would ever occur to me. The fact is, I could NEVER be "replaced by a hooker." A transaction where money is exchanged for fake affection, flattery and sex on a time clock could never even approximate a relationship of any kind that I might have - even a bad one. Even if my husband DID go to hookers. 2
123321 Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 Yes, I advocate that prostitutes and their customers be put in jail and/or fined, just like they are now in countries where it is illegal, such as the U.S. And as part of this, they be required to get free counseling to help them deal with whatever issues led them to this, just like I would advocate for drug dealers and illegal drug purchasers to get jail time or fines and access to counseling to help them turn from a destructive lifestyle. Enforcing your ideas of good lifestyle choices through incarceration and re-education. It sounds familiar but I can't quite Pol Pot my finger on it. PS- The Federal government has no anti-prostitution statutes that I'm aware of. So since the issue is cheating (again, not what this thread is about), you should petition for cheating to be illegal. You could get rid of every prostitute, and cheaters would still cheat. How is it that you don't grasp such a simple concept? There are locales where adultery is punishable with prison time, I would think that if that's what a person is really trying to legally proscribe then that is what they should make illegal. What Kathy is advocating is the moral equivalent to making it illegal to sell pecan pie (although paradoxically it's OK to give away) as a part of the fight against tooth decay.
Robert Z Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 If you are having call girls up to your hotel room, it's illegal EVERYWHERE in Nevada. There are legal brothels ONLY in certain rural areas of Nevada, and prostitution is illegal elsewhere in that state. There is also a lot of effort used to keep the illegal prostitutes out of the "classy" Nevada hotels. You might as well just get the escorts to come to your house wherever that is. Actually, no. I don't understand the legal ins and out [pun intended] but it is all supposed to be legal. It is a private club that has a special agreement with a local hotel.
Robert Z Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 (edited) Originally Posted by Robert Z Dream on, Robert Z. I think that Kathy and maybe one other woman who has participated in this discussion might have that fear, Has participated in this discussion is not a limiting factor. There are many other women who surely feel the same way. I was referring to women who are threatened by this. And why would I dream on? What do you think my motives are here? Edited June 29, 2012 by Robert Z
Mme. Chaucer Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 And why would I dream on? What do you think my motives are here? I'm thinking you are excited about "teaching a lesson" to women, by your choice of phrases such as "putting you women on notice," etc. But your negotiations with pros really don't have anything to do with my life. I am absolutely and truly not threatened by the availability of prostitutes, or of porn, or of women who might want to screw my husband. If my marriage develops problems, I STILL will not be concerning myself with such things. Unwittingly, you have provided a great support on this thread for the stance of KathyM. There are locales where adultery is punishable with prison time, I would think that if that's what a person is really trying to legally proscribe then that is what they should make illegal. What Kathy is advocating is the moral equivalent to making it illegal to sell pecan pie (although paradoxically it's OK to give away) as a part of the fight against tooth decay. I have tried to get her take on this before, but Kathy ignores my questions. I get the impression that Kathy believes that there should be enforcement in place to prevent ALL sex unless it is between "one man one woman" who are married church style. Other sex should be punishable.
123321 Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 Unwittingly, you have provided a great support on this thread for the stance of KathyM. Not so much I think, they can both be wrong without either one making the other one "more right".
Mme. Chaucer Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 Not so much I think, they can both be wrong without either one making the other one "more right". But Robert is all about, "wives, be worried about all the beautiful young ladies just waiting for your husband to open up his wallet in return for all his fantasies to be fulfilled." Which is exactly the scenario that Kathy seems to fear.
Recommended Posts