Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhesus
Well, well... I'm not strictly against paying for sex (although I'd never do it myself), there's just a few things:
1. In biological Darwinian terms, those who pay for sex are losers and unfit.
|
Wrong. The only measure of "success" in evolutionary biology is the extent to which one succeeds in passing on ones own genes. As long as screwing hookers does not limit the amount of children one produces, it is irrelevant whether one does so or not.
More importantly, however, it is important to keep in mind that natural law is not a behavioral code. Evolutionary biology merely states that if one produces much offspring, ones genes will be passed on.
This is completely unrelated to the social view of "success". A deadbeat father who gets hundreds of women pregnant is the pinnacle of evolutionary success. In terms of evolution, Lateeqa, the 16 year old mother with 5 children, is extremely successful.
In fact, the rapist who gets his victims pregnant is following a "successful" strategy - in terms of evolution.
Biology doesn't say what one should do. I merely investigates the mechanisms of nature.
Quote:
|
2. I think paid sex rarely constitutes a fair and equal business transaction. A business transaction is rarely equal, but considering all other factors (social, psychological, physical), a "paid sex" transaction is in most cases exceptionally abusive. I find the abuse factor even bigger in cases where westerners (sex tourists like Reak and a few others on this board) use the inequality between their and the prostitute's financial situation to their advantage (or so they think).
|
If the women choose to work as prostitutes, rather than earn far less money with other work, what business of yours is it?
Prostitutes are humans, humans with a free will and all. If they choose to become prostitutes over their other options, that is their right. Profiting from someone else's choices is not abuse.
If you want to argue that their financial situation takes away their freedom of choice, it is the system which caused them to be in such a financial situation that is abusive, rather than their clients. What you think is "right" is taking away what they apparently see as their best option, without offering an alternative.
The only thing that helps is actually offering viable alternatives. Arguing that their livelihood should be taken away because it's "abusive" to them is sickeningly stupid.
"Don't have sex with prostitutes and give them money. Instead, stay away from them, so they have no money at all."
Great thinking there
Quote:
|
3. Whether it's justified or not, some things are unacceptable in our society, and paying for sex is one of them (it is at least in my milieu). It's not necessarily a bad thing to adhere to social norms. You don't walk around naked. You don't steal from others (some of us do). Why then steal someone's dignity, are your beastly drifts so strong?
|
Considering the large percentage of men who at some point in their lives have sex with a prostitute, one can safely say that positive morality does in fact not forbid it at all. Rather, it's a taboo - something that isn't necessarily an unacceptable practice, but rather an unacceptable topic at the dinner table. Much like BDSM, porn, fistfucking, etc.
Your last comment pretty much exposes the problem here, though. You feel that if a woman has sex in exchange for money, she loses her dignity. In other words, you don't respect prostitutes.
You are in fact the biggest misogynist in this thread. You don't respect women if they don't live up to your naive views of decency, feel that they should be protected from their own choices, and are unable to accept that merely working as a prostitute does not make a woman a lesser person in any way.