by exploited » Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:19 am
There is nothing really messed up about seeking sex for money. It is something I would likely do if I had a really long dry spell. Again, all you are doing is insisting that sex be treated as some sort of magical interpersonal experience, rather than something done for fun or strictly pleasure. That is YOUR opinion of sex and yours alone, with no more of a logical foundation than people who say capitalism is "natural" or that human nature exists.
Having hooked up with women who have no interest in pursuing a long-term or emotional relationship, I can say with certainty that your views pertaining to sex are wholly antiquated and without substance. There are lots of women who are - gasp - just as sexual as men. They don't require romantic attachment and why should they? Do you require romantic attachment to play basketball with someone? To get a massage? To grind up to on a dance floor? Of course not. So why is sex somehow magically different? I suspect you feel this way due to a puritanical streak, one that holds sex to be an especially valuable resource that should only be given out when the reward is high enough (which according to you is essentially a monogamous, emotional relationship).
Such thinking is deeply sexist, not to mention completely illogical. The idea that John's get to do whatever they want is so inaccurate it isn't even funny. That isn't how escorts or prostitutes work, even streetwalkers will place limits on what they will and will not do. Furthermore the best way to encourage socialized behavior is to remove the stigma surrounding sex work, as well as enable thoughtful, reasonable people to regulate the industry in a meaningful way. There is degradation happening in the industry, absolutely, but you seem to think that sex trafficking is the same as sex work, which just isn't the case.
Prostitites are no more damaged than anyone else who provides a service. Your disgusting second wave moralizing is irrelevant.