The ghosts in the room

[Bramblethorn]

Unfortunately, haven't heard much yet except for a stripper who apparently who thinks horned up dudes looking through beer goggles at a naked woman is profound intimacy, and the delusional dreams of another that a dude paying for a fuck means deep connection. Yawn.

For somebody who keeps telling us how bored you are with this discussion, you sure do seem to keep coming back to it.

 

[oggbashan]

...

PS - calling solo workers "crazy" is victim-blaming bullshit. Many would much prefer to work in partnership for safety's sake, but are prevented from doing so by anti-pimping/anti-brothel laws.

It is very difficult in the UK for a woman to be a sex worker/prostitute and remain within the law. It is possible to have a brothel with one, two or three women on the premises including a 'maid' but if any men are involved even as security - the law is broken.

Sex workers who are married or are in a permanent relationship with another person (m or f) can run the risk of their partner being prosecuted for living off the prostitute's earnings.

Our local police take a tolerant view of well-run women-only brothels. While there might be some technical breaches of the law the police don't make them a priority unless there is crime associated with the premises. In our small town if any John was rolled for his wallet the news would be around the place within hours and the brothel might as well shut its doors.

They are more concerned about trafficked and enslaved women, and the drug-addicted amateurs. Both are at real risk of injury and health problems. The amateurs that worry them most are the underage girls who will offer sex for cheap alcohol. From time to time the police and other agencies try to deter those younger women but young alcohol-fuddled brains don't heed warnings about future consequences.

 

[Handley_Page]

It is very difficult in the UK for a woman to be a sex worker/prostitute and remain within the law. It is possible to have a brothel with one, two or three women on the premises including a 'maid' but if any men are involved even as security - the law is broken.

Sex workers who are married or are in a permanent relationship with another person (m or f) can run the risk of their partner being prosecuted for living off the prostitute's earnings.

Our local police take a tolerant view of well-run women-only brothels. While there might be some technical breaches of the law the police don't make them a priority unless there is crime associated with the premises. In our small town if any John was rolled for his wallet the news would be around the place within hours and the brothel might as well shut its doors.

They are more concerned about trafficked and enslaved women, and the drug-addicted amateurs. Both are at real risk of injury and health problems. The amateurs that worry them most are the underage girls who will offer sex for cheap alcohol. From time to time the police and other agencies try to deter those younger women but young alcohol-fuddled brains don't heed warnings about future consequences.

And that's what makes it sad.

 

[Bramblethorn]

The point is on a site like this its not education, experience, facts or logic that hold sway its tits and sexy talk. The moment a woman says she was a stripper, an escort, a lingerie model, anything...the guys stop thinking anything but "Ohhh..."

So maybe next time I make a post I'll attach a picture of myself in a pair of lace boy shorts and a hand bra. Then I'll get some people saying "Ohhh, maybe she has a point too!"

Your user name is "Dirty Allie" and your userpic is a cleavage shot. Just saying.

 

[Rozalin_0123]

Awesome. I'm sure we all look forward to hearing from you and other sex workers about how wonderful it all is.

Unfortunately, haven't heard much yet except for a stripper who apparently who thinks horned up dudes looking through beer goggles at a naked woman is profound intimacy, and the delusional dreams of another that a dude paying for a fuck means deep connection. Yawn.

(Bradley Cooper texted me tonight. I changed my FB status to "engaged!"--Amy Schumer)

I'm sure dancing naked for horny men is enthralling for attention-seeking narcissists. Makes sense. Most girls figured out that they can be sex objects the minute they started growing boobs. Takes more for some, I guess.

You can add me to your ignore list at any time.

I'm still waiting for you to contribute something to the conversation that wasn't pulled directly from your ass. It's sad when JBJ, of all people, has had more, meaningful things to contribute to the topic at hand than you have.

 

[Rozalin_0123]

It is very difficult in the UK for a woman to be a sex worker/prostitute and remain within the law. It is possible to have a brothel with one, two or three women on the premises including a 'maid' but if any men are involved even as security - the law is broken.

So it is possible to remain within the law as long as certain precautions/measures are being followed? Seems to me the law does very little, if anything at all, to protect the girls. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around why the officials are more concerned about the males who are in the prostitute's every day lives (boyfriends, security guards) than the John's going in and out the door. Sure, pimping and sex trafficking organizations are very real, but why smear all males who have anything to do with these women? Not every boyfriend is a pimp.

I suppose it is a catch-22 situation. Giving boyfriends/guards/whoever leniency could provide a safety net for the real pimps. But is it really better to have laws in place that serve more as a deterrent to getting into the sex industry opposed to laws that actually protect the women from harm?

So then, what happens when the pimp is female? This article paints a very disgusting picture of what could happen:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...child-prostitute-didnt-told-aged-just-10.html

 

[oggbashan]

So it is possible to remain within the law as long as certain precautions/measures are being followed? Seems to me the law does very little, if anything at all, to protect the girls. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around why the officials are more concerned about the males who are in the prostitute's every day lives (boyfriends, security guards) than the John's going in and out the door. Sure, pimping and sex trafficking organizations are very real, but why smear all males who have anything to do with these women? Not every boyfriend is a pimp.

I suppose it is a catch-22 situation. Giving boyfriends/guards/whoever leniency could provide a safety net for the real pimps. But is it really better to have laws in place that serve more as a deterrent to getting into the sex industry opposed to laws that actually protect the women from harm?

So then, what happens when the pimp is female? This article paints a very disgusting picture of what could happen:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...child-prostitute-didnt-told-aged-just-10.html

Protect the women? That would need a change in the law which is concerned more about public morality than sex workers.

Changes have been considered, including legal brothels, but any changes suggested have been vehemently opposed by do-gooders. There isn't a consensus about what needs to be done. When the laws allowing legal brothels were examined - as happens in some European countries - the difficulties and problems created were thought nearly as bad as the current situation.

The UK reality is that most indoor sex workers are in an illegal operation and that makes them vulnerable to exploitation. Those on the streets are even worse off.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Our local police take a tolerant view of well-run women-only brothels. While there might be some technical breaches of the law the police don't make them a priority unless there is crime associated with the premises. In our small town if any John was rolled for his wallet the news would be around the place within hours and the brothel might as well shut its doors.

That sounds sensible on the police's part, although I'm never entirely comfortable about solutions that require selective enforcement - too much potential for abuse in the wrong hands. Still, probably the best option available under existing law.

Even in larger cities, I expect word would get around. I've seen mention (one of the forum threads here?) of websites where Johns rate the different women*/establishments.

For what it's worth, the most vocal anti-trafficking activist I knew was a professional dominatrix. I met her through our medieval history hobby group; I doubt she'd have remembered me, but she was the type who made an impression.

*presumably men too, but I haven't seen that mentioned.

 

[Handley_Page]

That sounds sensible on the police's part, although I'm never entirely comfortable about solutions that require selective enforcement - too much potential for abuse in the wrong hands. Still, probably the best option available under existing law.

Even in larger cities, I expect word would get around. I've seen mention (one of the forum threads here?) of websites where Johns rate the different women*/establishments.

For what it's worth, the most vocal anti-trafficking activist I knew was a professional dominatrix. I met her through our medieval history hobby group; I doubt she'd have remembered me, but she was the type who made an impression.

*presumably men too, but I haven't seen that mentioned.

There was a piece in the paper this weekend featuring a woman of a certain age who regularly went to a brothel to get herself sorted.

 

[legerdemer]

There was a piece in the paper this weekend featuring a woman of a certain age who regularly went to a brothel to get herself sorted.

Your wording reminded me of the Victorian cure for women's hysteria.

 

[Handley_Page]

Your wording reminded me of the Victorian cure for women's hysteria.

I ain't that old!


PS, But I do like the style of their language.

 

[oggbashan]

...

Even in larger cities, I expect word would get around. I've seen mention (one of the forum threads here?) of websites where Johns rate the different women*/establishments.

...

Long before websites, back in the 18th Century, there were books and pamphlets published giving details of the brothels and whores of London (and Bath, and Oxford...) with prices and services.

The publisher of one such book was charged with corrupting public morality. His defence was that it was a public service, telling people which diseased whores to avoid. The jury found him not guilty because the book was factual reporting.

Some of the whores were not pleased with him, nor the author.

 

[Rozalin_0123]

There was a piece in the paper this weekend featuring a woman of a certain age who regularly went to a brothel to get herself sorted.

Did it happen to mention her reasoning behind it?

From what I've heard from Char, people from all walks of life seek these girls out for a variety of reasons that don't necessarily include a quick fuck. From socially awkward virgins who clam up around attractive women, to other women curious about women.

One of the more common "parties" is three-somes with couples. The ultimate "male" fantasy. The couple wants someone who won't judge them, to be free of emotional attachment, and be safe at the same time. A brothel makes sense if that's what you seek.

 

[lovecraft68]

Yes I'm sure wives love paying a hooker to be with their husbands(and them) no emotional attachment? How about no real passion or anything else?

Nothing cheapens a couples experience more than a paid whore. I have no clue who
Char' is but they specialize in propaganda.

No self respecting women takes their husband to a whore house for a mutual playmate.

People looking to swing generally find other couples on this new fangled thing called the internet. They chat, maybe they skype, they meet up for coffee they get to know each other then....

Hey honey, let's go buy a girl. More of that romanticizing going on here.

For what a hooker will give you for anything beyond having a third you could buy a blow up doll.

 

[Rozalin_0123]

*Sigh* Here we go again...

Nothing cheapens a couples experience more than a paid whore. I have no clue who
Char' is but they specialize in propaganda.

Not been following along, have you? Why engage in a conversation where you only care about the sound of your own voice?

No self respecting women takes their husband to a whore house for a mutual playmate..

People looking to swing generally find other couples on this new fangled thing called the internet. They chat, maybe they skype, they meet up for coffee they get to know each other then....

Because you would know the intricacies of every single relationship, right? Yep, a woman wanting to explore a different sexual side of herself with her husband within a safe environment totally means she doesn't respect herself or her husband.

Meeting up with couples has no guarantees, not to mention it's signifigantly more dangerous than a prostitute within a legal brothel. Some people aren't looking to jump head first into the swinging lifestyle. Who better to ease in a couple than an experienced prostitute? The couple gets exactly what they want from the experience, which sometimes even includes *gasp* coffee and getting to know each other.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Yes I'm sure wives love paying a hooker to be with their husbands(and them) no emotional attachment? How about no real passion or anything else?

Nothing cheapens a couples experience more than a paid whore. I have no clue who
Char' is but they specialize in propaganda.

No self respecting women takes their husband to a whore house for a mutual playmate.

People looking to swing generally find other couples on this new fangled thing called the internet. They chat, maybe they skype, they meet up for coffee they get to know each other then....

Hey honey, let's go buy a girl. More of that romanticizing going on here.

For what a hooker will give you for anything beyond having a third you could buy a blow up doll.

You know little about hookers.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Long before websites, back in the 18th Century, there were books and pamphlets published giving details of the brothels and whores of London (and Bath, and Oxford...) with prices and services.

I have one of those, Harris's List of Covent-Garden Ladies. Can recommend to anybody who wants old-fashioned euphemisms for ejaculation.

Yes I'm sure wives love paying a hooker to be with their husbands(and them) no emotional attachment? How about no real passion or anything else?

Nothing cheapens a couples experience more than a paid whore.

There are millions of people out there who'd tell you that your relationship will be irrevocably cheapened by any kind of threesome. Or by kinky sex, watching/reading porn, sex before marriage, sex using any kind of birth control...

No self respecting women takes their husband to a whore house for a mutual playmate.

IMHO, when a guy takes it upon himself to define which women are and aren't "self-respecting", he's rather missed the point of self-respect. A self-respecting woman does what she chooses, and doesn't care whether you approve of it or not.

For what a hooker will give you for anything beyond having a third you could buy a blow up doll.

I know you pride yourself on being a defender of women, but IMHO this comes off as quite contemptuous. A woman is not a blow-up doll. A woman who gets paid for sex is still not a blow-up doll. Comparing her to one isn't respectful. It's the other thing.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

I go for the outcome I want and ignore the delusions I have about what others think or feel or experience. If I order a piece of pie and a cup of coffee I cant care less what the server thinks about it.

 

[Handley_Page]

Did it happen to mention her reasoning behind it?

.

As I understood it, the main thrust of the piece was that it was HER choice and sod everyone else. If she wants a hot piece of young virile male, she'll go out to get it.

IMHO, when a guy takes it upon himself to define which women are and aren't "self-respecting", he's rather missed the point of self-respect. A self-respecting woman does what she chooses, and doesn't care whether you approve of it or not.

I think that's what the author of the piece was trying to say.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

That's not true, necessarily. A self-destructive woman/person does what they choose, too, without caring what anyone else thinks. So does a 2 year old. I do what I want and I don't care what you think. Teenagers date the wrong person, do drugs, do all sorts of self-destructive behavior, simply to thumb their nose at their parents and say Oh yeah well it's my life. Yep, it's their choice to bang their head against a wall without caring for anyone's approval, but is it self-respecting?

Sometimes, what's truly an act of self-respect consists precisely in doing what you don't choose because you care about what others think. That doesn't mean pandering for approval, either.

Choice is important, but it's hardly the be-all and end-all of understanding someone's actions.

A self-respecting woman does what she chooses, and doesn't care whether you approve of it or not.
QUOTE]

 

[Bramblethorn]

That's not true, necessarily. A self-destructive woman/person does what they choose, too, without caring what anyone else thinks.

Some do, but that's certainly not true as a generalisation. There are many, many people who do self-destructive things precisely because they do care too much about what other people think of them. The person who drinks in order to fit in with the crowd, the person who has unprotected sex they don't want because they don't want to be seen as a square, the person who gets into a miserable unfulfilling relationship because they're too scared to come out as queer/kinky/etc.

Even this:

Teenagers date the wrong person, do drugs, do all sorts of self-destructive behavior, simply to thumb their nose at their parents and say Oh yeah well it's my life.

...makes it clear that they DO care what their parents think. Rebellion is not indifference.

And no, I'm not advocating sociopathy by any means; there's a happy medium to be found. Self-restraint to avoid hurting somebody else is commendable*. Self-denial in order to earn somebody else's approval... not so much.

When a guy starts defining what "self-respect" ought to mean for a woman, we're usually talking about the latter of those two things. It's almost inevitably a shaming tactic where "self-respect" actually means his respect.

If a woman decides she doesn't want her partner having sex with anybody else, that's fine! It's a very common preference and she has every right to say "this is a condition of our relationship". But it's not everybody's preference, and people who make a different choice don't need to be psycho-analysed by strangers passing judgement on their "self-respect".

*Exception for people who get hurt simply by the idea of others being happy. Trampling on those people's sensibilities is A-OK.