Why do men use prostitutes?

ILuvBirdsEye you say you only judge those doing the coercing. I wonder what your view would be about this. I go to a strip club sometimes. There is no coercion involved and the dancers are all doing it of their own free will (they do some checks on that). I asked my regular dancer out of interest one time about what she does the job and she said it's because it can be pretty good money especially when the businessmen types buy the VIP room, and because it beats stacking shelves. Is she in the wrong for giving people lap dances in return for money rather than stacking shelves in return for money? Am I wrong for buying dances? It is a genuine question and I genuinely want to know what you think.

I bet they are also the type to be updating Wikipedia.

It is interesting that certain posters come out of the woodwork on the prostitution threads. You might not have one for ages, but as soon as you do they turn up. They are old school - using Web alerts, etc.

Ultimately it's two private consenting individuals and society has no right to judge
It's not private (It's cruisers on the street, it's a mega brothel next door, it's all over the internet),
it's not consenting (coerced by drugs, trafficed, options in life, Hobson's choice )
and am only judging the one doing the coercing.

You don't tell me to look away coz it's non of my business.

If a man chooses to sell his kidney and a woman chooses to buy it - is it just an issue involving two consenting adults or is within a wider context of social inequality - where the poor can get horribly exploited to benefit the rich?

We are not allowed to sell our organs for a reason.

If a woman chooses to sell her body for money, and a man chooses to spend his money buying sex, then isn't that both their own choices? I don't understand why people feel they have a right to judge that. If it's two consenting adults, then what is the problem? Would you also object to two consenting gay people having sex?

Isn't it true that far more women go to church now than men? Also, feminists are women. So as women, the same visceral abhorrence to women being used as living toilets for men to jiz into will be felt. Men won't share it in the same way. It is more instinctive for a man to see a woman in prostitution as a soiled, dirty, sinful place to put your dick.

Men will be able to empathetically 'feel' the men's perspective in the way women can't, so they will tend to see things from the punter/abuser/rapist''s perspective more, and of course it is vice versa with women and men.

Prove it then. Go on. Proved by whom? When?

And dont even start on the factually untrue, lies and falsehoods like "oh it makes people value woman less". That is a lie, it is a proven falsehood.

Don't think it's a big mystery. People want sex and are prepared to pay for it. Other people want money and are prepared to have sex to get it. Put the two together and you have an entire industry. Ultimately it's two private consenting individuals and society has no right to judge, just like you have no right to judge what two gay people do.

In the past when homosexuality was still seen as taboo we had all this rubbish about how it "degrades the fabric of society" and "instills harmful values and morals". You see the same thing now regarding prostitution, with people claiming it somehow affects society and gives people the wrong morals. But ultimately it's just people trying to impose their own moral values on other people. I look at it this way, if you wouldn't judge to consenting gay people for being gay, why the fuck would you judge a consenting prostitute and her client? It's just bigoted, you should be more tolerant of how others live their private lives.

What kind of point is it that you are trying to make?

Surely the point is that religious people and feminists make similar sounding points about prostitution but have arrived at their conclusions from completely different routes and beliefs.

Some actually get off on the fact that women(/men/children) are not into it. They get off on the sadism of making someone do something degrading and unpleasant that they don't want to do- like bullying. It is legal, easily procured, sexual abuse.

Reducing poverty among women means that women who don't want to be sex workers can stop selling sex
It's not a pure financial transaction. As eryth says, there's a power dimension too.

I don't understand why anyone would want sex with someone who didn't want them or find them attractive. That seems soul destroying to me. It makes me think that these men must not be able to see women as people, that they can just discount the fact the women aren't sexually interested during sex. Ugh.

Some feminists and religious people often say the same things regarding sex work
Some atheists and religious people say the same thing about treating 9thers with respect.

Some children and religious people have the same views on Jesus.

Some cats and religious people both like the sleep.

Some flies and religious people both eat jam.

What kind of point is it that you are trying to make?

It discredits feminists with the left given that the left is supposed to stand up for the vulnerable, the dispossessed and oppressed.

This is begging the question. People on the right would argue that the right wing is better for the vulnerable, dispossessed and oppressed, and that it's the left wing which oppresses people. You are pre-supposing that "left = good, right = bad" and automatically taking issue with any argument that contradicts this.

but then I didn't think I'd have to spell out the power and economic disparities between men and women which make prostitution possible.

I'm all for reducing poverty among women. Reducing poverty among women means that women who don't want to be sex workers can stop selling sex. I don't think anyone would argue with you that reducing poverty among women is a bad thing.

Pope Francis calls it the torture of women, quite a difference stance from the previous religious view that prostituted women were "sinners" with nothing whatsoever to say about the torturers (johns). If Pope Francis can see it why can't you?

Pope Francis's comment about tortured women was regarding women who find themselves in a situation in which they don't have a choice. I don't think Pope Francis would hesitate to call a woman a sinner for having sex with a man she wasn't married to, if she had the choice not to do so.

should have added "the left should be feminism's natural allies given that the left...."

It discredits feminists with the left given that the left is supposed to stand up for the vulnerable, the dispossessed and oppressed. Sadly the left is male-dominated, so men's sex rights trump women's rights not to be sexually exploited by men, A huge failure on the part of leftists I would say.

I didn't think I'd have to spell that out as it's pretty obvious, but then I didn't think I'd have to spell out the power and economic disparities between men and women which make prostitution possible.

One interesting thing is that the right wing has picked up radical feminist arguments against prostitution like you say for example that Pope Francis calls it the torture of women, quite a difference stance from the previous religious view that prostituted women were "sinners" with nothing whatsoever to say about the torturers (johns). If Pope Francis can see it why can't you?

I haven't come across the "feminists are religious, social conservatives " argument before. It's barking grin

The reason why it's barking is because you misquoted what I said.

What I said was;

1. Some feminists have socially conservative views.
2. Some feminists and religious people often say the same things regarding sex work (I pointed out that the quote from Pope Francis could just as easily have come from a feminist opposed to sex work).

I did not say "feminists are religious, social conservatives."

"Feminists are aligned with the right wing" has been going on since Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon created the Anit-Porn Ordinance in the early 1980s. It's propaganda put out by PR companies employed by the porn industry to discredit feminists who were threatening their business and their abuse of women.

How would calling something right-wing discredit someone, or an ideology? It only discredits that ideology if it's put to someone who makes a deliberate and intentional point of adopting any and all ideologies which are anti-right wing (which is just silly; why would anyone allow labels like "right wing" and "left wing" to determine which ideas they follow?)

Given that the overwhelming majority of right wing people, and right wing political parties, have absolutely no problem with being called right wing, then calling a feminist or a feminist movement right wing would do absolutely nothing to discredit the feminist movement in their eyes. In fact, the opposite true; the political right normally tries to discredit feminism by calling it left wing! And Certainly, the DUP has absolutely zero problem with anti-porn and anti-prostitution laws being described as right wing.

If the woman is underage, addicted to drugs, trafficked, and/or so economically impoverished they have no alternative means to get money when selling sex, then consent is wholly undermined. And my view is that the great majority of prostituted women are in one or more of these categories. So the liberal argument doesn’t hold for me.

"Feminists are aligned with the right wing" has been going on since Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon created the Anit-Porn Ordinance in the early 1980s. It's propaganda put out by PR companies employed by the porn industry to discredit feminists who were threatening their business and their abuse of women. It's been remarkably successful because its echoes are still being heard today.

Men will use any tactic they can think of to protect their interests.

Why the heck would a man decide to drag up a two year old thread to try to convince feminists why it's ok that he buys sex? Grim

I haven't come across the "feminists are religious, social conservatives " argument before. It's barking

In the horrific child abuse cases in Rotherham and the like, the young girls were groomed by men showering gifts on them, not giving them money.

Do your research. They were raped.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-45980210

Rape is the tool men use to coerce women into prostitution. Rape destroys women and girls' boundaries and terrorises them so they can be easily used sexually by many men.

Why not go the whole way and say that probably all women are prostitutes, given you can't be entirely sure of the motivations behind them having sex...

A lot of men unashamedly believe this and will say up front that all women are whores and all men pay for sex, just that the payments vary.

Viewing women as objects and sex as transactional poisons their entire worldview to the point they are unable to conceive of real sexual intimacy. I would almost feel sorry for them if their views weren't so deeply harmful to women.

assasinated

Not much of a further stretch once we go past non-working wives are prostitutes

My dad doesnt do that one