Why do men use prostitutes?

"In effect, they were doing to men what men do to female prostitutes.
Of course, there is a difference because prostitution often involves coercion, violence, people trafficking, health risks etc."

Ffs. No they weren't doing to men what men do to prostitutes. Not even close. Not even slightly similar. What a completely pointless "comparison".

I have never considered paying a woman for sex, let alone actually done it, and I think a lot of that is how I view other human beings. I preferred getting to know someone and I think that I am a loyal person, having been married for nearly 30 years, I have never had an affair.
During that time, I have known men and women who like casual sex and are quite open about it.
When I first started work in a large organisation, there were two girls in their late teens/early twenties who used to go to formula 1 and motor bike racing at Brands Hatch. They would go to these meetings with the intention of ending up in bed with famous drivers/riders, staying in nice hotels and enjoying fine dining.
They were probably doing this half a dozen times a year, for them it was glamorous and they were getting rewarded.
In effect, they were doing to men what men do to female prostitutes.
Of course, there is a difference because prostitution often involves coercion, violence, people trafficking, health risks etc.
There is then the other question about highly paid, self employed sex workers - escorts, both male and female, who will satisfy the needs of both sexes if they are wealthy enough.

Because they can

@EamonnWright

People on here very rarely caveat things like that. It's men and men only.

I have to disagree. I primarily lurk around FWR and as a lurker I have been witness to many heated debates on different topics here. A great deal of FWR posters are married to men or have sons and all posters (female and male) have (or had) fathers.

My DH is the light of my life - I devote myself to him because of who I know him to be through communication and action (24yrs strong). He is the most magnificent and most beautiful being I have ever encountered. I co-parented my brother - he is precious to me and my heart would be less full as well as less resilient and protective of the vulnerable without him. My father (while old-fashioned) is loving, genuine, and I would not be as kind without insight into his big heart.

Do not assess frustration directed towards a group of men (not all men) as vitriol or 'hate of men'. Consider that we as women deal with misogyny on the daily and that comments likely shall not be tailored to your comfort. If you are not a consumer of prostitution why would comments (referencing a topic of female exploitation) fuel an angry fire for you? Defensive reactions are telling. Debate is fantastic - I love it but when one side gets defensive the fun falls away.

I get that the current climate is unsettling for you, women exist in a constant hurricane - the world's injustices can be too much to carry no matter your sex. You have some thoughtful statements, do not go the way of the 'Dark Side' - try to put yourself in our shoes. Bound in social restraints and oppressed we rise to bring equality with a recognition and appreciation of our differences (racial, sexual orientation, sex et al).

That grey rock rocks.

This is a grey rock.

Sorry, I see you are just quoting the guardian.
It's the wrong verb though. 'rape' is what those men do. Rapists is what they are.

Seems OP was quoting from The Guardian, so take it up with them. The OP was also a fair while ago. Just a disgusting john decided to dredge it up to tell us how he's one of the good ones because he doesn't hit prostitutes so they're lucky to have him, or something.

'use'? OP?

You deserve a criminal record.

Lowering the number of overall men who feel confident and entitled to pay for sex is very much the goal here, so yeah we need the Nordic Model. You're not going to get anywhere with 'oh but then only the really really bad men will be left'. Yep, but the overall demand will have been drastically lowered which is a MASSIVE WIN. Fewer men paying for sex means fewer women being raped to survive. And then society can keep working on the issue to deal with the really really bad men.

Of course men will not stop raping women for money at the drop of a hat. People haven't stopped murdering each other, either, despite that having been illegal for quite some time. But we are very clear about which direction we need to be moving in.

Men were asked what would put them off. A criminal record, an ASBO or their employer being told was the answer. Finding out the woman was pimped or coerced apparently not so much.

Not sure how that squares with the full decriminalisation model.

I am a man who pays for sex. Yesterday, I completed a survey for men who pay for sex, which asked me this question, which in turn has piqued my interest in this thread.

The survey asked me what would stop me paying for sex. I can't remember what answers I selected specifically, but yes, if having a criminal record was a very real and likely possibility, then that would put me off paying for sex. I did not choose the answer which said knowing the woman was trafficked... but please let me explain this. It is important that these sorts of responses to surveys are understood correctly.

If I knew a woman was pimped or trafficked, that would only stop me paying for sex with that one specific woman. It would not stop me paying for sex as a whole; there are plenty of women I know who are completely willing, so I would continue paying for them. This is the reason why I did not say that knowing a woman was trafficked would stop me paying for sex.

The second, important point, is that the decriminalisation model would not make it legal to pay for sex with a coerced or trafficked woman; that would still be illegal, and it would still be classified as rape. So under the decriminalisation model, paying for sex with a willing woman would be completely legal, whereas paying for sex with a trafficked woman would be illegal. Given that this survey implies that men's greatest fears are getting into trouble with the police or having a criminal record, then introducing the decriminalisation model would be good news. Men would take care to ensure the women they are visiting are legal, and the threat of receiving a criminal record would scare them away if they sensed any possibility that something was not quite right and that the woman may be a victim of sex trafficking.

Under the Nordic model, if we assume it works as intended, then the threat of a criminal record would deter some men from paying for sex full stop (again for emphasis; this is if it works as intended). However, this only applies to men who have a fear of having a criminal record. Men who do not fear having a criminal record would continue to pay for sex... so now, the majority of clients of sex workers would be men who do not fear a criminal record. Logically, anyone can see why this is not good for sex worker safety.

So going back to the original comment;

Men were asked what would put them off. A criminal record, an ASBO or their employer being told was the answer. Finding out the woman was pimped or coerced apparently not so much.

So yes, these responses confirm that the decriminalisation model would be best for sex worker safety, and that the Nordic model would contribute to violence against sex workers.

Some of them have been barred from volunteering, but also from training as social workers in order to help girls like them.

Is this the group who have been barred from volunteer work with Girlguiding and others, because of their criminal records?

I agree, the silence from "sex work advocates" has been deafening.

What has been interesting today is that NIA has been at the High Court today seeking to get (I believe) a judicial review to have women who were trafficked into prostitution as teenagers’s criminal records sealed or expunged due to them being victims of crime rather than perpetrators. Not a single punter’s group or “sex workers” group was there or has been involved at all, which I feel says enormous amounts about where their sympathies actually lie.

The lack of concern among punters about women being coerced into prostitution through trafficking is shocking, but sadly didn't come as a surprise. And the fact that they didn't want them to like it is also very telling.

There's basically no way a punter can know whether a sex worker is there willingly or not, so I guess some just close their minds to that so their consciences are not troubled.

Others are basically paying to rape women. Horrifically, some of these men are murderers as well as rapists. Basically they can get away with treating these women in the way they deserve to be treated, as they see it.

So, hatred of women is not an exaggeration at all. It's the plain truth. Otherwise they would be concerned to think a girl might have been trafficked from her own country and be in fear for her life.

I just saw this in a feminist group on Facebook. It seemed relevant.

To Ophelia and Almond it makes me really sad deep down inside that you and other women have to go through this and that we are still in a world peddling the 'enpowerment' myth wrt porn and sex work. Whenever I hear that I feel like stories like yours are just ignored and it makes me upset and angry. Just like that myth that men NEED sex and porn available to them. I'm sending hugs to you both and assuring you, your story is being listened to, really listened to here.

@Datun Amen to your post about women asking nicely. Well said.

If asking nicely for what we need worked for women then domestic violence, rape, and the pay gap wouldn't exist. It doesn't. When men get angry about feminism what's making them angry is the core of what we're saying, not the tone in which we're saying it. What major social change has ever come about as a result of people just nicely asking if other people would let them have more rights, please, if it's not too much trouble? It's a ridiculous argument that only makes sense if you think that the things being asked for are not rights at all.

And that's all the patience I have for our resident "but if you just asked nicely..." bloke. Almond on the other hand...I wish I could give you a hug. I've known women who worked in the sex industry, and none of them came out of the experience without a lot of mental and emotional scars. The "sex positive" myth of the empowered sex worker is bullshit - what happened to Almond is far more representative of the experience of most women in the industry than whatever nonsense Belle Du Jour and other apologists want the public to believe.

So basically, LadyinTheWater it is women's fault men "turn" to prostitutes? If only women liked or loved them a bit more then they wouldn't need to use and exploit other women? Nice.

And "sex addiction" is a bullshit term that men invented to excuse themselves from feeling entitled to sex and screwing around.

Single men use prostitutes when their confidence or appeal to women is low. A small but significant number of men are too frightened to approach women or prostitutes. Married men will turn to prostitutes and/or lovers when their own relationship is loveless or in turmoil. Males addicted to sex may seek it anywhere, anytime and in any way. Some women addicted to sex do the same but are less likely to require a male prostitute, as finding a man who is willing, for a woman is less problematic.
There is a resemblance of meaning in our adult sexual relationship, which in some way expresses a beauty or pain, a connection or a fracture, an avoidance or an obsession of some element of our parent's obvious or covert sexual identity. As with so much of our personality, our upbringing is a major determining factor in our adult intimate lives. We are the confirmation or, the remedy to someone else's previously anguished or lustful state of being. Sex is the survival of mankind, so it is high in the psyche of most, particularly younger people.

Ophelia

Of course it is. I just have trouble admitting to that part about him. Apologies.

The thing is, of course that, if you've consumed porn, you've supported both prostitution and trafficking. The three things are inextricably linked.

And yes, it does seem that in men who think these things are ok, their empathy chip is broken.

Someone I think Anyfucker up thread mentioned an empathy chip being removed in sex purchasing men.

It sometimes baffled me how men could orgasm into a woman who he knows wouldn't spread her legs for him in a million years other than for money. How is that a turn on?

You don't give it much thought at the time because you bloody love/need the money, but men who do this must only care entirely about their own physical wants and the emotional/empathetic side of them must be totally absent.