thelondonpaper - apparently visiting prostitutes is a perfectly normal thing to do...

[ChukkyPig]

Yesterday they ran a piece in the "columnist" section where people can send stories in.

It was a piece by "john" who basically justified his use of prositutes on the grounds that modern women are awful and won't look at him so what's he supposed to do.

here

I was a bit but thought, never mind, the letters page tomorrow will be full of letters picking holes in the piece.

Today the letters page was crammed with responses to the article, ALL of which said that it was sad the guy was so lonely, it was understandable that he used prostitutes, that it was fine these days, and that anyway modern women are shallow bitches so what do they expect men to do.

I was a bit shocked TBH that the paper didn't print a single letter mentioning exploitation, trafficing, that women aren't awful and what's he on about etc but no.

Anyway the paper had picked this as a "hot topic" so I go online expecting to see some anti-prostitution comments. But there aren't! One person (out of about 30) mentions trafficing/coercion but that's it. The rest of the responses are sympathetic and understanding, mostly saying that there are decent women out there.

Where's the moral outrage? I know it's a rag but this is bizarre all the same.

I have posted a comment but oddly it hasn't appeared yet - maybe it's being moderated - or maybe for some reason they are only displaying sympathetic responses.

I am having an outraged moment - please feel free to join me...

And - do publications have to give a balanced view on their letters pages? or are they allowed to just print one point of view? Guessing the latter...

And of course men are unwillingly celibate sometimes. That was my point. It's entirely unremarkable and it's not a good reason for abusing women (which is what prostitution amounts to in the vast majority of cases IMO).

TMMJ

Yeah, I saw that comment too and thought, what a feckin' loser. Don't think it's a coincidence that he to wait until he was 27 before getting it 'unpaid' (yuck) with that attitude.

There seems to be a disturbing emerging pattern on here in various threads. I come in late (because I have other things to do), but having read the thread, offer some thoughts, have them rephrased ("oh, no, this is what you really mean, admit it") and over-elaborated in a way which totally misleads and goes away from the point I have made - to the point of making what I have said seem totally nonsensical.

I'm then lambasted for saying what everyone would like me to be saying, rather than what I am.

I'm seriously considering giving this place up for a while.

UQD the thing I was irate about was the original article in the free paper. The second thing I was irate about was that all but two of the letters/comments from the public published in the free newspaper the next day supported the use of prostitutes and agreed that women were shallow bitches who were driving men to use prostitutes (no exaggeration). The other 2 comments suggested that John try harder to meet a woman who wasn't a prostitute.

They did not publish a single letter/comment in the paper questioning the morality of visiting prostitutes in the first place, nor did they publish any mentioning coersion, trafficing etc. It seemed to be accepted that using prostitutes was fine, but maybe John had low self esteem and should get out more.

Most people won't look at the website - they will just read the paper - which is read a lot by children - and will read John's pro hooker story and a load of horrible men saying how fab it is to use prostitutes.

That is why I am upset.

I agree that a couple of comments on the website touch on the moral sife of it slightly but the vast majority are still "go for it" or "poor old john". Incidentally the comment I added yesterdaychas still not made it onto the site.

lol motherinferior

dittany; but is it about power and control? not sure...if the only way you can get a women to do something for you is by handing over the cash..i'd say the power and control is with the woman.?

rape is about power and control.

dittany, I have already clarified what my meaning was in that original post.

I have no clue as to what being single and wishing you were part of a couple has to do with visiting prostitutes. Bridget Jones, anyone?

'Boyfriends: nil, visits to prostitutes down to three a day'' Aye right!

I've been single for years on end in the past and would rather never have sex in my life then pay a stranger to endure doing it with me.

Don't get why this is different for men, personally. I also thought that UQD's post said quite plainly that unmarried men have a reason to visit prostitutes.

The man in that feature was just peeved that he didn't have a girlfriend.
And told himself that it was modern women are awful. It was probably jsut trying to justify his taste for anonymous sex.

nkf, I don't necessarily disagree with your fist two sentences, but I don't think they necessarily imply that conclusion!

I think he is upset, distressed, distraught that he has never had a girlfriend, nor even a sniff of interest, when he has tried his best to be nice, say all the right things, etc. This must be pretty awful at the age of 27. It's unsurprising that he's come to the conclusion that it's because he's not exactly a looker with a fat wallet.

I don't think it comes through from the article that he has a taste for anonymous sex - I think that's the last thing he actually wants.

Dittany: I never claimed that the writer of the f-word piece is or was a sex worker. The opinions of willing sex workers that I paraphrase on here (carefully, not wishing to give identifying information on other people without their consent) was what I was referring to.
My point is that abolitionist or punitive laws are a danger to the most vulnerable and most exploited unwilling sex workers. It makes it much harder for them to seek help if they are already criminalised by doing what they do (if you think you are by definition a criminal, when someone hurts you then it is not so easy to go to the police as you are frightened that they will prosecute you rather than going after the person who has harmed you). Also, banning drugs, guns, etc hasn't made them less available, it's just handed over the whole business to the criminals and put lots of otherwise not-criminally-inclined people at risk. (Look at the horrendous mess Prohibition caused in the US).
People trade sex for favours, advancement, peace and quiet, love - and money, all the time. Some people want more sex than others. Some people really have little or no access to sexual partners such as people with disabilities: do you really think that they should just be told, hey, tough luck, that's just another part of life that's closed to you.

Weeonion: WRT sex workers having partners, some do, some don't.

I think it is pretty degrading to tell a disabled person that no one could possibly love them, and they will only get sex if they pay a person who would only consider it for money. Lots of people with disabilities have loving relationships- some people look further than outward appearances.

"I wouldn't visit a prostitute, but that's easy for me to say because I have a gorgeous, sexy and loving wife."

That is one of the weirdest comments I have ever read on here... So by that logic if she left you you would start getting into prostitutes?

Look, if it makes any of you any happier I will concede that I didn't express myself in the best possible way first time round. That, of course, is a cardinal sin on here and something which nobody else has ever done, oh no.

Crush, please read my post of 17:09:55. And subsequent typo correction...

AbbeyA: yes, many people with disabilities find partners and form relationships, but it is a lot harder for them, particularly as probably most people who do not have disabilities nor know anyone who does find the idea of people with disabilities having or wanting sex freaky and wrong. One of my sex worker friends has a client who is quite severely physically impaired and pretty much housebound: he wants to have someone touch him, flirt with him, not be disgusted by the idea that he has sexual feelings (as many professional carers are: if they are not appalled they are embarrassed and don't know what to advise).

I am probably not the person to be on this thread, so will leave it, because I can't understand anyone wanting to have sex without emotional involvement. I would hate the thought that someone was only touching me and flirting with me because they were paid-I would rather not bother. It would leave me more depressed than ever.

DIttany: what part of this do you not understand: buying someone's time and services does not amount to ownership of that person. At the end of the transaction, the seller of the services walks away.

Yes, many people are enslaved by criminals: kept locked up, forced to work for no money, abused and exploited, which is bad and wrong and which many people are working and campaigning to stop - but this is not confined to sex workers - a willing sex worker is far better off than a trafficked person working in the catering or clothing industry.

Solidgold your agruments are all wonky.

If I was a 9 year old girl in india who had to go out to earn her keep i would far rather sew clothes than have sex.

If I was a 13 year old boy in thailand I would far rather prepare food than have sex.

If I was a 14 year old runaway in London I would rather have a safe place to live than have sex.

Because in all of these cases, they are not having consensual sex, they are allowing themselves to be abused for cash.

I just do not believe that you really don't get the argument that selling one's body is something one only does when utterly desperate and/or forced to do so - you said earlier that it is rare to meet people who are in the sex industry because they enjoy it - you seem to be enjoyinh playing devils advocate.

I would argue that at the end of the transaction, a certain amount of the time, the seller ends up beaten to a pulp, raped or humiliated in some way whe hadn't even thought possible.

It's only a rare and imaginative boss which makes you feel like that after a day working in any other industry.

if prostitution was a legalised and regulated profession - then there may be an argument.

as it is atm. its not a profession that one would go into by choice - i would wager.

Oh FFS: because you would rather do anything other than sell sex does not mean that everyone feels the same way.
And it is not that rare to meet people in the sex industry who have chosen to do the work. People who want to help those sex workers who are exploited, enslaved, in a terrible place, actually need to understand that this is not true of all sex workers, because to label them all as victims without taking any notice of anything they say is not helpful and can even be seriously harmful (people who think you are a patronising tosser will not want to seek helpf from you and may actively resist you).

Yes UQD but why hasn't he ever had a girlfriend? It's either because he doesn't really want one. Or because there is something incredibly wrong with him. And as far as I can see, extremely unappealing people find partners so I assume it must be the first. He doesn't really want a girlfriend and prefers to go to prostitutes.

Does it have to be either of those two options? It's clear from the article that he really wants a girlfriend, and doesn't really want to be visiting prozzies. Maybe his problem is that he really wants a girlfriend, rather than someone special, and so he exudes desperation.

I don't think there is anything "wrong" with him as such - it just sounds as if he is a bloke who is not especially good-looking and, it seems, does have a bit of a chip on his shoulder about it.

What he needs to do get into a career where he earns a fat wad. That seems to do it for most ugly fellas I know.

solidgold, i am not labling them all as victims, but to be sure as far as we can that there is choice, there needs to be legislation and regulation