I had an eerie, but also a thought provoking experience last night. I'm driving up the DVP, right after having enjoyed the services of an SP, listening to MOJO. On comes a talk show about whether to legalize prostitution. The host says "How many of you are on your way home right now, maybe driving along the 401 or DVP, to be with your wife or girlfriend, and have recently used the services of a prostitute?" The coincidence (I'm assuming MOJO didn't have me on a spy-cam) really spooked me!!
Naturally, my first question is whether any other Terbites were listening to the same show and were caught up in the same coincidence, or even called into the show!
Beyond that, the host put forth the propositions that: 1) the use of prostitutes is increasing, 2) married/attached men use prostitutes in much greater numbers than single men, 3) in the vast majority of cases, the activity is never discovered by the wives/girlfriend, 4) men who do so are more likely, rather than less likely to remain in their current marriage/relationship as a result of satifying their curiosity/need for variety in this way (as opposed to extra-marital affairs/cheating), and 4) there is little evidence that use of prostitutes contributes to the spread of sexual diseases to a greater degree than ordinary casual sex (although both clearly do contribute). What the host was proposing was that not only should prostitution be legal, people should change their thinking about it or "de-stigmatize" it. Its clear that many women do not want to perform oral, greek or other "non-vanilla" forms of sex without being paid. It's also clear that men will accept a wive's/girlfriend's position on this without feeling the need to reject her and are prepared to pay prostitutes for these activities.
Most callers were men who admitted to using pros, but all claimed they used them infrequently (3-4 times a year). I thought they were underplaying their frequency, or weren't counting visits to MP's. After all, I have my own experience and the postings of others on this board to compare to (I think 1-2 times per month is more like the average)! One woman called in while I was listening to say she was horrified by what she was hearing and could only continue to date men on the basis that there must be some men who would never consider using a pro. Like most women, her issue seemed (while clothed in the guise of health concerns to a degree) to be about loyalty. Personally, I find that angle to be baffling. Using a prostitute for experiences your gf/wife won't/can't provide has nothing to do with disloyalty. Leaving your wife for another woman, now that's disloyalty! Spending extensive time with your lover/mistress instead of with your wife and kids, that's disloyalty! Yet, because affairs involve some emotional attachment, strangely most women seem to think these are preferable to the use of prostitutes.
So I'm interested in the views of fellow Terbites:
1. Does the use of prostitutes/MPs/dancers undermine committed relationships with women?
2. Should there be any stigma, considering how widely pros are used, to using a pro/mpa/dancer?
3. Are women out to lunch with their attitude "If I'm not into it, you ain't gettin' it. If you want it so bad, you can't have me (and getting rid of me, if married, is going to be unbelievably expensive)."
Naturally, my first question is whether any other Terbites were listening to the same show and were caught up in the same coincidence, or even called into the show!
Beyond that, the host put forth the propositions that: 1) the use of prostitutes is increasing, 2) married/attached men use prostitutes in much greater numbers than single men, 3) in the vast majority of cases, the activity is never discovered by the wives/girlfriend, 4) men who do so are more likely, rather than less likely to remain in their current marriage/relationship as a result of satifying their curiosity/need for variety in this way (as opposed to extra-marital affairs/cheating), and 4) there is little evidence that use of prostitutes contributes to the spread of sexual diseases to a greater degree than ordinary casual sex (although both clearly do contribute). What the host was proposing was that not only should prostitution be legal, people should change their thinking about it or "de-stigmatize" it. Its clear that many women do not want to perform oral, greek or other "non-vanilla" forms of sex without being paid. It's also clear that men will accept a wive's/girlfriend's position on this without feeling the need to reject her and are prepared to pay prostitutes for these activities.
Most callers were men who admitted to using pros, but all claimed they used them infrequently (3-4 times a year). I thought they were underplaying their frequency, or weren't counting visits to MP's. After all, I have my own experience and the postings of others on this board to compare to (I think 1-2 times per month is more like the average)! One woman called in while I was listening to say she was horrified by what she was hearing and could only continue to date men on the basis that there must be some men who would never consider using a pro. Like most women, her issue seemed (while clothed in the guise of health concerns to a degree) to be about loyalty. Personally, I find that angle to be baffling. Using a prostitute for experiences your gf/wife won't/can't provide has nothing to do with disloyalty. Leaving your wife for another woman, now that's disloyalty! Spending extensive time with your lover/mistress instead of with your wife and kids, that's disloyalty! Yet, because affairs involve some emotional attachment, strangely most women seem to think these are preferable to the use of prostitutes.
So I'm interested in the views of fellow Terbites:
1. Does the use of prostitutes/MPs/dancers undermine committed relationships with women?
2. Should there be any stigma, considering how widely pros are used, to using a pro/mpa/dancer?
3. Are women out to lunch with their attitude "If I'm not into it, you ain't gettin' it. If you want it so bad, you can't have me (and getting rid of me, if married, is going to be unbelievably expensive)."
