Few nations have had a more complex relationship with prostitution than the USA. Desire isn’t the issue. Prostitution enjoys plenty of demand in the United States, just as it does almost everywhere else. America’s puritan past, however, has helped to prevent prostitution from attaining much legal standing in the States, and a culture of intense shaming has also come to surround the act.
Recent events in Nassau County, NY have highlighted these realities:
The district attorney in upscale Nassau County, New York, has unleashed civil strife by posting the names and pictures of 104 men arrested in a prostitution sting over the last six weeks.
‘Operation Flush the Johns’ on Long Island nabbed young men and old men, lawyers, doctors, engineers, teachers, college professors and students.
All of them set up dates to meet with prostitutes at local a hotel using the classified ads site backpage.com.
District Attorney Kathleen Rice said police started a sting operation in April after receiving numerous complaints about prostitution at hotels across the county.
The ringleader is this woman, Kathleen Rice, a 48 year old district attorney with no significant other and no children. I know — shocker.
This story reveals important realities that all men should be aware of when it comes to this topic. Firstly, it must be understood (and is made clear by this story) that America has no sympathy for “the John”. America’s puritan roots are still very powerful and they have now grown to merge with new feminist ideas portraying prostitution as a tool of oppression and/or the patriarchy. That is not a good mix.
Yes, the woman leading this public shaming charge is of precisely the breed we would expect: she’s intensely career focused, bullish, childless and on the wrong side of 40. She’s basically a real-life version of the cat-lady caricature that many of us refer to.
Her efforts, however, are only possible because she lives in a culture where prostitution is put in a particularly negative light.
Think about what is being done here: dozens of men who have merely been charged with a crime (and are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty) have been paraded out in public by the government in a bid to further shame them. The state is essentially putting on a show just to make an example of them.
Many criminals have their pictures released and put on the evening news or wherever, but how many have the state go out of their way to make a show and spectacle out of their predicament? Think of how many gang members and white collar criminals are caught having stolen, laundered, embezzled millions, or ended lives. How many men are arrested for these crimes as well as robbery, assault, or abuse?
The answer is plenty, many of them are caught in stings. But how many of them do you see paraded around in spectacles like this with catchy names like “Operation Flush The John”?
The answer is next to nil. So, why is it that these kinds of operations are receiving so much of the state’s money and attention in a land where violent crime is rampant and formerly unpardonable sins like abortion and gay marriage are finding increasingly wide acceptance?
1. Puritanism: America is a land founded by uptight religious zealots and largely shaped by their minds, their culture and their will. There are not a lot of western nations in which prostitution remains explicitly illegal. America remains one of the more prudish western societies in many ways because of its much closer ties to religious fundamentalism. Puritans had a very hard time coming to terms with their sexuality and/or finding much joy in it, and those who inhabit the society they built still harbor some of those traits.
2. The Feminine Imperative: Consciously or subconsciously, many women recognize the damage that legalized prostitution can do to the feminine imperative. Women are already concerned about “Where All The Good Men Have Gone” and the growing propensity for dudes to opt out of marriage in their 30’s/40’s when many women are hoping to opt in. It is likely that, were prostitution legal, a substantial number of those bachelors would avail themselves of said services and perhaps further close themselves off to the idea of a serious relationship. Dragging men out of bachelorhood could, in the aggregate, become more challenging with safe, regulated and legalized prostitution in the picture.
The man today who is not particularly relationship oriented but could be swayed by a persistent woman would be even harder to catch. Powerful men of the “Mr. Big” variety (the kind that most women spend their days dreaming of settling with) would be in a particularly strong position, one that would not be too appealing to a) the women they may already be dating/married to (stepping out for a quick paid fling would become less of a risk) and b) the women that hope to lock them down (these men will have even fewer reasons to find spaces in their usually full schedules for a relationship with the more efficient paid option available).
In short, prostitution would severely undercut the leverage that American women have over men in their relationships. Women are intelligent—they know this, and act accordingly. Their disproportionate political weight ensures that the state will give them what they want.
Any change in prostitution’s status in the USA would require a restriction of the feminine imperative and/or a softening of American Puritanism. Until that day comes (and it is a long way off), expect the Kathleen Rice’s of the world and their shaming to rule the day.
Read Next: Is Prostitution Good For Men?
It’s not just actual sex they try to shut down. This same mix of “strange bedfellows” also tried to eliminate access to pornography in the 1980s.
The anti-sex feminists + anti-Fun Fundies ran President Reagan’s ‘Meese Commission’. They went after stores that sold Playboy and Penthouse, like the 7-Eleven chain and gas stations.
Thanks goodness for the Internet, because their efforts to get rid off visual stimulation can’t do much damage, at least the way the Internet is currently run….
I had on article about this situation earlier this month: http://www.returnofkings.com/14333/the-christo-feminist-porn-wars-of-the-1980s
“In short, prostitution would severely undercut the leverage that American women have over men in their relationships. Women are intelligent—they know this, and act accordingly. Their disproportionate political weight ensures that the state will give them what they want.”
My thoughts exactly….
When I saw this DA the first thing that came to mind was that movie “Mask” with Cher and the guy with craniodiaphyseal dysplasia:
This “thing” looks like a manjaw from hell.
you could say what she did was jaw dropping.
I’m almost surprised she’s not one of the Johns caught availing themselves of the services of female prostitutes….
DA Kathleen Rice is a Ballchinian.
Her forehead looks like the Georgia Dome.
Her clitdick has microballs.
Coming soon, Kathchin’s Kats, a movie about cats and their strong, independent herder.
If Brobox’ avatar were smirking it would look better than DA Kathleen Rice.
DA Kathleen Rice; the decline of the West personified.
That chin puts Bruce Cambell to shame.
I thought Murphy from RoboCop
She reminds me of the uber-wench in the hannibal lecter series that kept trying to chase him. Not attractive at all, and miserable so she chases the bad boy her whole life and almost loses it.
This chick tries hard to feminize her masculine features and personality. Not working for me.
She just made 104 new friends without even knowing it.
Thought it was Scully from X-files…
You mean Gillian Anderson? It’s hard (nigh impossible) to compare her with someone like that. This is her now and her from the Xfiles:
Shes 45 in the recent pic
I don’t know about that one brah
Certainly an improvement.
Mainly the red hair.
Here is a 4 year old I guess professional pic. She looks horrible now. Not in this pic. But I bet she was a knockout looks wise in her 20’s. Sadly, she wasted it whatever good qualities she may have had on becoming a lawyer.
‘Mainly the red hair.’
And the DSLs…
Hey guys. She is just being generous with her suffering. She wants to let everyone know how much it sucks that no guy wants to bang her.
Peace
I think what’s different in America is the surge in power women got due to wars that chewed up the men, while in other countries that suffered occupation most women became whores to survive. The only country where women are more entitled is Sweden, which sat out both world wars
Excellent point. North America (USA & Canada) was quite spoiled in that it has never lived a post-war ravaged existence.
The CSA certainly ‘lived a post-war ravaged existence,’ sweepy.
Still think you’re free?
Prostitution is explicitly LEGAL in most Western nations, nearly all of Latin America, and much of the rest of the world. But not in the Puritan States of America.
I can think of no better personification of the Matrix than Kathleen Rice. The Matrix does not want to lose pussy power over men. It’s their only hope of making men conform to the Draconian ways it treats them.
“You have a problem with authority, Mr. Anderson. You believe you are special, that somehow the rules do not apply to you. Obviously, you are mistaken.”
The Matrix does not want to lose the pussy power American women have over most men.
Go look up the original meaning of the word “Matrix”, for your answer.
The unofficial prostitutes (paid for by nanny state entitlement), hate the official honest ones
Prostitution is legal in most countries (including mine), but what does it change really? It’s still shamed as hell so it still isn’t a real option.
Yes it is, you dumbass.
It is either if your reputation doesn’t matter to you, or if you enjoy having to hide. To each his own I guess.
Nobody ever finds out and those that do don’t care.
This whole article is about 104 guys who got “found out” and, off hand, I’d be willing to say 100% of them did indeed care very much that they were found it.
Just one thing to add – the reason Puritanism is so screwed up on sex, is because it’s a sex cult – and like sex-cults in general, it only wants the leader – and his close followers – to be enjoying the bounties of sex.
Puritan shaming is of the variety that works on the lower-status males – it’s not the preacher, or community leader who’s liable to go to a prostitute; he’s “counselling” your wife and daughter. Another feature of sex-cults that you notice is that it’s both puritanical AND prurient; it’s obsessed with smut (Hollywood porn is equally puritanical), while pretending not to be.
Old-world Christianity celebrated sex, rather than shaming it (though it prescribed it for a very specific sort of relationship). Puritanism is a heresy, which is why it fits in so perfectly with feminism, old maids, self-righteousness, and pride.
Never forget: the Puritans came here, not for “religious freedom” (to oppress everyone else) but because the English were sick and tired of their prissy-fussy shit and ran them out. Less than one hundred years after Shakespeare you couldn’t see his plays because the theater gave Cromwell and his lackeys the vapors. They were so repressive and awful the English realized they were more “free” under a monarchy. Which they were. Hence the Restoration.
Cromwell – a man who raped women and murdered peasants in his youth, and got erections as a soldier killing the Irish.
Besides Guinness and some Whiskies the Irish doesn’t contribute much to the world.
Not to dilute your point or anything, but as someone who extensively studied the time period to which your referring I have to say, you are over simplifying by quuuuite a bit. I know not everyone is a history nerd like I am, but if you ever check the book “World Turned Upside Down” by Christopher Hill it explores the English Civil War period really well.
Christianity(the old kind-Catholicism and Orthodox in particular) stated that it was a sin to have sex be it adultery or maybe to a lesser extent fornication out side of marriage. However St. Augustine of Hippo and bishop of Hippo(now called the city of Annaba, Algeria) who died in the early 400’s and the Italian St. Thomas Aquinas, Catholic priest and University of Paris Professor stated that although prostitution is a sin, it should be permitted by governments so that lust will not overthrow society. Both men understood the concept of harm reduction which the puritans and feminasties did not, do not and probably never will. Now in our own time especially in the USA, lust is overthrowing society or more accurately our civilization. To be for legal prostitution prohibition is to be against civilization. There are many GAME( Seduction or Pick Up Artist, PUA) and religious reasons especially with the religion called Christianity to exhort men not to pay for sex with prostitutes, but the previous sentence still stands as the truth which can not be denied, can not knocked down nor defeated in the end or long run.
Augustine was quite the cad before he converted to Christianity and he mentions how much his Christian mother, St. Monica prayed for him and his pagan father was appalled by the incredibly high number of women he had sex with and how he and his friends had their own “PUA” club to exchange ideas of how to do “GAME” or seduction. Thomas Aquinas was born a virgin and died a virgin, and his family did not want him to be a priest nor a virgin so they sent him prostitute which he drove away. Augustine had sex with professional prostitutes which he paid for and had sex with amateur women he seduced. Augustine got weary of interchangeable pussy and having sex with women even women he didn’t like to satisfy his lust and worse his pride and so this is one of the reasons he became Christian. Augustine’s famous prayer was, ” God, grant me chastity and continence, but not yet!” Both men were well travelled like Roosh. Augustine lived exactly like Roosh with the exception of Roosh stating that he never had sex with prostitutes by paying money for their services until Augustine’s conversion to Christianity. Oddly, most portrayals of Augustine have him looking like an older more hairy Roosh.
Old-world Christianity celebrated sex, rather than shaming it (though it prescribed it for a very specific sort of relationship).
Point of fact, so did the Puritans. The actual historical Puritans were very, very different from the hostile caricature portrayed today. Their enemies scorned the Puritans as being obsessed with worldly pleasures (!) due to their feasting, drinking, and enthusiastic advocacy of (matrimonial) sex.
This strong pro-sex message of the Puritans, resulted in exceptionally high fertility, in contrast to their enemies, the nearly sterile Quakers, who advocated abstinence even within marriage. It was the Quakers, NOT the Puritans, who promulgated the whole sick idea that even righteous earthly pleasures are somehow wrong. And not coincidentally, the Quakers laid the foundation for the feminization of the church.
Yet by some odd quirk of history, the Puritans are blamed for everything the Quakers got wrong.
PS
That said — Quakers weren’t all bad. They kept Indian treaties, they started the anti-slavery movement, and they established freedom of religion.
And Puritans weren’t all good. They tried to completely exterminate my primary ancestral ethnic group: To Hell or Connaught! (Um… I’ll take door #3, Mr Cromwell — going to America!)
You’re right about Quaker fair dealing. They were persecuted in Tidewater Virginia but were valued, oddly enough, for their utility as a buffer against the Indians on the other side of the mountains. The Quakers gave value for value in their trading with the Indians, who well understood the quality of people the former were.
Their enemies scorned the Puritans as being obsessed with worldly pleasures (!) due to their feasting, drinking, and enthusiastic advocacy of (matrimonial) sex.
That’s the common stereotype that Protestants have about Catholics, actually. I have no idea how you came to the conclusion it was applied to Puritans.
“…I have no idea how you came to the conclusion it was applied to Puritans….”
I didn’t come to that conclusion, I read it in history. Puritans, though quite fervent and disciplined in their faith commitment, were seen as too pleasure-seeking elsewhere. They worshipped hard, they partied hard, and if they were married, they… you can fill in the rest.
Also of note — the Puritans once excommunicated a married man for refusing to sexually service his wife. Yes, they actually used church discipline to enforce marital sexual obligations. I would think that this would be a popular stance in the Manosphere…
Excellent!
The Mormons take the same attitude: very prudish and big chiefs get all the poosy. I consider Mormonism a certain kind of Puritan offshoot.
Utter nonsense. Mormons place great value on marriage and inculcate values in their youngsters that make for successful marriage. They are for sure not prudish or somehow “against” sex.
The men in the hierarchy of the Mormon Church have been admirable men in my experience, and I’m not of the faith, or any faith for that matter. I’ve only seen senior leaders of the church on TV and they seem like admirable men as well extremely focused on the welfare of the Saints.
Your comments are reckless and ill informed.
I agree with every word, but the rapid technological advancement of sex toys (VR sex, sex bots, etc.) will be a mortal wound to the pussy cartel.
until the feminists try to shut those down for some sort of “causing objectification / degradation of women” blah, blah, blah nonsense….
Aren’t they already doing that?
I believe I read some blurb long, long ago; about someone getting shut down for making obviously childlike sex dolls, and marketing them as such, for the pedo market.
why would anybody care? Pedo’s getting their rocks off isn’t a bad thing. Children getting molested would be.
I remember thinking the same thing: Who are they protecting? Plastic dolls?
Brains capable of putting together coherent thoughts, went out of fashion in the West a long, long time ago.
Key word there is “try.”
Prostitution is only a danger for marriage-minded women, when a constant supply of sex is the reason men enter into marriage. If that is his reasoning for entering such a union, he might be terminally stupid and can’t be helped anyway.
Do not underestimate the gullibility/ignorance of the average American male when it comes to sexual matters. It is not at all uncommon for a young man unused to steady, regular sex and/or receiving consistent sexual attention from a decent looking young woman to fall in love faster than he should with the first decent looking woman who changes those things. Plenty of long term relationships and marriages begin that way. I was once in such a position myself, so I speak from experience.
It isn’t mere stupidity that causes this, it is a lack of an abundance mentality and the presence of a very restrictive scarcity mentality. Lots of American men, intelligent or otherwise, have this problem.
So in short, american men settle for less for fear of not being able to settle at all?
exactly.
I have two sons, 19 and 21,. This is what I fear for them. My answer is that I have pleaded with both of them not to enter into a LTR with any American woman until they have traveled extensively outside the west.
Dead on comment. Truth in every word , I see what you speak of everyday.
Gospel ^
Amen.
It is much worse than just not getting sex in speaking of the scarcity mentality and abundance mentality. It is also that men are not truly loved on average as much as women. At best, men will not be loved in the matter that suits their needs as much as women on average. Worse, men will not be told they are loved as much as they need as much as women are on average. Worst of all, men will not be loved at all as much as women on average. I’ll mimic your first statement with different content next. Do not underestimate the gullibility/ ignorance of the average American male when it comes to matters concerning love.
Well said.
Not much more I can add. The US is f’d. This just makes me sick. What a lost society.
Yup. An article such as this reminds me of why I left Femerika. What a wasteland.
Yup. An article such as this reminds me of why I left Femerika. What a wasteland.
Great article, spot on.
Love their presumed innocence is in small print at the bottom of the poster.
I suspect that Ms. Kathleen Rice was quite the babe from 17 to 24.
Having blasted at full force into the wall, she now slides into oblivion for which not even her outstanding professional ambition will provide redemption.
Sadly voters reward the exaggerated ambitions of these sanctimonious prosecutors (and prosocutresses) who launch such crusades. Probably these serve as an effective distraction from the public’s own moral lassitude so that our all-too-human fellow citizens can fancy themselves at least as superior to the monsters (johns in this case) that are the target of the campaign.
In men, ambition and achievement are the most desirable characteristics as sweetness and tenderness are for women. Having internalized the aspects we most desire in potential mates, we have made ourselves into models most irrelevant and indeed repugnant to our very nature.
While ambitious and high achiever women are celebrated for their success, men who fail to assert sufficient social status to qualify as a potential mate have suffer a fate of irrelevance. Not even prostitution can remedy this.
Perhaps better would be to censure any form of adultery? Why should sluts and cads get off without our sanction, just because they are too stupid / clever enough to play without pay?
Return to the normal positive values of responsibility in reproduction for society on all levels. Bring on the supervision for the promotion of virtue and prevention of vice. None of this half-a$$ed nonsense that targets male sexual transgressions exclusively.
Its amazing how much time American men waste chasing pussy. If they could buy it, things would change overnight.
Feminists talk about equality and freedom and power. Legalizing prostitution would free plenty of indentured/trafficked prostitutes, probably keep them cleaner, and “empower” them as women going into business for themselves. But for the reasons mentioned in this article, they’d rather take a hypocritical stance because of the choice it offers – both to men and women. It’s the most blatant example of women eliminating the competition.
This is the same chick that didnt want to press charges on a false rape accuser who nearly destroyed the lives of 3 young men (google Hofstra false rape accuser).
In all honesty this shaming bullshit is more appealing to women as a type of punishment because women are typically more concerned with what people think of them than men. If a man wants to have sex with woman for money I could care less. Hell , if a man wishes to have sex with a man for money or a dog or horse I still could give a fuck less. The only people with whom I take issue concerning their sex life is people who fuck pre pubescent children . The idea that I should look down upon ,or for that matter even care that somebody is accused of paying for sex is childish and feminine. The bitch in this article is a why people hate lawyers, and the stupidly of the laws in this country are why I could never be a prosecutor . On a related note fuck the vice cops who did this sting, I hope they get murdered in the line of duty and there daughters become strippers. Anyone who says they are just doing their jobs, so were the SS when they rounded up the Jews for Nazi Germany.
My only argument against you is beastiality, sex with animals, is clearly wrong, but otherwise you are correct in that what 2 mutually consenting adults decide to do sexually with eachother in privacy should be no one’s concern.
I do not like beastiality nor do I wish to associate with those who do like it. As a conservative libertarian I don’t see any need to interfere with a persons love affair with an animal as long as it his animal, and not the property of someone else(I do not believe in animal rights). I personally am not homosexual, and find homosexual acts to be disgusting (unless it is two women and they are hot) however it is not my place to tell two men what to do. I just really am disgusted with any government agent of any kind telling someone who and how they can fuck when force or unfair coercion is not involved in the situation. But doclove I must concur sex with animals does provoke serious disgust in me as well.
I would be curious to hear from someone who has lived in places with and without legal prostitution, regarding how the sexual marketplace is affected.
I recently spent a week in Karlsruhe, Germany. As an American, I was astonished to find out that there’s a alley full of brothels right across the street from the university (which is a prestigious one), and many of the (hot, young) hookers are students there.
Here to answer, even if I don’t use it myself, I live in a country where it’s legal.
Quickly : Easy money for female students, but it doesn’t change much for men, it’s still very shamed, people wear sunglasses and hats to avoid being recognized as for 90% of people, paying for sex, even with a model escort, means you can’t even lay a fat troll.
Pretty sad to think that way when succesful people represent such a large customer base but that’s how the general opinion is…
HUGE manjaw going on
Why single out Puritanism? Sounds like the author was raised in a Puritan church and still has a sore butt from it. Why not just call it Christianity?
Puritanism is as much of a philosophy as it is as sect of Christianity. The new england liberals who decend from the puritans, although quite secular, adhere to the same sanctimoniousness as their pious ancestors. http://www.richardwebster.net/thepoliticsofthebody.html
It’s been about 300 years since “Puritans” had any political sway in New England. And for the past 4 generations Irish and Italian Catholics have been running the show.
Today, you will find many more decedents of John Winthrop’s people in places like Texas and Utah than you will in Massachusetts. Richard Webster is a colossal idiot.
“Puritans” is the root of all the quacky protestant religious movements in the U.S. smartass, Lutherans Presbyterians and episcopalians are the only exceptions.
Second, it’s been a long long time since those “Catholics” practised their faith, they were absorbed by the sick culture of your country and even when they were practicing (many decades ago) most of them couldn’t even be regarded as Catholics in the sense classical Europe or Hispanic Catholics of yore would understand the term.
The Puritans were Anglican and then re-absorbed into the US Episcopalian church
You’re very confused.
Puritanism = Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder.
“Sounds like the author was raised in a Puritan church and still has a sore butt from it.”
LOL no
I single out Puritanism because, as a distinct form of worship/thought, it clearly played a unique role in the foundation and propagation of American culture. Not all forms of Christianity were created equal.
I think prostitution could be legalized in the U.S., but I think vices like drugs would be legalized long before prostitution becomes legal. All it takes is sufficient motivation to do so. Chronic down economy is usually the best condition in which to make this happen, so it could happen in my lifetime.
The shaming, however, would never stop. I cannot see the U.S. of A. ever regarding prostitution the way the Dutch view it.
Next step will be laws against men leaving for countries in Asia and South America..to “protect third world countries from Western predators”..or translated, “so we will not lose our power”
“Next step”? There are *already* federal laws in the United States that prohibit international travel for purposes of prostitution in some cases.
II dont mean for prostitution..I mean for meating ordinary foreign girls.
That will be interesting as the same people who want to stop men from going overseas are the same people who are advocating for same-sex fiance visas.
I can’t wait until modern science perfects the sex robot. There’s not a damn thing that Kathleen Rice and the feminist can do about the fembot.
Yes, they can — just like they went after pornography in the 1980s. They’ll claim that sexbots lead to “objectification of women” or some other nonsense. Or if they’re feeling especially crazy that morning, they’ll make a claim for “robot rights”.
And don’t forget the nonstop shaming they’ll use against men who buy one, use one, or discuss it.
They would have to know the man had one first. Its not like you would take it out to dinner.
I believe you strongly underestimate the appetite for the latest techno gadgets, amongst Japanese men……
They would make spare parts and maintenance so difficult to purchase (ilegality+control) that prices would be high as hell and users rare.
What does the average divorce cost? What about hiring a hooker several times a week?
You just have to pitch it in terms of cost per lay. Put a 2,000 use / 10 year warranty on the thing and you could easily have a list price of $30k. That works out to $15 an experience + cleaning supplies. Your units sold would be in the tens of millions.
If prostitution were both legal and socially acceptable, then it would become just another female entitlement.
Imagine your girlfriends and dates are just as Hypergamous as they are today with who and how the associate, but now they expect to be paid. Imagine your long term gilfriend still expecting money months into the relationship.
It is said that women only object to prostitution, because the price is too cheap, but who says that legal prostitution will greatly reduce the price? Im not sure. I doubt that there is this great flood of women who are willing to sleep with men who repulse them, but dont because of Illegality. I am pretty sure that an open buyers market may never exist, except for alpha males.
The best option for men is what exists in Latin America todaywhere strong religious values keep the practice out of sight and out of the mainstream, but where the government is not policing. This was also the law in much of the US until recently.
Assuming you’re right about completely all encompassing female sluttiness. Legal prostitution then, most likely, lead to a sexual market for women, similar to that which currently exists for men; 10% get all the action (and dough.) While little (or not so) Ms. Manjaw gets to bond even closer with her cats than today.
“but who says that legal prostitution will greatly reduce the price?”
Here you can fuck a decent looking whore for 25 dollars. In the US you’d literally have to pay 10 times the amount.
Dear ROK,
Please do a post on the whole Miley Cyrus VMA’s. At first i was actually impressed with the outrage and thought maybe there is hope for america, but i have been seeing a lot of liberal-Fem blogs and stuff defending her and calling it “slut shaming”…
I am curios what ROK and its readership think about the whole phenomenon.
The “Where Have All The Good Men Gone” line. I actually stumbled upon that piece of shit article the other day on the WSJ. Totally absent from this piece, which constantly stresses men’s responsibility to “man up” and “provide” for a woman is the notion of HIS happiness. What HE wants to do with his life. Her implications are that masculine maturity consists of abandoning the things that you enjoy in order to grind all day at a job you hate in order to provide for a spoiled bitch who treats you like shit. My reaction is “fuck you, I’m not a man because I want to live my OWN life?” I sacrificed YEARS of my life in order to fight for this country and this cunt thinks I need to “man up” by marrying some cum dumpster so she can have the “beta -husband-white-picket-fence-fantasy” after a decade or more on the cock carousel? No.
Really good points.
Where have all the good men gone?
To look for good women, every one
When will they ever learn……
Poetry
Funny, our neighborhood back in Long Island had 36 residential burglaries in one year with the Nassau County Police as the main representatives of the area of our small town. They never even caught the guys. So much for your track record Nassau County. They are probably one of the worst representations of a government union.
This should make you guys feel better.
I suspect that in ten years, feminism’s chickens will come home to roost. They are passing some of the most draconian domestic violence and sexual assault laws the world has ever seen.
How long can that go on before major upheaval?
I don’t know the answer, but I am on the fence between forever, and ten years. Ten years, and cognitive dissonance seem more favorable.
America is indeed a very sick society, as any foreigner can attest. Just last night in front of an international audience we Americans showcased a girl in her underwear performing vulgar sexual acts. I’m talking of Miley Cyrus in case you didn’t know. When your average male sees that he will obviously become aroused. However, if you were to mention your sexual desire for Miley, you’d be labeled a ‘pervert’ or a ‘creep’. I kept hearing people refer to her as a child. Really?
I’ve noted that American females are just as obsessed with sex as American males. The females recognize the immense power it gives them, especially as American females squirt out 1000’s of new beta males a day. I could go on…but you get the point.
I kept hearing people refer to her as a child. Really?
She’s 20 years old. I often dump on people who consider 17 y.o. girls “children”, but this is just stupid. There’s no jurisdiction in the world where she’d be considered a minor.
In the minds of desperate 35+ year old women anybody under 28 is a child
During my time in the service of Uncle Sam, I had the privilege of visiting several different countries, in different parts of the world. Let’s just say, I’ll never forget this Russian girl, who gave me, then 20yrs old, the night of my life. The bad thing is now, every girl I sleep with gets compared to her. 🙂
http://s21.postimg.org/sf99l1ykn/Nassau_County_Slackers_wht.jpg
To be fair and equitable they should at least put up picks of any woman who has had a one night stand.
If paid adultery is a crime, it rationally follows that the actual crime is adultery.
It’s interesting that an Alpha that can bump uglies at will is not punished but a Beta that is procuring the same thing but must pay is a criminal.
So in effect it is criminal not to be able to get a lay.
“So in effect it is criminal not to be able to get a lay. ”
DING DING DING we have a winner.
Women hate omegas.
So we agree that adultery needs to be recriminalized.
Spot on, Athlone. Do checkout the writing of Laura Augustin, who writes extensively about what she calls the “rescue industry,” i.e, organizations that purport to fight “human trafficking” and who try to save women who most often don’t want to be saved. The real goal of these organizations is to fight prostitution and Miss Augustin calls them on their BS and bad statistics. Truly, check out her archive!
http://www.lauraagustin.com/site-map
Good thing this Puritan doesn’t make the law in Tokyo. The entire globe cannot be clock blocked.
You are the first gay satanist? No way, the church of Anton Szandor Lavey has been promoting the freedom to be gay and satanist at the same time since immemorial times.
Stop bullshitting us. Being the first gay satanist is like the greatest honor ever. Do you really think you deserve it?
That meat-wad sandwich and plastic bottle in front of her says it all. Compare that to the fine meals my wife prepares every day, as seen in “A Man Wants a Wife, Not a Co-Worker”.
As for the Puritans and early Americans, prostitution was common back in the day. Whorehouses existed in most mining towns of the old west. My own dad, who grew up in mining towns along the Mexcan border, recounts how the madame of the hotel next to his family’s shack would visit his mom to have tea, and he would listen intently to her stories. “Those young gals are lovely now, but wait until their asses fall out” he quotes her in Spanish.
Another thing : notice the largely pale faces in the perp poster. She would not dare post a “pimps” poster as everyone know what color all of them would be, and that would be politically dangerous for appearing to be “racist”. All the fictional perps on Law&Order SVU dramas are middle-aged white men.
Onward christian soldiers, marching as to war…
Ummm what do you mean by disproportionate political weight? Are they getting 2 votes each now? If they did have disproportionate political weight wouldn’t their be more women in office?
“Ummm what do you mean by disproportionate political weight? Are they getting 2 votes each now?”
Women are significantly more likely to vote than men are. They turn out at significantly higher rates than men do, and thus account for the majority of votes cast in modern American elections.
Because women outvote men, they tend to wield a disproportionate amount of political weight. That disproportionate weight is not quite equal to “2 votes each”, but it is significant. Politicians generally govern their behavior and shape their agendas/platforms on the basis of the will of the voters, and these days the majority of these voters are women.
“If they did have disproportionate political weight wouldn’t their be more women in office?”
Why would that be the case? Don’t assume that women always have each others’ back. They may generally agree on many things (hence the issue about their disproportionate political clout being important), but that doesn’t mean that they’ll always prop each other up. Females are often known to be quite hard on other individual females and they are extremely competitive.
Don’t forget the other aspect that addes to the disproportionate weight; women vote in blocs. Women have a proven (as in scientific studies have demonstrated multiple times) that women have an in group bias and that men do not. That means women will vote for whatever they think is best for women ( and f**k the rest o f humanity), while men vote based on the merits of the issue. As a result some men vote one way and other men vote the other, but the vast majority of women will vote only one way on any issue. As a result what women wants is what gets voted in.
“If they did have disproportionate political weight wouldn’t their be more women in office?”
Does it matter what isthe gender of the chauffer? what matters is who is sitting in the back telling the chauffer where to go. And in the US of A today the gender of the person sitting in the back is female.
Copper’s Eva Heissen: ‘Wives are like whores with a marriage certificate.’
Kathleen Rice,
No matter where you are or how you feel, we, the lifetime members of the Wolverine Fan Club, think you fuckin’ suck as a human being. This condition of yours is the product of years of alienation in your workplace and social circles.
By looking at your photograph it is not difficult to realize that you think you are tough and confident as a man.
We, the Wolverine Fan Club, think you are a joke. A very ugly and “unfunny” one.
Fuck you
Sincerely,
The Wolverine Fan Club
Women dont like prostitution. Thats why its illegal.
That’s a workable basic summary of things, I suppose.
Tell me, would you want your daughter to be a prostitute?
Women don’t like prostitution but you know what?
In their eyes it’s ok to get money/dinner/drinks for nothing from men or get married and give up sex maybe once a month.
Women are the biggest hypocrites of all time!
Athlone best poster on ROK by far
Sigh. Totally ignore the fact that many women and little children (both male and female) are forced into prostitution and when there is an arrest, the prostitute is more likely to go to jail as opposed to the John when without the John, there is no need to kidnap little innocents for the John’s personal pleasure. I seriously hope that the writer and those that are reading and in agreement with this article, don’t have any daughters. Else, you probably would be the first to auction her off to the highest bidder. Btw, marriage was invented by men, not women. We were much happier in our sexual freedom and child bearing/rearing freedom until insecure little males that were tired of being the alpha males little bitch, found a way to manipulate the situation in his favor so he could have some pussy (and spare his own ass from the alpha male).
Some 75-80% of prostitutes in America are literally slaves. They have no choice in who they have sex with, they meet a quote or get beaten, and they don’t get to keep the money–and the average age for “entering” the trade is 12.
So these guys were embarrassed when someone caught them trying to rape a child-slave–I’ll forego the sack-cloth and ashes.
I get so happy when a good man with logical and rational thinking comes along. Thanks for sharing.
“Totally ignore the fact that many women and little children (both male and female) are forced into prostitution”
Are you implying a correlation between the legalization of prostitution and the rate of child prostitution/forced sex trafficking in any given society?
I’ve seen no evidence of such a relationship so if you have any I’d be interested in taking a look.
“I seriously hope that the writer and those that are reading and in
agreement with this article, don’t have any daughters. Else, you
probably would be the first to auction her off to the highest bidder.”
Yes, because supporting the legalization of a practice that has been explicitly legalized in nearly every other developed nation on Earth implies that I plan to sell my daughter into the sex trade for profit.
I’m sure that the Canadian, German, British, French, Spanish and Italian citizens (male and female) are totally in favor of child sex trafficking given their sanctioning of governments that have deemed the act of paying for sex not to be a crime. That must be the case, after all, if we’re to take for granted your allegation that supporting legalized prostitution = supporting child and/or forced sex trafficking.
Is this really the best you can do?
“Btw, marriage was invented by men, not women.”
The concept of marriage is a cultural universal that found likely found its sanction independently via the blessings of both sexes in many different societies. It cannot be credited to one sex or the other.
“We were much happier in our sexual freedom and child bearing/rearing
freedom until insecure little males that were tired of being the alpha
males little bitch, found a way to manipulate the situation in his favor
so he could have some pussy (and spare his own ass from the alpha
male).”
You understand that marriage does not necessarily imply monogamy, correct?
There are many forms of marriage that do not work in favor of the “insecure little males” (I assume that by this you mean “beta males”) at all. These forms of marriage allow for alpha males to simply legitimize their harems. Your definition of marriage seems to strictly follow the northwestern European model, which is not the only one that exists. That model is the most beta friendly form of marriage in existence.
Women benefit extensively from the concept of marriage and always have. This “freedom” you speak of was useless in pre-modern times when there was no strong state and no welfare to support women, forcing them to rely on family/community support in the raising of children. Those women benefited from some form of marriage and the security it could offer via the attachment to a suitable male (and his resources/physical protection), though this marriage was likely not of the strictly monogamous northwestern European kind.
“Are you implying a correlation between the legalization of prostitution and the rate of child prostitution/forced sex trafficking in any given society?
I’ve seen no evidence of such a relationship so if you have any I’d be interested in taking a look”.
Don’t take my word for it, research places like Thailand to find your answer. Maybe even a little research on organizations such as the Russian mafia and the Mexican cartel.
“Yes, because supporting the legalization of a practice that has been explicitly legalized in nearly every other developed nation on Earth implies that I plan to sell my daughter into the sex trade for profit”.
If you are supportive of another’s man’s daughter for working as a prostitute then why wouldn’t you endorse your own daughter?
“I’m sure that the Canadian, German, British, French, Spanish and Italian citizens (male and female) are totally in favor of child sex trafficking given their sanctioning of governments that have deemed the act of paying for sex not to be a crime. That must be the case, after all, if we’re to take for granted your allegation that supporting legalized prostitution = supporting child and/or forced sex trafficking”.
Do you read the news? You might find reports of one child porn sting after another being busted for the vile defilement of a child. Sex with teens is actively endorsed even in legal porn, because even though eighteen is the official age of adulthood, it’s the teen that counts, especially with men that fantasize about younger teens. Legalize one form and the other has a good chance to follow.
“The concept of marriage is a cultural universal that found likely found its sanction independently via the blessings of both sexes in many different societies. It cannot be credited to one sex or the other. You understand that marriage does not necessarily imply monogamy, correct?
There are many forms of marriage that do not work in favor of the “insecure little males” (I assume that by this you mean “beta males”) at all. These forms of marriage allow for alpha males to simply legitimize their harems. Your definition of marriage seems to strictly follow the northwestern European model, which is not the only one that exists. That model is the most beta friendly form of marriage in existence.
Women benefit extensively from the concept of marriage and always have. This “freedom” you speak of was useless in pre-modern times when there was no strong state and no welfare to support women, forcing them to rely on family/community support in the raising of children. Those women benefited from some form of marriage and the security it could offer via the attachment to a suitable male (and his resources/physical protection), though this marriage was likely not of the strictly monogamous northwestern European kind.”
Yes, the concept of marriage is universal and yes, marriages were traditionally used to form alliances. However, not do I only know that there are quite a few societies that don’t practice monogamy (there are societies where a wife can have as many partners as she chooses and she would still be considered a woman of morals), but some of those marriages are homosexual ones too. There is a big difference in marriage in matriarchal societies as opposed to patriarchal societies. Men aren’t needed for protection. They are just needed as sperm donor. Entrapping women into a monogamous relationship (while he’s free to insert his penis into any female he chooses) was done because of the believe of immortality that could only be found through his legitimate male progeny. May I suggest some readings? “The Golden Bough”, the Gilgamesh myth and look up some books written by Joseph Campbell. There are many more but that should get you off to a good start.
“Don’t take my word for it, research places like Thailand to find your
answer. Maybe even a little research on organizations such as the
Russian mafia and the Mexican cartel.”
Prostitution is actually illegal in Thailand and Russia, a fact which would seem to lend credence to my skepticism regarding the notion that there is a direct correlation between the legalization of prostitution and rates of child prostitution/sex trafficking.
“If you are supportive of another’s man’s daughter for working as a prostitute then why wouldn’t you endorse your own daughter?”
Because another man’s daughter is not my daughter, just as another man’s son is not my son, another man’s house is not my house and another man rules are not my rules. People are free to make their own decisions for them and theirs. These decisions are not made in unison.
You attempt here to establish the notion that if you do not oppose another unrelated individual engaging in a particular activity that you should therefore tacitly approve that course of action for yourself or those related to you. You’re implying a correlation/link that simply does not exist.
To use a less controversial example than prostitution: I played American football at the collegiate first division level. I sustained serious injuries and would prefer my children not participate in the game of American football.
Though I do not approve of my own children playing the game, I have no issue with others who will choose to allow their children to do so. I will still watch the game on tv from time to time and even cheer for some of the players, so long as they’re not my own offspring. Other parents and their children are free to make their own decisions for their lives, and I’ll not judge them. My approval of their participation does not equate to an approval of my own childrens’ participation.
“Do you read the news? You might find reports of one child porn sting
after another being busted for the vile defilement of a child.”
Yes, I read the news. No, I don’t see your point. Child pornography is not legal or endorsed in any of the nations I mentioned despite their sanctioning legalized prostitution.
“Sex with teens is actively endorsed even in legal porn, because even
though eighteen is the official age of adulthood, it’s the teen that
counts, especially with men that fantasize about younger teens. Legalize
one form and the other has a good chance to follow.”
1. The age of adulthood is 18. This means that those under 18 cannot engage in prostitution, film pornography or emancipate themselves. It says nothing at all, however, about the endorsement of sexual engagement.
The age of actual sexual consent (the age at which an individual can consent to the engagement of sex with an individual of any age) is significantly lower in most parts of the world. Only 9 US states set this age of consent at 18. Most (29/50) set it at 16. In Europe, the number goes from 14-16 (save for Ireland, where the number is 17).
The idea of teens engaging in sexual activity is endorsed in legal porn in large part because the legal systems governing the most powerful and effective governments on Earth and representing the most progressive and ethically-concerned cultures on Earth see no real issue with it. They see no issue because there isn’t one. It is completely legal in nearly every western society (and most American states) for a teen under the age of 18 to become sexually active with an older individual. Nobody is going to demonize that behavior in porn or elsewhere because it isn’t illegal or immoral.
2. Most men fantasize about teens on a regular basis. This is not pathology or pedophilia, it is biology. It is only recently that average ages of marriage/reproduction moved into the low to mid twenties. We’ve spent most of our 200,000 year history as homo sapiens marrying and beginning families in our teenage years. Our biological programming has not kept up with our societal progress, which has realized that 15-18 is not the ideal time to start making babies and has made it more feasible (via technological advancement and social awareness) to extend the concept of “adolescence” (though that is still mostly a western thing).
3. I’m not sure what you mean by “legalize one form” (of what?)
If you’re referring to prostitution, then I maintain that there is no evidence of legalize prostitution leading to increased tolerance of pedophilia and child sex trafficking. The burden is on you to provide evidence to the contrary.
“There is a big difference in marriage in matriarchal societies as
opposed to patriarchal societies. Men aren’t needed for protection. They
are just needed as sperm donor.”
Untrue. Even in societies suspected to have been matriarchal in nature (ex: the Iroquois), men were responsible for most of the warfighting, the hunting and for the protection of the community as a whole. There is no society in which male protection was not essential-humans do not live in vacuums, communities have historically never been able to discount threats from invaders, and women cannot fend for themselves on a proper battlefield against trained male warfighters.
The notion of the matriarchy in which no male warfighters were necessary and men served only as sperm donors is a fantasy capable of existing only in a world where women faced no armed external threats, faced no harsh environmental conditions and had no need for wild game to subsist. Amazons are not real, and neither is Wonder Woman.
“Entrapping women into a monogamous relationship (while he’s free to
insert his penis into any female he chooses) was done because of the
believe of immortality that could only be found through his legitimate
male progeny.”
This is not the reason for the promotion of monogamy among western europeans (the only people on Earth known to have promoted socially imposed monogamy). Monogamy was designed to reduce competition between men by decreasing the power of the “alpha males” who, absent strict instructions to the contrary, would acquire many women and leave many men without mates or hopes of starting a family. Said leftover men tend to be dangerous, often undermining societal progress with their idle and/or violent behavior. Monogamy was designed to reduce the number of these leftover men and, by extension, aid the progress of civilization.
Judging by Western Europe’s success and current domination of the entire globe, I’d say they were onto something, though this process of thought has not come without its downsides.
http://www.gvnet.com/childprostitution/Thailand.htm
My mistake, I guess I should have clarified that it was tolerated and even regulated as opposed to legal.
1.Football is vastly different than prostitution. I have as of yet to meet a woman that wanted to be a prostitute when she grew up.
2. A grown man having sex with an underage girl is perverse. But hey, I’m sure the Romans would agree with you.They saw fit to bugger little boys and rape little girls alike.
3. Marriages were mostly between two teens. What advantage is there to a woman to marry a disgusting old fart that would probably die and leave her without the protection that a lot of men conceitedly believe she needs?
4. The longer it takes a species to mature, the species has a better chance of moving up on the evolutionary ladder. Lust for little girls is not biologically, it’s cultural. What you presented are “studies” that I lump along with an older man’s sperm searching out and killing a younger man’s sperm in competition for the ova.
5. Someone forgot about middle-eastern based monogamy. Christianity started in the middle east and promotes monogamy. Judaism also started there and though the hubby was allowed multiple wives and concubines. But she wasn’t allowed to be with any other but him.
6. You can’t seriously believe that women did not fight, hunt and provide. Amazons were not a complete myth. British and Irish women fought in wars along with their men folk. But yea, hold on to that male fallacy.
7. A man that cannot respect and appreciate a woman and her worth, especially as a person and not as something to be used and discarded, does not deserve to ever be with a woman and would be better solely jerking off for the rest of his life.
Well, I did reply but it appears as if it has been deleted. Very amusing.
No, its right here.
It’s not showing up from where I’m at. Good debate though.
“Football is vastly different than prostitution.”
Not in the context of its place in this particular discussion, which is to illustrate the fact that one can approve of others engaging in a particular activity while not wishing to engage in it themselves and not approving of their relatives engaging in it. People do not make decisions in unison as you have implied.
“A grown man having sex with an underage girl is perverse.”
By “underage”, do you mean under 18? If so, then you’re welcome to your opinion but you’ve got very little in the way of a logical base to stand on.
Most modern governments (and, by extension, the democratic electorates that sanction them) see no problem with 16 and 17 year olds consenting to sexual intercourse.
Most modern psychologists will also tell you that attraction to individuals in that age range is not indicative of a paraphilia (perversion) in the way the attraction to pre-pubescent individuals (pedophilia) is.
“But hey, I’m sure the Romans would agree with you.They saw fit to bugger little boys and rape little girls alike.”
I don’t need the Romans to agree with me. The United States government along with the governments of just about every modern nation on Earth agree with the notion that it is perfectly ok for individuals as young as 16 to consent to sexual activity with persons of any age at or above their own.
The same governments that sanction the engagement in sex by individuals as young as 16 or 17 condemn the rape of pre-pubescent children. It is therefore quite disingenuous (and, in fact, downright inaccurate) of you to attempt to portray my belief in the notion that 16/17 year olds consenting to intercourse is not perversion as a tacit belief in the validity of child rape.
“3. Marriages were mostly between two teens.”
Typical age gaps spanned about 5 years in western societies prior to the 20th century. A relationship involving a 20-22 year old male and a 15-17 year old female was probably as typical as anything else. You were probably just as likely to see a female in the latter half of her teen years marrying a male in his early 20’s as you were to see two teens marrying.
“What advantage is there to a woman to marry a disgusting old fart that would probably die and leave her without the protection that a lot of men conceitedly believe she needs?”
1. In pre-20th century Europe/America, marriage was more essential socially than it is now, a crucial determinant of one’s social status and future success. For a woman especially, marriage was considered essential since patriarchal norms limited her role outside of that of wife/mother. Thus, it was crucial that women worked to obtain the “right” marriage.
What was the “right” marriage? The one that secured or increased her social status/wealth and ensured that any children she had were secure in their status as well. The “right” marriage often involved marrying someone with a good “pedigree”, be it through family legacy, wealth, or individual accomplishment (preferably some combination of all these things).
Older men could often offer all of the above, and thus sometimes made good candidates for families seeking the “right” marriage for their daughters. Most of the time the age gaps in “right” marriages were close, but this was not always the case as some older men simply made better overall candidates for “right” marriages to individual women than younger men did. That is how some older men offered an advantage to younger women.
2. Not all large age gaps involved “disgusting old farts”. It wouldn’t be out of line to have seen a 16 year old medieval European woman married off to a 28-35 year old man. I would not call that age “disgusting old fart” territory.
3. A woman who married a wealthy older man in pre-20th century Europe could often expect to inherit a large sum of that wealth upon his passing. It must be noted that pre-20th century European society was one of very limited independence for women: it was very hard for them to build their own wealth and a wife was usually legally obligated to give up all of her property/wealth upon marriage (the husband often being the recipient). Becoming a widow to a wealthy man was one of the few surefire ways to acquire true wealth and power for a woman in such a society and to keep it. Indeed, many of the most powerful women in colonial America (to use one example and one time period) were widows to wealthy men.
“Lust for little girls is not biologically, it’s cultural.”
If by “little girls” you mean post-pubescent teens under 18, then no, you’re off. Any attraction to said females by males their age or older is biological, triggered by the onset of puberty and their move toward sexual maturity (the attainment of traits that men consider sexually attractive, i.e. full breasts). Most modern states recognize this, which is why 16 is the most common age of sexual consent across the western world.
If by “little girls”, you mean pre-pubescent females, then you’re both wrong and right. The attraction to pre-pubescent children is called pedophilia, and there is evidence that it is a genetic disorder. Men are not wired to find pre-pubescent girls sexually appealing cannot usually be influenced to do so by any cultural means.
There is also evidence, however, that pedophilia can be triggered by environmental factors like child abuse. It is therefore a likely a genetic and a cultural (prevalence of child abuse) phenomenon.
“You can’t seriously believe that women did not fight, hunt and provide.”
No, women could provide. In most societies outside of Europe (particularly in africa and the pre-colonial Americas) women were crucial to the provision of food to the community and handled most of the agricultural work. Warrior women also existed in some African societies and it is certain that some women hunted.
What is more certain, however, is that men did the bulk of the hunting and the bulk of the fighting necessary to keep societies going. Women are not physically equipped to reliably track and bring down large game (something many societies heavily relied on) and they are not physically powerful enough to withstand large forces of trained male warfighters.
They are especially ill equipped to do these things while carrying and raising children, something they must do if any given society is to expect to persist (the Spartans learned this the hard way, as did the Greeks, the Romans, the Babylonians and many others).
This is why, historically, men have been essential to the defense of a community and its members as well as to its provision. Women are also essential to the communities provisioning but were more essential than men in the propagation of that community and in the nurturing of its future members.
What you’re trying to argue for is a matriarchy in which men have no real value at all and women can do everything adequately by themselves. This society does not exist in our sexually dimorphic species, never has existed and never will. It is fantasy.
“Amazons were not a complete myth.”
Yes they are. There is no society in which men are totally and utterly superfluous, just as there is no society that could do without women.
“British and Irish women fought in wars along with their men folk.”
Nobody said that women were NEVER involved in warfare.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_warfare_and_the_military_%281750%E2%80%931799%29
What I said was that warfare, throughout history, has involved primarily male warfighters. Women are very rare on battlefields and have always been. Why? Men are generally more inclined to warfighting and are generally more physically suited to it.
“But yea, hold on to that male fallacy.”
I’m sorry, but if you cannot acknowledge the basic predominance of the human male in human warfighting then you’re delusional. There is nothing fallacious about that.
And all of that in a state in which prostitution has not been legalized.
I rest my case.
If the law isn’t enforced, it doesn’t matter. Even we have some outdated, backward ass laws that are not enforced. If one breaks them, nothing is done. Nor, has “illegal” stopped the sex trade and the abuse that comes along with it.
I’m really busy right now and this debate is no longer mere banter but has entered the realm of a Anthropological debate that is going to require a more research that I really don’t have time for right now. Not that it matters anyway, because the arguments that you present and the ones that I presented are argued by those with a much stronger educational background than ours (unless you have a doctorate in Anthropology and/ Biology)and they still have no resolution. I’ll be back over the weekend but the battle, um, debate is far from over.
I started this discussion by challenging the notion that there was any sort of strong correlation between the legalization of prostitution and the rate of forced child rape/trafficking/prostitution, a notion which you very strongly implied.
Here you’ve essentially proven my point for me: prostitution is illegal in Thailand and Russia, but child trafficking/prostitution are much bigger problems there than in nations like Canada and Germany, where prostitution is explicitly legal.
You’ve established that there is not a clear correlation between the legalization of prostitution and the prevalance of child trafficking/rape. Nations in which prostitution is explicitly illegal (Cambodia, Thailand, Russia, Laos, etc) are the ones with the higher rates of child trafficking/prostituton/abuse, not those where the practice is legal (Canada, Germany, etc).
The prevalence of child prostitution/trafficking is not correlated with the mere legalization of prostitution as you’ve implied. It is correlated with a host of broader cultural, social and economic factors that go beyond the word of the law (or impact how closely said law may be enforced or followed).
http://tampep.eu/documents/tampep_generalpresentation.pdf
http://www.dw.de/little-progress-on-tackling-german-child-abuse/a-16615798
http://www.dw.de/child-prostitutes-between-school-and-dinner/a-16996832
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2003/10/30/2003073939
http://www.wouk.org/rahab_international/germany_prostitution_trafficking.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Europe#cite_note-28
You were saying? Not only is there a correlation but some of the sex trafficked victims are infants and like any other situation where men are involved, these women and children are exploited for the financial gain of men.
“http://tampep.eu/documents/tampep_generalpresentation.pdf”
Not seeing much evidence of child prostitution and/or child sex trafficking in this document. I do see evidence of some serious issues relating to the treatment of migrant sex workers, but this document doesn’t seem to aid in proving your implication that the prevalence of child prostitution/forced child sex trafficking is enhanced by the legalization of prostitution in general.
“http://www.dw.de/little-progress-on-tackling-german-child-abuse/a-16615798”
This link tells me that sexual abuse is an issue in Germany that hasn’t been addressed.
It does not tell me, however, that child sexual abuse (which isn’t child prostitution/child sex trafficking but we’ll go ahead and put it under that umbrella for argument’s sake) is more prevalent in Germany than in nations where prostitution is illegal (ex: Thailand, Cambodia, the United States).
Remember, your implication has been that legalized prostitution = enhanced rates of child trafficking/child prostitution. Merely proving that child abuse exists in a state in which prostitution is legal doesn’t help this argument. You need to also establish that said child abuse occurs at a greater frequency in that state (and in other states where prostitution is legal, meaning not just Germany but also France, Canada, the UK, etc, etc) than in others in which prostitution is not sanctioned by law.
“http://www.dw.de/child-prostitutes-between-school-and-dinner/a-16996832”
This article says that child prostitution is a problem in Germany. We are aware of this, as the existence of child prostitution in that state (and in others in which prostitution is legal, like the UK, Canada, France, etc) was never really challenged. What we’re discussing are the rates of said child sexual abuse/prostitution relative to those in states without legally sanctioned prostitution. This article doesn’t help with that.
“http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2003/10/30/2003073939”
This article (which is a decade old, it must be noted) has the same issues as the two above.
“http://www.wouk.org/rahab_international/germany_prostitution_trafficking.php”
This article devotes some time specifically to the focus on child prostitution/trafficking. It informs us that a problem exists but, like the articles above, doesn’t offer the comparative analysis needed to prove your implication. It does tell us that Germany has among the higher rates of rape in Europe, but that doesn’t help much in the context of our discussion.
“http://www.globalmarch.org/worstformsreport/world/romania.html”
This link just doesn’t work.
Men aren’t needed for protection. They are just needed as sperm donor.
LOL
And women are just needed as CUM DUMPSTERS!
Correction: In Malta & Turkey the age of consent is not 14 or 17 BUT 18!
You must really hate your mother and I hope that you never have children and any woman unlucky to sleep with you that might get cursed to get pregnant by you should have an abortion using Clorox.
The only hate I have is for stupid women like you since they are the reason why I would never think about marriage or having children.
I only hate stupid women who think men are sperm donors & there’s no way i would want to get married or have kids with stupid women who are whores just like you.
Whore!
Whore- adapted from the Indo-European word for “lover”. Houri -a word ignorantly mistranslated into European languages but meaning, pure, chaste, beautiful virgins. Apparently, there are more Alpha males in the Middle East that aren’t afraid of having sex with women than in European cultures. We both know that when men attempt to bring women down it’s due to insecurities and fears. It’s a shame that we live in a culture where men are so ashamed and insecure about themselves that they learn to fear sex and self-project themselves onto other people while believing that they are entitled to sex. Grow up, little boy. http://houri.askdefinebeta.com/
Serial killer.
I knew i heard her name before. Kathleen Rice is the DA that didn’t prosecute a girl who made false rape charges:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/25/new.york.falsely.accused/index.html
Please don’t contribute to the shaming: blur the faces on the poster.
I was watching an episode of Cops recently which was entirely devoted to a prostitution sting. It was all basically entrapment(the fake prostitute was out in the street trying to flag men down near the motel) and they managed to get 5 men within a couple hours. It was almost like an assembly line, after being cuffed the johns would be dumped in the adjoining motel room with the others and would have to witness the next victims being pulled in.
After using immense police resources to destroy the lives of these men, the female officer in charge gives this speech on how she is somehow protecting these men, even noting that none of them had any criminal history whatsoever.
A career slag who hit the wall years and years ago with nothing better to do is going to tell me what I can and can’t do? Shocker indeed. Sometimes I can’t believe I served this country. What a joke.
The USA and it’s truly idiotic anti-prostitution laws, and not to mention a horrendous waste of valuable police and court time. Thank God I live in Australia, where we don’t have these stupid laws. For fucks sake USA, legalise prostitution and don’t publicly shame men whose only “crime”, was that they wanted to have sex.
Getting pussy just another expense if pussy pay the bills then dick pays to rent. I only need a hoe for one thing and that’s to cum. I got 99 problems and a bitch ain’t one!
– Brotha Marquis
So riddle me this…if America has such a Puritanical background, why have so many people (with women usually marching at the head of the pack) so supportive of same sex marriage? Isn’t that a more radical movement than legalized prostitution? We’ve had prostitution throughout human history for thousands of years, but same sex marriage for only the last decade or so. And doesn’t that lessen the amount of available men that women have to choose from? You always hear women complaining about a lot of otherwise available men being gay, but now, with the current pro-gay climate, it’s becoming easier and easier for men who might have normally given women a chance to just jump on over into the LGBT bandwagon. Why aren’t women threatened by THAT? On the other hand, maybe the question should be “what are women gaining by it?”
Man this Country is such a bunch of idiots.
They support
Blowing up families in foreign lands who have brown skin yet they are all upright about what two adults do behind locked doors.
And Zionist cultural subversion aka feminism is just a tool to make what nature provided- men and women to hate each other because Jane Dow
Listened to Zionist commie drivel at puff bag u and now thinks attacking the biological entity who would treat her the best if she gave him honor with no drama or questions is the cool
Thing to do.
It’s
Like my lawyer said-were surrounded by idiots.
I don’t want by tits and a soft feminine demeanor I want a cups and a snarky chihuahua in flip flops barking at me aka the difference between eastern drops and Americastan.
Take a camera and film yourself having sex with a prostitute. Then it´s not prostitution, it´s pornography = legal 😛 Still, prostitutes are for lazy gammas
You can buy a girl fancy dinner and get sex, perfectly ok. You can buy a girl designer shoes/purses or diamond ear rings and get sex, perfectly ok. But suddenly, paying a girl a dollar for sex and both of them are criminals. LOL.
Make no mistake, criminalize prostitution is all about women controlling
the supply of pussies. If these women actually care about prostitutes’
well beings, they would get them off the street and into safe/control
brothels by legalizing the oldest profession.