Now DG don't get riled but I think they are two very different questions. Originally Posted by WTFNo worries; disagreement and discussion can be enjoyable.
- discreetgent
- 04-16-2010, 08:48 AM
- WTF
- 04-16-2010, 09:09 AM
I totally agree with this....
Human psychology is vastly complex, and it is a rare experience to be able to tell any human being everything about your thoughts, desires, dreams, fantasies, and secret moments. We all have them - even if we've been faithful and never booked a compensated date.
Originally Posted by Lauren Summerhill
While I agree with this, I think it can apply to any person or group. I just do not think we are special in this regard.
There is always a barrier between us and other people. Originally Posted by Lauren Summerhill
To say "hey it's a hooker forum" when there's bad behaviour only feeds into the stereotypes we should be deconstructing, killing, changing. Originally Posted by Lauren SummerhillThis is where we may disagree a bit. It is only a hooker board to some. Why can't they feel this way? It is the diversity that makes life intresting.
Bullying, intolerance, and generally an acidic atmosphere is nothing more then internalized self hate finding a voice online. Originally Posted by Lauren SummerhillTrue...but again different people have different views on just what is and isn't bullying. Some people put the truth above one's feelings. It may scare somebody or embarrass them to get yelled at but if they are about to burn their hand on a lie, I for one will take on that burden.
If someone is civil in asking for my death and another is a bully in asking for my life I think the civility would lose out.
For me this forum is more about facts than presentation.
Think of it as the difference between talking about what one would do in war and the reality of what one actually does.
Personally , I think that the open forum in the higher end is like generals talking about the war that the hourly workers are actually fighting. I try and post from that prespective.
It is somewhat like going to a homeless shelter and discussing a high electric bill in a 10k foot home. I would expect to catch a little eye rolling.
Certain discussions are for certain groups in certain settings.
I am off my soap box. I hope you take no offense, none was meant.
- Guest053011
- 04-16-2010, 09:16 AM
There is always a barrier between us and other people. Originally Posted by Lauren Summerhill
I totally agree with this....Precisely what I meant
While I agree with this, I think it can apply to any person or group. I just do not think we are special in this regard. Originally Posted by WTF
This is where we may disagree a bit. It is only a hooker board to some. Why can't they feel this way? It is the diversity that makes life intresting. Originally Posted by WTFThere's nothing wrong with being a hooker forum, just like there's nothing wrong with being a hooker. I only meant using this as an excuse for mistreating people and accepting that's "just how it is", to me at least, is bullshit.
There is no reason we cannot be considerate, and treat other people with dignity, regardless of our beliefs or motivations. I think that's part of being a moral and ethical human being.
And yes, disagreeing keeps things interesting
- pjorourke
- 04-16-2010, 09:21 AM
..just like there's nothing wrong with being a hooker. Originally Posted by Lauren SummerhillExcept you get kicked in the shins a lot. I used to be a prop -- our job was to hold up the hooker.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_union_positions
- Katy Alexander
- 04-16-2010, 09:37 AM
I do not think of you as a case study.
- Laurentius
- 04-16-2010, 09:52 AM
I never experience a feeling of emptiness after visiting with a provider. But, then again, in most cases the visit is just one aspect of an overarching discussion that takes place before, during and between visits. I don't bother booking a lady once unless I think there's a good chance I'll want to see her repeatedly. What happens over time in most cases is a type of friendship.
So I don't end up with a hollow feeling. I think that by booking a whole woman instead of a pretty picture; and treating her as a whole woman -- to some extent anyway, I get a whole woman.
On Lauren's points, I think we have to be careful in looking at historical human behavior and using that to advocate or justify that behavior in the present.
Let's look at the basic idea that polygamy is -- quite provably -- an aspect of our evolutionary state to which we are well-suited. And, genetic evidence suggests that MOST of that polygamy (though not all) took the form of one man having many mates. In most of human history, money did not exist -- nor wealth as we think of it. That man got all the babes because he was the biggest and baddest. Using his bigness and badness, he was able to control more resources than other men.
Now -- let me ask a question.
What do you do with all the "excess males" for whom a female is unavailable? Make them eunuchs to guard the harem? Use them as cannon fodder in unnecessary wars? Send them forth to kill all the men in a neighboring community and seize their women?
All of these methods of dealing with the "excess males" problems of polygamy have existed in various historical cultures.
One thing that most men imagine, in imagining polygamy, is that THEY will be among those men with multiple mates. But most men imagining that would be wrong because 10% of the people in the U.S. control 70% of the wealth and the other 90% of people make due with spreading around the remaining 30%. And in the modern era, the proxy for bigness and badness -- because it guarantees resources for offspring -- is wealth.
Likely, most guys in this forum are part of the 10%. But how many are in the 1% who control 42.7% of wealth? (1) It is that 1% who would have the most choice of women, leaving the rest of the top 10% the rest. And the other 90% of men? Ah ... well ... chemical castration these days is reliable and permanent.
And as much as we sit here and say we would never accept that; there is some reasonably argued research that the crime of RAPE is actually an aspect of evolved psychology present in a certain percentage of men for gaining the capacity to reproduce in spite of being iced out of the gene pool. Support for this notion is gained through statistics indicating that a woman is most likely to be raped while most fertile.(2) Given the intense levels of PTSD and other psychological damage that women can experience as a result of rape; it wouldn't take long for those in the 10% to start favoring using excess males as cannon fodder, eunuchs and the like. In every age we believe we are so much more enlightened than we were; only to have future generations look back and see as as barbarians.
So I think we should carefully consider that social monogamy, overall, is good for MEN because it gives most men access to a mate far better than they would otherwise have. (That is, 90% of men are better off. The other 10% of men are worse off.)
Women, of course, are better off under polygamous structures overall. With the rare exception of women with such overwhelming charms that even the most psychopathic of men wouldn't be subject to dalliance; a woman who is one of 10 wives to Bill Gates would still have far more resources available to her and her offspring than a woman who is the only wife of a computer programmer.
As women have gained more political power; certain forms of economic polygamy have been created. For example, I fully support two women economically. Plus, of course, hobbyists are part of a shared pool of male-provided resources which providers divide. So maybe I am supporting, albeit through a roundabout mechanism, a certain percentage of another woman's economic requirements.
And -- speaking of psychopathy -- in the modern era there is a very strong correlation between wealth acquisition -- especially of ladder-climbers in corporate structures -- and traits we identify as psychopathic. (3)
Enforcing social monogamy has the beneficial effect of reducing the percentage of offspring that would otherwise be sired by psychopaths. As one Harvard researcher indicated, if we keep heading down this path of rewarding psychopathy: "... evolutionarily speaking, it doesn't end well."
So we need to be VERY careful, IMO, in realizing the ultimate consequences of our advocacies because there will likely be unintended -- and very unwelcome -- consequences in spades.
Behavior that may be evolutionarily based was entrenched during a very different phase of our development with very different technology and mores. The fact that, at one time, a behavior might have been adaptive does not mean it is in our enlightened self-interest in the present.
For example, for all practical purposes, all providers should be considered unimpregnable by hobbyists. It is likely extremely maladaptive for them to expend resources that can never assist their own offspring. In fact, it could almost be seen as a form of cuckoldry as the hobbyist's resources are often expended on a woman raising an unrelated male's children.
Certainly, if the children are seen to be part of the hobbyist's genetic group (however he defines that); his expenditure may in fact be adaptive in terms of group evolutionary theory. But group evolutionary theory is extremely controversial to say the least; though it has some strong points in explaining the existence of traits such as altruism that would be maladaptive from the standpoint of an atomized individual.
This is just a long way of saying that just because I WANT to do something doesn't mean that I SHOULD.
My own reasons for hobbying are such that, ironically, I use it in such a fashion as to further the wellbeing of future offspring with non-providers by extending my patience during a time that, due to trauma, my wife is not sexual.
(1) http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html
(2) A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion by Randy Thornhill and Craig T. Palmer
(3) http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/...tml?page=0%2C4
So I don't end up with a hollow feeling. I think that by booking a whole woman instead of a pretty picture; and treating her as a whole woman -- to some extent anyway, I get a whole woman.
On Lauren's points, I think we have to be careful in looking at historical human behavior and using that to advocate or justify that behavior in the present.
Let's look at the basic idea that polygamy is -- quite provably -- an aspect of our evolutionary state to which we are well-suited. And, genetic evidence suggests that MOST of that polygamy (though not all) took the form of one man having many mates. In most of human history, money did not exist -- nor wealth as we think of it. That man got all the babes because he was the biggest and baddest. Using his bigness and badness, he was able to control more resources than other men.
Now -- let me ask a question.
What do you do with all the "excess males" for whom a female is unavailable? Make them eunuchs to guard the harem? Use them as cannon fodder in unnecessary wars? Send them forth to kill all the men in a neighboring community and seize their women?
All of these methods of dealing with the "excess males" problems of polygamy have existed in various historical cultures.
One thing that most men imagine, in imagining polygamy, is that THEY will be among those men with multiple mates. But most men imagining that would be wrong because 10% of the people in the U.S. control 70% of the wealth and the other 90% of people make due with spreading around the remaining 30%. And in the modern era, the proxy for bigness and badness -- because it guarantees resources for offspring -- is wealth.
Likely, most guys in this forum are part of the 10%. But how many are in the 1% who control 42.7% of wealth? (1) It is that 1% who would have the most choice of women, leaving the rest of the top 10% the rest. And the other 90% of men? Ah ... well ... chemical castration these days is reliable and permanent.
And as much as we sit here and say we would never accept that; there is some reasonably argued research that the crime of RAPE is actually an aspect of evolved psychology present in a certain percentage of men for gaining the capacity to reproduce in spite of being iced out of the gene pool. Support for this notion is gained through statistics indicating that a woman is most likely to be raped while most fertile.(2) Given the intense levels of PTSD and other psychological damage that women can experience as a result of rape; it wouldn't take long for those in the 10% to start favoring using excess males as cannon fodder, eunuchs and the like. In every age we believe we are so much more enlightened than we were; only to have future generations look back and see as as barbarians.
So I think we should carefully consider that social monogamy, overall, is good for MEN because it gives most men access to a mate far better than they would otherwise have. (That is, 90% of men are better off. The other 10% of men are worse off.)
Women, of course, are better off under polygamous structures overall. With the rare exception of women with such overwhelming charms that even the most psychopathic of men wouldn't be subject to dalliance; a woman who is one of 10 wives to Bill Gates would still have far more resources available to her and her offspring than a woman who is the only wife of a computer programmer.
As women have gained more political power; certain forms of economic polygamy have been created. For example, I fully support two women economically. Plus, of course, hobbyists are part of a shared pool of male-provided resources which providers divide. So maybe I am supporting, albeit through a roundabout mechanism, a certain percentage of another woman's economic requirements.
And -- speaking of psychopathy -- in the modern era there is a very strong correlation between wealth acquisition -- especially of ladder-climbers in corporate structures -- and traits we identify as psychopathic. (3)
Enforcing social monogamy has the beneficial effect of reducing the percentage of offspring that would otherwise be sired by psychopaths. As one Harvard researcher indicated, if we keep heading down this path of rewarding psychopathy: "... evolutionarily speaking, it doesn't end well."
So we need to be VERY careful, IMO, in realizing the ultimate consequences of our advocacies because there will likely be unintended -- and very unwelcome -- consequences in spades.
Behavior that may be evolutionarily based was entrenched during a very different phase of our development with very different technology and mores. The fact that, at one time, a behavior might have been adaptive does not mean it is in our enlightened self-interest in the present.
For example, for all practical purposes, all providers should be considered unimpregnable by hobbyists. It is likely extremely maladaptive for them to expend resources that can never assist their own offspring. In fact, it could almost be seen as a form of cuckoldry as the hobbyist's resources are often expended on a woman raising an unrelated male's children.
Certainly, if the children are seen to be part of the hobbyist's genetic group (however he defines that); his expenditure may in fact be adaptive in terms of group evolutionary theory. But group evolutionary theory is extremely controversial to say the least; though it has some strong points in explaining the existence of traits such as altruism that would be maladaptive from the standpoint of an atomized individual.
This is just a long way of saying that just because I WANT to do something doesn't mean that I SHOULD.
My own reasons for hobbying are such that, ironically, I use it in such a fashion as to further the wellbeing of future offspring with non-providers by extending my patience during a time that, due to trauma, my wife is not sexual.
(1) http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html
(2) A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion by Randy Thornhill and Craig T. Palmer
(3) http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/...tml?page=0%2C4
- charlestudor2005
- 04-16-2010, 10:39 AM
- WTF
- 04-16-2010, 10:40 AM
- boredinbingo
- 04-16-2010, 12:13 PM
There's so much to respond to! I should clarify a few things: Realizing that this activity isn't for everyone or hypothetically for me isn't what my OP was about. I wasn't trying to say that we're all wrong for doing this, but I guess I was getting at something we generally don't discuss is how we hobby and still exist as functional, moral, positive people in our lives. There are dicks in every community and profession in the world. I think the claim we're all making is that participating in the hobby and being a great person are not mutually exclusive.
When Lauren Summerhill wrote:
"There's nothing wrong with being a hooker forum, just like there's nothing wrong with being a hooker. I only meant using this as an excuse for mistreating people and accepting that's "just how it is", to me at least, is bullshit.
There is no reason we cannot be considerate, and treat other people with dignity, regardless of our beliefs or motivations. I think that's part of being a moral and ethical human being.
And yes, disagreeing keeps things interesting"
(yes i know how the quote feature works but it was easier to do it this way)
That is exactly why I wanted to bring this up. To say it's just a hooker board is fine I guess, we all take from this what we want, but we spend so much time talking about our activities and experiences without giving a lot of text to what we get out of it beyond the physical. I often wonder if focusing solely on reviews of our meetings with providers just reinforces the image that we're just whores and creeps. It doesn't really help us with the whole P.R. thing.
The thing is - I DO want to deconstruct the common mythology about all this, but it's hard to when we're all focused on who does daty or not or having semantic arguments about what constitutes a GFE. I think if we truly believe that there is more to it than just getting our rocks off (which is fine if there isn't) then I think we ought to consider spending some time actually discussing our thoughts on the hobby and how it affects us on a deeper level, how we balance it in our lives, and how we are humans too.
I only brought up my own misgivings as a way to open the floor to more thoughtful discussion. I was saying "here are the things I've considered over time - what have you?" So, I regret that it seemed like I was trying to sway us all one way or another.
We don't HAVE to talk about our feelings and demons and whatever, but I would like to start some sort of dialogue about issues and facets of the hobby on a more deeper level so we can generate some source or literature of some kind that demonstrates that we are, in fact, awesome people - not the harlots and predators we're made out to be.
When Lauren Summerhill wrote:
"There's nothing wrong with being a hooker forum, just like there's nothing wrong with being a hooker. I only meant using this as an excuse for mistreating people and accepting that's "just how it is", to me at least, is bullshit.
There is no reason we cannot be considerate, and treat other people with dignity, regardless of our beliefs or motivations. I think that's part of being a moral and ethical human being.
And yes, disagreeing keeps things interesting
"(yes i know how the quote feature works but it was easier to do it this way)
That is exactly why I wanted to bring this up. To say it's just a hooker board is fine I guess, we all take from this what we want, but we spend so much time talking about our activities and experiences without giving a lot of text to what we get out of it beyond the physical. I often wonder if focusing solely on reviews of our meetings with providers just reinforces the image that we're just whores and creeps. It doesn't really help us with the whole P.R. thing.
The thing is - I DO want to deconstruct the common mythology about all this, but it's hard to when we're all focused on who does daty or not or having semantic arguments about what constitutes a GFE. I think if we truly believe that there is more to it than just getting our rocks off (which is fine if there isn't) then I think we ought to consider spending some time actually discussing our thoughts on the hobby and how it affects us on a deeper level, how we balance it in our lives, and how we are humans too.
I only brought up my own misgivings as a way to open the floor to more thoughtful discussion. I was saying "here are the things I've considered over time - what have you?" So, I regret that it seemed like I was trying to sway us all one way or another.
We don't HAVE to talk about our feelings and demons and whatever, but I would like to start some sort of dialogue about issues and facets of the hobby on a more deeper level so we can generate some source or literature of some kind that demonstrates that we are, in fact, awesome people - not the harlots and predators we're made out to be.
- atlcomedy
- 04-16-2010, 01:13 PM
bingo -
to paraphrase or quote WTF, if it isn't fun or you don't feel good about it, don't do it...it really is that simple. I think you may be way over thinking this...
second, as a side note to the comments in your most recent post, many if not most of the regular gentleman posters here review rarely if at all.
to paraphrase or quote WTF, if it isn't fun or you don't feel good about it, don't do it...it really is that simple. I think you may be way over thinking this...
second, as a side note to the comments in your most recent post, many if not most of the regular gentleman posters here review rarely if at all.
- Laurentius
- 04-16-2010, 01:29 PM
There is a difference between reasonable apprehension and feeling guilty.
I would say that "your conscience is the eye of God inside you" and if one is feeling guilty -- he should stop.
But, at the same time, given some of the data that is out there, I think a certain amount of apprehension is reasonable.
There were highly reviewed providers who turned out to be under-18 drug addicts being pimped. There was another who was discovered to be in a horrible situation where she was being forced to provide. Again, highly rated.
It is entirely reasonable for a guy to wonder if what he is doing might be hurting someone; and then figure out what steps he can take to avoid harm.
Likewise, if a guy is doing something that is subject to massive social disapproval; we being social creatures, I think a little retrospection is worthwhile.
Lots of things are subject to social disapproval. Sometimes, this social disapproval has a sound basis; and sometimes not. But its existence should certainly prompt examination of one's motives and understanding whether others are being harmed or not.
IMHO, of course. :-)
I would say that "your conscience is the eye of God inside you" and if one is feeling guilty -- he should stop.
But, at the same time, given some of the data that is out there, I think a certain amount of apprehension is reasonable.
There were highly reviewed providers who turned out to be under-18 drug addicts being pimped. There was another who was discovered to be in a horrible situation where she was being forced to provide. Again, highly rated.
It is entirely reasonable for a guy to wonder if what he is doing might be hurting someone; and then figure out what steps he can take to avoid harm.
Likewise, if a guy is doing something that is subject to massive social disapproval; we being social creatures, I think a little retrospection is worthwhile.
Lots of things are subject to social disapproval. Sometimes, this social disapproval has a sound basis; and sometimes not. But its existence should certainly prompt examination of one's motives and understanding whether others are being harmed or not.
IMHO, of course. :-)
- WTF
- 04-16-2010, 01:35 PM
that we are, in fact, awesome people - not the harlots and predators we're made out to be. Originally Posted by boredinbingoWe are not that awesome...we could be feeding the hungry, yet we are feeding our cocks! So in that regard we are pretty damn hard to defend buttttttttttttttt I do not care what others think. So I do not need to defend my actions. I actually feel pretty goood about myself. I do enough other things to offset what little trouble my weenie gets me in.
I'm mean shit I ain't Tiger Woods....not that I don't wanna be! LOL
- boredinbingo
- 04-16-2010, 03:54 PM
I'm not really sure what to say - so I'm probably going to abandon this thread. It's interesting because it seems like if someone expresses that they have a concern about this - the response is generally "you don't like it, quit." That's not universal and I'm not trying to start a fight - but it seems like that is a lot of the general perspective. Don't get me wrong, my feelings aren't hurt and if anything it was still interesting to get your various perspectives.
I'd be willing to accept that I might be over thinking it, but I think there are probably a lot more of us out there that underthink it. And I think that's a lot more dangerous. I think you can examine something without it necessarily meaning you want to condemn it or discard it. I think sometimes that level of nuance is not exercised where it could beneficial in this community or subculture. I get it's a pretty free market activity and selfishly driven, but I guess I was misguided in thinking that our experiences affect us in good and bad ways that, we don't discuss amongst ourselves or in the mainstream.
I'd be willing to accept that I might be over thinking it, but I think there are probably a lot more of us out there that underthink it. And I think that's a lot more dangerous. I think you can examine something without it necessarily meaning you want to condemn it or discard it. I think sometimes that level of nuance is not exercised where it could beneficial in this community or subculture. I get it's a pretty free market activity and selfishly driven, but I guess I was misguided in thinking that our experiences affect us in good and bad ways that, we don't discuss amongst ourselves or in the mainstream.
- WTF
- 04-16-2010, 04:23 PM
but I guess I was misguided in thinking that our experiences affect us in good and bad ways that, we don't discuss amongst ourselves or in the mainstream. Originally Posted by boredinbingoWe are discussing it. Maybe not exactly how you thought we might but damn, what fun is that?
I do not mean to come of as flippant but this forum in some shape or form has been around for awhile and the general consensus has been when this subject rears its head is that if you are having doubts about your actions ...stop and evaluate.
Heck if we do not stop and evaluate all our actions from time to time something is probably wrong with us.
Now get out there and get you some tail and come tell us your tale. We will then break it down like Hammer time.
- discreetgent
- 04-16-2010, 05:05 PM
Don't take these comments the wrong way, its nothing personal. In part I really do think that overthinking about this (as on most things) doesn't do much good.
is how we hobby and still exist as functional, moral, positive people in our lives. There are dicks in every community and profession in the world. I think the claim we're all making is that participating in the hobby and being a great person are not mutually exclusive. Originally Posted by boredinbingoI honestly just don't get why the need to even make that claim. If we can accept (and I do) that no one is being coerced (and I don't agree that payment means coercion even in the sense it was discussed) and no one is getting hurt I don't see the issue at all. Not everyone who hobby's is married, some who are married have permission to do so; those that do not could be hurting someone but there are so many other ways to hurt people that I don't really understand why it makes sense to single out this particular activity.
That is exactly why I wanted to bring this up. To say it's just a hooker board is fine I guess, we all take from this what we want, but we spend so much time talking about our activities and experiences without giving a lot of text to what we get out of it beyond the physical. I often wonder if focusing solely on reviews of our meetings with providers just reinforces the image that we're just whores and creeps. It doesn't really help us with the whole P.R. thing.This forum in particular might be ill-suited for this particular line of inquiry. Few people here review or even pass along back channel the details of their encounters. Perhaps a question that might be answered better in one of the review forums? If you go through the threads of this forum I think you will find multiple threads that discuss whether we are just getting our rocks off or if there is more to it as well.
The thing is - I DO want to deconstruct the common mythology about all this, but it's hard to when we're all focused on who does daty or not or having semantic arguments about what constitutes a GFE. I think if we truly believe that there is more to it than just getting our rocks off (which is fine if there isn't) then I think we ought to consider spending some time actually discussing our thoughts on the hobby and how it affects us on a deeper level, how we balance it in our lives, and how we are humans too.
I only brought up my own misgivings as a way to open the floor to more thoughtful discussion. I was saying "here are the things I've considered over time - what have you?" So, I regret that it seemed like I was trying to sway us all one way or another.I happen to agree with WTF that we are pretty much neither any worse than others nor more awesome. Back to my opening I really do think that there is overthinking here.
We don't HAVE to talk about our feelings and demons and whatever, but I would like to start some sort of dialogue about issues and facets of the hobby on a more deeper level so we can generate some source or literature of some kind that demonstrates that we are, in fact, awesome people - not the harlots and predators we're made out to be.