2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

That figure is false. It includes women who were "deceived" and women under the age of 18 automatically as "forced into prostitution". So if someone lied about the salary that's being forced into prostitution? If a 17 year old decides to become a prostitute she's "forced" into it? That figure is a fraud.

Much like Dworkin was a fraud. She talked about freedom, but was really a censorship advocate who would have thrived in Soviet Russia, where she originated.

Dworkin claimed all sex is rape, which to put it mildly is lunatic.

For a man to quote Dworkin is a disgrace not just on an intellectual level, but a total failure of critical thinking.

Again, research many places, then you'll see more of the reality. That she says things you don't believe doesn't make her wrong in what she said.

Many writers aren't believed by others, even though they're right. That's their opinions.

Look at how many oppose Trump and how many are on his side. Is he wrong in everything he's done? Of course not, but some here would say he's wrong about everything. That's outright bias. Something I've never had as I look to may sources of facts, then decide.

You don't have to believe everything anyone says. That's being gullible. That's why you research. Not search but research, until you find many saying the same things. Then you look at your own personal bias and see if it interferes with what everything you've read. Look to where you get your figures and see if they don't compare to what's available online.

The Global Slavery Index: In its Walk Free Global Slavery Index report, it was estimated that 401,000 people were living in modern slavery in Thailand on any given day. This metric encompasses forced labor across all major industries—including commercial fishing, agriculture, and the garment sector—alongside forced sexual exploitation.

1. The 1-in-10 Ratio: A notable national peer-reviewed study published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) investigated the prevalence of trafficking among female sex workers (FSWs) in Thailand. The findings indicated that approximately 10% (one in ten) of Thai female sex workers entered the industry via trafficking mechanisms (defined as entry under the age of 18, or through force, coercion, and deception).

3. Historical data from Wikipedia's documentation on human trafficking in Thailand notes that out of hundreds of victims identified annually by the state, typically a significant portion (such as 151 out of 720 in previous comprehensive annual counts) are formally categorized as victims of sex trafficking

5. Outbound Trafficking: Conversely, tens of thousands of Thai women are trafficked overseas. Estimates from organizations tracked via Wikipedia suggest that between 100,000 and 200,000 Thai females work in overseas sex industries, many having been lured abroad under the false pretense of legitimate employment (such as Thai massage or hospitality jobs) only to have their passports confiscated upon arrival.

Edited Sunday at 05:27 AM2 days by fredwiggy

4 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

But Fred, you miss the point. You made it very hard to read. That´s what I am talking about. Get it know?

I didn't make it hard to read. it's easy to read, and if you don't want to read it, there are many other topics here you can search. That's the point.

Why Dworkin was wrong:

The Legal Definition and Harm of Pornography (Legally Defeated)

• The Claim: In her 1981 book Pornography: Men Possessing Women and her subsequent work with Catharine MacKinnon, Dworkin argued that pornography is not abstract speech, but a direct form of sex discrimination and a civil rights violation against women. They drafted the anti-pornography civil rights ordinance to allow victims of sexual assault to sue pornographers for damages.

• The U.S. legal system decisively ruled this framework unconstitutional. In the landmark case American Booksellers Association v. Hudnut (1985), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the ordinance, a decision later affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. The courts ruled that Dworkin's definition of pornography amounted to viewpoint-based censorship that violates the First Amendment.

2. The Mechanics of Heterosexual Intercourse (Heavily Disputed)

• The Claim: In her 1987 book Intercourse, Dworkin wrote extensively about the physics and politics of penile-vaginal penetration, stating that the act itself inherently occupied, depleted, and compromised a woman's boundaries under patriarchy.

• Why it is disputed: This text birthed the widespread public perception—and frequent media caricature—that Dworkin claimed "all heterosexual sex is rape". While Dworkin and her defenders (such as her partner John Stoltenberg) repeatedly denied that she meant this literally, critics and sex-positive feminists argue that her framing remains fundamentally flawed. They contend that by defining the physical act of intercourse as an intrinsic mechanism of male domination, she stripped women of sexual agency and erased the possibility of egalitarian, consensual heterosexual pleasure.

The Rejection of Sex Work (Disputed by Modern Feminism)

• The Claim: Dworkin maintained that prostitution and sex work are never truly consensual choices. She argued that the sex industry is an extension of gynocide and sexual slavery, where women are reduced to "a female piece of meat" entirely for male pleasure.

• Why it is disputed: This position fractured the feminist movement during the "Feminist Sex Wars" of the 1980s and remains heavily contested by modern intersectional feminists and sex-worker rights organizations. Critics argue that Dworkin’s rigid framework paternalistically denies agency to sex workers, conflates all consensual sex work with human trafficking [AS FRED IS DOING], and advocates for carceral legal measures that ultimately make the profession more dangerous for women.

4. Overstated Historical and Cross-Cultural Claims (Factually Contested)

• The Claim: In her early work Woman Hating (1974), Dworkin drew massive historical parallels to illustrate the depth of misogyny. She argued that the European witch trials resulted in the slaughter of millions of women (frequently citing the popular but debunked number of 9 million victims). She also analyzed Chinese foot-binding as a totalizing structural model of male sadism.

• Why it is wrong/disputed: Mainstream historians have thoroughly disproven the "9 million witches" statistic, establishing that the actual death toll across several centuries of European witch trials was closer to 40,000 to 50,000. Historians and anthropologists also criticized her chapters on foot-binding and witch trials for being historically reductive, arguing that she ignored complex economic, cultural, and localized factors to force historical events into a singular, unyielding theory of universal patriarchal violence.

In other words, Dworkin was a LIAR, an EXAGGERATOR, an INCOMPETENT and she made the lives of women, and sex workers in particular, WORSE.

Edited Sunday at 05:28 AM2 days by Cameroni

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Why Dworkin was wrong:

The Legal Definition and Harm of Pornography (Legally Defeated)

• The Claim: In her 1981 book Pornography: Men Possessing Women and her subsequent work with Catharine MacKinnon, Dworkin argued that pornography is not abstract speech, but a direct form of sex discrimination and a civil rights violation against women. They drafted the anti-pornography civil rights ordinance to allow victims of sexual assault to sue pornographers for damages.

• The U.S. legal system decisively ruled this framework unconstitutional. In the landmark case American Booksellers Association v. Hudnut (1985), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the ordinance, a decision later affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. The courts ruled that Dworkin's definition of pornography amounted to viewpoint-based censorship that violates the First Amendment.

2. The Mechanics of Heterosexual Intercourse (Heavily Disputed)

• The Claim: In her 1987 book Intercourse, Dworkin wrote extensively about the physics and politics of penile-vaginal penetration, stating that the act itself inherently occupied, depleted, and compromised a woman's boundaries under patriarchy.

• Why it is disputed: This text birthed the widespread public perception—and frequent media caricature—that Dworkin claimed "all heterosexual sex is rape". While Dworkin and her defenders (such as her partner John Stoltenberg) repeatedly denied that she meant this literally, critics and sex-positive feminists argue that her framing remains fundamentally flawed. They contend that by defining the physical act of intercourse as an intrinsic mechanism of male domination, she stripped women of sexual agency and erased the possibility of egalitarian, consensual heterosexual pleasure.

The Rejection of Sex Work (Disputed by Modern Feminism)

• The Claim: Dworkin maintained that prostitution and sex work are never truly consensual choices. She argued that the sex industry is an extension of gynocide and sexual slavery, where women are reduced to "a female piece of meat" entirely for male pleasure.

• Why it is disputed: This position fractured the feminist movement during the "Feminist Sex Wars" of the 1980s and remains heavily contested by modern intersectional feminists and sex-worker rights organizations. Critics argue that Dworkin’s rigid framework paternalistically denies agency to sex workers, conflates all consensual sex work with human trafficking [AS FRED IS DOING], and advocates for carceral legal measures that ultimately make the profession more dangerous for women.

4. Overstated Historical and Cross-Cultural Claims (Factually Contested)

• The Claim: In her early work Woman Hating (1974), Dworkin drew massive historical parallels to illustrate the depth of misogyny. She argued that the European witch trials resulted in the slaughter of millions of women (frequently citing the popular but debunked number of 9 million victims). She also analyzed Chinese foot-binding as a totalizing structural model of male sadism.

• Why it is wrong/disputed: Mainstream historians have thoroughly disproven the "9 million witches" statistic, establishing that the actual death toll across several centuries of European witch trials was closer to 40,000 to 50,000. Historians and anthropologists also criticized her chapters on foot-binding and witch trials for being historically reductive, arguing that she ignored complex economic, cultural, and localized factors to force historical events into a singular, unyielding theory of universal patriarchal violence.

In other words, Dworkin was a LIAR, an EXAGGERATOR, an INCOMPETENT and she made the lives of women, and sex workers in particular, WORSE.

I never said all consensual sex work is from trafficking. Of course there is going to be people who dispute those who write what she does. Ever think why? Think of how many are on prostitution's side, and why. Billion dollar industries, like Big Pharma, will always have their detractors, and those who are for it, for profits also. Anyone could say her detractors are liars also. Another excerpt and link you can read. Of course many will be in denial if they benefit from this trade

Some freely choose to sell sex. It’s far more common for people to do it to survive or because they’ve been tricked, coerced, or forced to by sex traffickers who target vulnerable people. This includes those without strong support networks, facing financial strain, who have experienced violence in the past, and who are marginalized by society. As a result, LGBTQ+ and Black girls are at particular risk for sexual exploitation. Many stay stuck in the sex trade into adulthood. 

Most people who’ve sold sex say they started when they were minors, wanted a way out, and were harmed by it. Research conducted with them confirms that few get enjoyment from performing sexual acts on men they can’t reject. 

“After a few years of the sex trade, I couldn’t take it anymore. I felt trapped in the industry and it made me feel so alone and so sad. I wanted a “normal” life,” wrote Esperanza Fonseca, a sex trade survivor, of the harms and trauma she experienced while in the life. “I didn’t want to give random men access to my body anymore. I didn’t want to pretend every day to be okay with clients who played out their worst fantasies on me…

Knowing that most people sell sex because they don’t have other options or are being trafficked makes it easy to understand why they suffer high rates of mental health issues. They also experience social stigma and discrimination, mistreatment by law enforcement, physical violence, harassment, and the fear of being arrested or prosecuted. All this can lead to the increased stress, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that people in the sex trade struggle with. 

One study conducted in the US found that 68% of people who sell sex reported symptoms of depression, and 55% reported symptoms of anxiety. Another study in Canada found that they had higher rates of PTSD compared to the general population, with almost one-third of participants reporting symptoms consistent with a PTSD diagnosis. Research also shows that selling sex involves such repetitive exposure to trauma that PTSD is more common for people who’ve lived through it than those who have lived through military combat. ” ......https://www.caase.org/mental-health-impacts-of-sex-trade/.

Edited Sunday at 05:39 AM2 days by fredwiggy

37 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

They are victimising men, who are encumbered by testosterone, and taking their money.

I don't feel victimized.

I slept like a baby after my last massage.

I did feel victimized in some of the crappy jobs I've had over the years though.

And by having to file dual taxation.

Edited Sunday at 05:33 AM2 days by save the frogs

7 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Being a target for sociopaths doesn't bother most people who can easily recognize their agenda, and not draining when you see them coming. Pointing them out to others lets them also swiftly dismiss their behavior. The truth cannot be changed even though it might be different to a simple mind. That's their cognitive bias and theirs alone. I, as well as most everyone else on this forum, only have a small problem with a select few. The rest are quite amiable.

We agree that exploitation, abuse, trafficking and men treating women badly exist in prostitution, and that should be condemned. Where we disagree is when that part becomes the whole picture, and every prostitute is treated as a victim and every man involved is judged through the same lens.

The world is full of people doing work under horrible conditions, for little money, sometimes dangerous and sometimes degrading. Nurses clean naked bodies, clean <deleted>, empty bowels with their fingers, deal with blood and bodily fluids, get abused by patients, do heavy lifting and wear their bodies down helping others. Cleaners scrub toilets and work with chemicals and other people’s waste. Coal miners have spent their lives underground doing dangerous and unhealthy work for a wage.

But the work itself does not automatically define all of them as victims. Some hate their jobs, some have little choice, some are exploited, and some take pride in being good at difficult work and helping others.

The same complexity exists in sex work. Some are clearly victims, but others choose it and are good at what they do. And for many clients it is not only about sex. It can involve companionship, listening, emotional support and human contact. Some sex workers are almost doing part of the job of a social worker in that setting.

That is where I disagree with the article. It takes a very real and ugly part of prostitution and makes it the whole picture. The world, and people, are more complicated than that.

Calling out everyone who disagrees with the essence and context of the text with names, diagnoses and being simple people. Think about it, Fred. It doesn’t make you better than others just because you make a nice package out of it and do not make it personally directed with intention. It is still personal.

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

So you agree with a heroin smuggler and failed writer. About what?

Oh I see, well, that's because it's false. Almost no woman working in the sex industry today, in Thailand or anywhere else, was forced into prostitution, they could all have chosen working at 711 or some other menial job. They CHOSE to become whores. They are NOT victims. They are victimising men, who are encumbered by testosterone, and taking their money.

Cam, seriously, if anybody is victimising men here, it is the men themselves, nobody else. And you are now doing exactly the same as Fred, speaking on behalf of all men.

23 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I don't feel victimized.

I slept like a baby after my last massage.

I did feel victimized in some of the crappy jobs I've had over the years though.

And by having to file dual taxation.

Nice reply! Spot on

2 minutes ago, Hummin said:

if anybody is victimising men here, it is the men themselves, nobody else.

No, every man who has to pay 2000 baht for intercourse does so because he is a victim. Firstly a victim of his testosterone fuelled sex drive, and secondly a victim of a predatory female who is using the man's biological sex drive to deprive him of financial resources.

Men are the real victims of prostitution, because of their testosterone fuelled sex drive they are easy targets. Women have no excuse, they can choose to do some other work, no biological hormone is compelling them to fleece men of money using sex.

I don't feel victimized.

I slept like a baby after my last massage.

You were a victim. A woman took your resources for a simple physical act, sex. It cost her nothing, it cost you 2000 baht. She took advantage of you.

You have my deepest sympathies.

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

We agree that exploitation, abuse, trafficking and men treating women badly exist in prostitution, and that should be condemned. Where we disagree is when that part becomes the whole picture, and every prostitute is treated as a victim and every man involved is judged through the same lens.

The world is full of people doing work under horrible conditions, for little money, sometimes dangerous and sometimes degrading. Nurses clean naked bodies, clean <deleted>, empty bowels with their fingers, deal with blood and bodily fluids, get abused by patients, do heavy lifting and wear their bodies down helping others. Cleaners scrub toilets and work with chemicals and other people’s waste. Coal miners have spent their lives underground doing dangerous and unhealthy work for a wage.

But the work itself does not automatically define all of them as victims. Some hate their jobs, some have little choice, some are exploited, and some take pride in being good at difficult work and helping others.

The same complexity exists in sex work. Some are clearly victims, but others choose it and are good at what they do. And for many clients it is not only about sex. It can involve companionship, listening, emotional support and human contact. Some sex workers are almost doing part of the job of a social worker in that setting.

That is where I disagree with the article. It takes a very real and ugly part of prostitution and makes it the whole picture. The world, and people, are more complicated than that.

Calling out everyone who disagrees with the essence and context of the text with names, diagnoses and being simple people. Think about it, Fred. It doesn’t make you better than others just because you make a nice package out of it and do not make it personally directed with intention. It is still personal.

Legitimate work , especially hard work, is contributing to society and you're getting paid for it. Prostitution and all it entails against the women , isn't legitimate work. It's not using your brain or muscles but giving your body, which should be a precious thing, your most precious, to men you would never bother with otherwise. Even taking away the trafficking and other coercions, you're still forgetting the amount of addictions to drugs and alcohol many are into, because of the guilt involved in this trade.

Also how the rest of them entered the trade. They were already victims at home, from abuse, neglect or molestation from people they thought they could trust. How many normal women from decent homes that have job opportunities would chose this trade?

I think some here will not bother to read anything else on this subject but will nitpick what the author said, even though many of her points are valid. Also, there are so many other sources for this, some of which I linked, that will tell more of this story. Who would you rather believe. people who use prostitutes or the women themselves who tell their stories to professionals?

The women are good at what they do because it makes them money. if they had a regular job they wouldn't sleep with any of these clients. Not going with prostitutes doesn't make me better than others .How i treat women does.There are many like me who put value on a woman and don't see them as objects. Who can disagree? Like I've been saying all along. What a person says anywhere shows how they think, especially regarding women, and that has nothing to do with me.

4 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

No, every man who has to pay 2000 baht for intercourse does so because he is a victim. Firstly a victim of his testosterone fuelled sex drive, and secondly a victim of a predatory female who is using the man's biological sex drive to deprive him of financial resources.

Men are the real victims of prostitution, because of their testosterone fuelled sex drive they are easy targets. Women have no excuse, they can choose to do some other work, no biological hormone is compelling them to fleece men of money using sex.

You were a victim. A woman took your resources for a simple physical act, sex. It cost her nothing, it cost you 2000 baht. She took advantage of you.

You have my deepest sympathies.

No, not every man has to pay. Those that do? He's a victim of his own thinking. There are millions of women who don't require a payment for intercourse. They're called girlfriends and wives. Every man has testosterone and a sex drive. You use it with a woman who wants you without a payment, those girlfriends and wives. A man can hold off for a time until he finds a woman who's interested and willing. It's called patience and is what separates teens from adults.

7 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

No, every man who has to pay 2000 baht for intercourse does so because he is a victim. Firstly a victim of his testosterone fuelled sex drive, and secondly a victim of a predatory female who is using the man's biological sex drive to deprive him of financial resources.

Men are the real victims of prostitution, because of their testosterone fuelled sex drive they are easy targets. Women have no excuse, they can choose to do some other work, no biological hormone is compelling them to fleece men of money using sex.

You were a victim. A woman took your resources for a simple physical act, sex. It cost her nothing, it cost you 2000 baht. She took advantage of you.

You have my deepest sympathies.

Seriously Cam, you are taking away men’s responsibility for their own discipline and self control, then putting the blame on women. Nice try.

16 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Cam, seriously, if anybody is victimising men here, it is the men themselves, nobody else. And you are now doing exactly the same as Fred, speaking on behalf of all men.

I'm speaking on behalf of men who respect women, and know what they put up with. The decent women, not the bitches.There are plenty of screwed up men worldwide that see woman as slaves or objects. Right or wrong?

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

Seriously Cam, you are taking away men’s responsibility for their own discipline and self control, then putting the blame on women. Nice try.

Not at all, but you are completely ignoring the biological reality, that men are encumbered with a sex drive, fuelled by testosterone, which hugely influences their decisions. This is not the case for women, who, rather use this encumbrance of men, to obtain their resources.

You are taking away biology and women's agency, which both play a major role in the act of prostitution.

4 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

There are millions of women who don't require a payment for intercourse. They're called girlfriends and wives.

You are very wrong again, of course. Girlfriends and wives are almost all paid for intercourse. In fact the resources for sexual access paradigm has been the dominant one for thousands of years.

Just now, Cameroni said:

Not at all, but you are completely ignoring the biological reality, that men are encumbered with a sex drive, fuelled by testosterone, which hugely influences their decisions. This is not the case for women, who, rather use this encumbrance of men, to obtain their resources.

You are taking away biology and women's agency, which both play a major role in the act of prostitution.

Encumbered? Women also have a sex drive.

Just now, Cameroni said:

You are very wrong again, of course. Girlfriends and wives are almost all paid for intercourse. In fact the resources for sexual access paradigm has been the dominant one for thousands of years.

Again? I haven't been wrong once. Girlfriends aren't paid for intercourse. You date them, treat them well, and they're willing when you ask because of that treatment. The same with wives, difference being you're providing for them also.Expecting sex because you buy them dinners or gifts is seeing them as a commodity and not a partner. Men don't deserve sex unless they're giving a woman what she needs. Not wants, needs.Then it's up to the woman to allow you to have her.

Edited Sunday at 06:20 AM2 days by fredwiggy

20 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Legitimate work , especially hard work, is contributing to society and you're getting paid for it. Prostitution and all it entails against the women , isn't legitimate work. It's not using your brain or muscles but giving your body, which should be a precious thing, your most precious, to men you would never bother with otherwise. Even taking away the trafficking and other coercions, you're still forgetting the amount of addictions to drugs and alcohol many are into, because of the guilt involved in this trade.

Also how the rest of them entered the trade. They were already victims at home, from abuse, neglect or molestation from people they thought they could trust. How many normal women from decent homes that have job opportunities would chose this trade?

I think some here will not bother to read anything else on this subject but will nitpick what the author said, even though many of her points are valid. Also, there are so many other sources for this, some of which I linked, that will tell more of this story. Who would you rather believe. people who use prostitutes or the women themselves who tell their stories to professionals?

The women are good at what they do because it makes them money. if they had a regular job they wouldn't sleep with any of these clients. Not going with prostitutes doesn't make me better than others .How i treat women does.There are many like me who put value on a woman and don't see them as objects. Who can disagree? Like I've been saying all along. What a person says anywhere shows how they think, especially regarding women, and that has nothing to do with me.

Fred, who decided what decent or legitimate work is? Prostitutes have played an important role in society throughout history, but somewhere along the way that role has been degraded into something simple. One reason is that they interact closely with many people and are therefore more exposed to infections and illness. But if they were treated with the same respect, protection and health standards as nurses and others who work closely with people, much of that risk could be reduced. In many places, stigma and criminalisation create some of the greatest dangers for prostitutes, rather than the profession itself.

Even in very religious societies, prostitution has still existed in one form or another. The problem is not sex itself, but abuse, coercion and power. We have seen that in churches as well, where priests have abused women, men and children because they had power and little accountability. Abuse grows where someone has power over another person and there is weak accountability. Condemn the abuse, not automatically the act itself.

Society would probably be better off with legal, controlled places where workers are protected, health standards are enforced, alcohol and drugs are kept under control, and both sides are safer. Thailand already shows part of this through the widespread massage culture, where men can get relief without everything being pushed underground.

I’m painting with a big brush here, but you see where I’m heading.

Encumbered? Women also have a sex drive.

Not a powerful one, like a male, where it can cause the whole direction of your life to be determined by it. Women don't have this.

11 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Again? I haven't been wrong once.

You've been wrong this whole thread, over, and over, and over again.

12 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Girlfriends aren't paid for intercourse.

Yes, they are, a girlfriend will expect you to pay her rent, mortgage, holidays, gifts, and much else besides, at least in part, or fully.

You date them

When you "date" them, who pays for dinner?

14 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Men don't deserve sex unless they're giving a woman what she needs.

I'm starting to wonder if you are a woman.

25 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Legitimate work , especially hard work, is contributing to society and you're getting paid for it. Prostitution and all it entails against the women , isn't legitimate work. It's not using your brain or muscles but giving your body, which should be a precious thing, your most precious, to men you would never bother with otherwise. Even taking away the trafficking and other coercions, you're still forgetting the amount of addictions to drugs and alcohol many are into, because of the guilt involved in this trade.

Also how the rest of them entered the trade. They were already victims at home, from abuse, neglect or molestation from people they thought they could trust. How many normal women from decent homes that have job opportunities would chose this trade?

I think some here will not bother to read anything else on this subject but will nitpick what the author said, even though many of her points are valid. Also, there are so many other sources for this, some of which I linked, that will tell more of this story. Who would you rather believe. people who use prostitutes or the women themselves who tell their stories to professionals?

The women are good at what they do because it makes them money. if they had a regular job they wouldn't sleep with any of these clients. Not going with prostitutes doesn't make me better than others .How i treat women does.There are many like me who put value on a woman and don't see them as objects. Who can disagree? Like I've been saying all along. What a person says anywhere shows how they think, especially regarding women, and that has nothing to do with me.

What we are forgetting is who abused the women before they ever entered prostitution. Was it at home, a previous boyfriend, a man who took their virginity and threw them away, leaving them with lost dignity, stigma, or sometimes a child outside marriage? In societies where that carries shame, the road into prostitution can become much easier.

That does not mean all prostitutes experienced abuse, as you paint with a very big brush, Fred. But in many cases the abuse may have started with the family, relationships and society itself long before the woman entered the trade.

Just now, Cameroni said:

Not a powerful one, like a male, where it can cause the whole direction of your life to be determined by it. Women don't have this.

You've been wrong this whole thread, over, and over, and over again.

Yes, they are, a girlfriend will expect you to pay her rent, mortgage, holidays, gifts, and much else besides, at least in part, or fully.

When you "date" them, who pays for dinner?

I'm starting to wonder if you are a woman.

Cam, this is borderline trolling. Seriously!

23 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Not at all, but you are completely ignoring the biological reality, that men are encumbered with a sex drive, fuelled by testosterone, which hugely influences their decisions. This is not the case for women, who, rather use this encumbrance of men, to obtain their resources.

You are taking away biology and women's agency, which both play a major role in the act of prostitution.

Cam, biology influences us, it does not remove responsibility or self control. You are giving women full agency while reducing men to victims of testosterone. That is exactly the contradiction I was pointing out, and I suspect you do so out of convenience because it fits your narrative.

7 minutes ago, Hummin said:

What we are forgetting is who abused the women before they ever entered prostitution.

Nobody abused them. They're just work-shy and decided to become prostitutes.

Just now, Cameroni said:

Nobody abused them. They're just work-shy and decided to become prostitutes.

You are waste of time 🤗

5 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Fred, who decided what decent or legitimate work is? Prostitutes have played an important role in society throughout history, but somewhere along the way that role has been degraded into something simple. One reason is that they interact closely with many people and are therefore more exposed to infections and illness. But if they were treated with the same respect, protection and health standards as nurses and others who work closely with people, much of that risk could be reduced. In many places, stigma and criminalisation create some of the greatest dangers for prostitutes, rather than the profession itself.

Even in very religious societies, prostitution has still existed in one form or another. The problem is not sex itself, but abuse, coercion and power. We have seen that in churches as well, where priests have abused women, men and children because they had power and little accountability. Abuse grows where someone has power over another person and there is weak accountability. Condemn the abuse, not automatically the act itself.

Society would probably be better off with legal, controlled places where workers are protected, health standards are enforced, alcohol and drugs are kept under control, and both sides are safer. Thailand already shows part of this through the widespread massage culture, where men can get relief without everything being pushed underground.

I’m painting with a big brush here, but you see where I’m heading.

As I mentioned, work that helps others without harming anyone. If you were a prostitute, only then would you understand what they're going through. That's why these people did those studies, asking the girls themselves how they feel and how they live. That overrides anything anyone else can say, wrong or right. I know how long it's been around and what's involved, as it's been easily researched for decades.

i've talked with them myself, and all said the same things. I worked in NYC and when I took lunches, I would be at shops and delis, and they would come up to me. i told them I was working but did ask them how they were doing. Every one i spoke with said, "how do you think, it sucks, I hate this job, most men are pigs, the money's good but I hate it, I worry about the police everyday, most johns are okay but one beat the crap out of me, one of my friends was killed by a john" and others. This is exactly what these studies are telling us.

Yes, the workers would be safer if things were controlled, but that still doesn't take into account the johns damage, drugs, alcohol, STD's and deaths, outside of those places, besides the drugs and STD's, which will happen anyway. The drugs are used to escape their lives, and the majority are users. This will never stop, and even if they get some "protection", that's limited, as there are freelancers and all other countries.

2 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Cam, biology influences us, it does not remove responsibility or self control. You are giving women full agency while reducing men to victims of testosterone. That is exactly the contradiction I was pointing out, and I suspect you do so out of convenience because it fits your narrative.

You are trying to create an equivalence, where there is none. Women are not subject to testosterone levels like men, they do not have a sex drive as powerful as men do. Their decisions are not guided by sex the way mens' decisions are. When she decides to take your money for sex, that's not her hormones making the decision, that's sheer greed.

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Nobody abused them. They're just work-shy and decided to become prostitutes.

You have a computer or phone. Take some time when you're alone and look up what has women entering prostitution and the reasons why. You'll see that many points this woman made mirror others who actually talked to thousands of girls, something you haven't done.

Every one i spoke with said, "how do you think, it sucks, I hate this job, most men are pigs, the money's good but I hate it, I worry about the police everyday, most johns are okay but one beat the crap out of me, one of my friends was killed by a john"

She was going for the pity-dollar. How much did you give her?

Just now, fredwiggy said:

You have a computer or phone. Take some time when you're alone and look up what has women entering prostitution and the reasons why. You'll see that many points this woman made mirror others who actually talked to thousands of girls, something you haven't done.

Dworkin has been debunked as the LIAR, EXAGGERATOR and total FRAUD she is. Her writing is a tissue of lies. Dworkin has no points. Any man who quotes Dworkin has serious problems.

I don't need to talk to women to know why they "enter prostitution", they do it because they're greedy for money and exceptionally work-shy. And because they can, because taking money from men in a cloud of testosterone is easy.

Have you ever considered that 95% of women who become prostitutes do so, purely because it's easy money for almost no work? Don't just rely on AI, use your brain.

3 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

You are trying to create an equivalence, where there is none. Women are not subject to testosterone levels like men, they do not have a sex drive as powerful as men do. Their decisions are not guided by sex the way mens' decisions are. When she decides to take your money for sex, that's not her hormones making the decision, that's sheer greed.

Men aren't the same as far as what drives them, but women also have a drive. The difference is that hormone levels are cyclical. It's still individual although men think about sex more often.

Scientific Findings

• Averages: Most studies and meta-analyses find that men, on average, think about sex more frequently, have more frequent fantasies, and desire sex more often.

• Individual Overlap: According to Psychology Today, roughly one-third of women actually have a higher sex drive than the average male.

• Couple Dynamics: When looking at established relationships, studies show that about half of couples have similar levels of desire, and men and women are equally likely to be the partner with the lower sex drive

8 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

As I mentioned, work that helps others without harming anyone. If you were a prostitute, only then would you understand what they're going through. That's why these people did those studies, asking the girls themselves how they feel and how they live. That overrides anything anyone else can say, wrong or right. I know how long it's been around and what's involved, as it's been easily researched for decades.

i've talked with them myself, and all said the same things. I worked in NYC and when I took lunches, I would be at shops and delis, and they would come up to me. i told them I was working but did ask them how they were doing. Every one i spoke with said, "how do you think, it sucks, I hate this job, most men are pigs, the money's good but I hate it, I worry about the police everyday, most johns are okay but one beat the crap out of me, one of my friends was killed by a john" and others. This is exactly what these studies are telling us.

Yes, the workers would be safer if things were controlled, but that still doesn't take into account the johns damage, drugs, alcohol, STD's and deaths, outside of those places, besides the drugs and STD's, which will happen anyway. The drugs are used to escape their lives, and the majority are users. This will never stop, and even if they get some "protection", that's limited, as there are freelancers and all other countries.

And one last Thai twist before I call it a day. We should not forget the stigma and body shaming many women experience long before any bar enters the picture. Too dark, too fat, wrong shape, too poor, not pretty enough. Then along comes a fat ugly expat who, according to local mythology, must be rich, tells her she is beautiful and treats her like a princess.

But every culture has some version of the same story, poor girl meets rich man, Cinderella, rescue, status and romance all mixed together. Thailand is not unique, it just has its own version of the old Pretty Woman syndrome. Richard Gere and Julia Roberts did quite well selling us that story. 😄