19 minutes ago, jas007 said:

Andrea Dworkin is now dead, but in case anyone is curious as to why she might be bitter about so-called "male dominance," it's worth doing a search for her picture.

Yeah, maybe she wasn't getting laid much so she hates men.

14 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

No, it's a personal mental illness with nothing to do with not having women around. A priest can find a woman easily if he wants to. Going after boys and or children is a power thing, a deviance in them.

This is demonstrably false.

In Kinsey’s emblematic work on sexuality, zoophilia in America was firmly situated in the rural world. For this author, the rural context helped to explain zoophilia, since it is an environment with strong sexual control and little access to women.

If access to women is curtailed, but there is access to animals or choir boys, it stands to reason that the overwhelming sexual urge of boys and men will be directed in these alternative avenues.

This is why bestiality is so much more prevalent in parts of Colombia, Mexico, North Africa and was much more prevalent in rural Sweden in the past than it is now.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7600587/

In short, if you don't have normal sex with women, you could end up on the back of a donkey, dog, or a choir boy. Not something to be recommended.

8 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I don't have time to get a Phd in prostitution.

But I believe those statistics are false.

Watch The Law&Crime network on Youtube. There are many many spouses or ex-spouses who murder each other .... which dwarfs violence in prostitution.

Betrayal or rejection of a marriage partner you've had for 20 years makes people act crazy. There is no emotional bond with a prostitute, and it's generally emotions that make people act crazy.

Some target prostitutes specifically for violence, and the traffickers are already involved in getting them there.

This is another search..............Violence Rates in Prostitution

• High Abuse Levels: Research compiled by sources like the UK Parliament Committees shows that 74% to over 90% of women in prostitution experience physical or sexual violence from buyers or managers.

• Extreme Trauma: Cross-national data indicates that roughly two-thirds of prostituted women suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), matching the clinical severity seen in combat veterans or torture survivors.

• Coercive Control: Abusive dynamics involving isolation, threats, and repeated assault are common and mirror severe domestic violence.

Comparison to the General Public

• Homicide Risk: Women in prostitution are statistically estimated to be 18 times more likely to be murdered than women in the general public.

• Street-Level Danger: For women working in street prostitution, research highlighted in PubMed shows the risk of being murdered is 60 to 100 times higher than for non-prostitute females. They also face a much higher risk of "overkilling" or extreme postmortem violence.

7 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

This is demonstrably false.

In Kinsey’s emblematic work on sexuality, zoophilia in America was firmly situated in the rural world. For this author, the rural context helped to explain zoophilia, since it is an environment with strong sexual control and little access to women.

If access to women is curtailed, but there is access to animals or choir boys, it stands to reason that the overwhelming sexual urge of boys and men will be directed in these alternative avenues.

This is why bestiality is so much more prevalent in parts of Colombia, Mexico, North Africa and was much more prevalent in rural Sweden in the past than it is now.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7600587/

In short, if you don't have normal sex with women, you could end up on the back of a donkey, dog, or a choir boy. Not something to be recommended.

It doesn't matter what one opinion means, as there are many that state why some go after children, and abstaining from sex isn't a reason. Sex can be found anywhere by anyone, especially seeing you can purchase it. that a man chooses a child over an adult is a sexual deviance, period. Where on earth are there no woman? Nowhere. Bestiality is another sexual deviance. Nothing to do with not being with women but a choice.............Core Reason

• Targeted Attraction: Their sexual interest focuses on young people, not adults.

• Independence from Availability: The presence of adult women does not change their internal desires.

• Age Preference: For these individuals, adult women do not match what they are attracted to.

Understanding the Behavior

• Pedophilia: Mental health experts call an exclusive or primary attraction to children pedophilia (or attraction to older children/teens).

• Power and Control: Some abusers also look for a vulnerable target who is easier to manipulate, control, or silence than an adult.

• Distorted Thinking: Offenders often use cognitive distortions to justify their actions to themselves....Easier to Control: Some offenders are not just driven by sexual attraction, but by a desire for dominance.

• Fear of Adults: Adult women can say no, fight back, or report the crime easily.

• Targeting Weakness: Children are smaller and easier to scare, trick, or force into silence.

3. Faulty Thinking

• Excuses in the Mind: Abusers often use false logic to convince themselves that what they are doing is okay.

• Ignoring Consent: They fail to understand that a child cannot legally or mentally agree to sexual activity.

• Poor Impulse Control: Many offenders struggle to stop their own bad actions and ignore the harm they cause................https://theconversation.com/psychology-of-a-paedophile-why-are-some-people-attracted-to-children-59991

Edited Saturday at 08:50 AM5 days by fredwiggy

10 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Okay, so I'll provide another link that shows what goes on, seeing some here are making this personal against her because she isn't attractive, as if being attractive makes you more worthy of being read..............https://mission-freedom.de/en/prostitution-and-its-consequences/

24 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

I understand it completely, as I have all the others I've read. Again, you have to read all of it, and understand it to know why it's written. This is just one perspective. There are many others out there. Many others say the same things. Some won't bother to research and only go by their opinions. They might be right or wrong. Some opinions are based on not caring what women think or feel. All a person has to do is be honest with themselves and ask themselves why they go with these women.

You say it is one perspective, but you keep treating that perspective as the moral and factual baseline everyone else should be judged against.

Fred, this article actually makes my point better than yours. That is a heavily selected population.

It clearly says it is not talking about women who identify as sex workers and choose their own clients. It is specifically talking about prostitution characterized by misery, coercion, pimps, loverboys, lack of alternatives and abusive life histories.

Most of the women they describe are also women leaving prostitution or being helped through shelters and exit programs.

HRW instead argues that sex workers can have agency while still being poor, marginalized or vulnerable. Their South African research found women who had very limited economic choices, but who nevertheless described sex work pragmatically, sometimes preferred it to worse paid alternatives, and in some cases expressed pride in being able to support their families.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/08/07/why-sex-work-should-be-decriminalized

3 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Some target prostitutes specifically for violence, and the traffickers are already involved in getting them there.

No, you are in denial that many human beings are not even fit psychologically to be in a marriage, yet marriage continues to be promoted as the best and only viable lifestyle.

This is from AI, and once again, dwarfs violence in prostitution.

Sorry, I'm out. I'm getting tired.

17 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

This is demonstrably false.

In Kinsey’s emblematic work on sexuality, zoophilia in America was firmly situated in the rural world. For this author, the rural context helped to explain zoophilia, since it is an environment with strong sexual control and little access to women.

If access to women is curtailed, but there is access to animals or choir boys, it stands to reason that the overwhelming sexual urge of boys and men will be directed in these alternative avenues.

This is why bestiality is so much more prevalent in parts of Colombia, Mexico, North Africa and was much more prevalent in rural Sweden in the past than it is now.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7600587/

In short, if you don't have normal sex with women, you could end up on the back of a donkey, dog, or a choir boy. Not something to be recommended.

This comes from your statement,"If access to women is curtailed, but there is access to animals or choir boys, it stands to reason that the overwhelming sexual urge of boys and men will be directed in these alternative avenues."...........................................................

Sexual Orientation vs. Situational Behavior: True sexual orientation (such as a primary attraction to women, men, or both) remains stable. While physical deprivation in environments like prisons or isolated institutions can lead to temporary behavioral adaptations, it does not alter a person's underlying orientation.

1. Consent and Harm: Equating access to adult women with access to animals (bestiality) or children/minors (pedophilia or child sexual exploitation) overlooks the fundamental legal, ethical, and psychological boundaries of consent. Crucially, sexual interest in minors or animals is not a standard substitute for heterosexual desire; it represents distinct psychological profiles or abusive behaviors driven by power, control, or specific deviance rather than a simple lack of adult female partners.

2. Social and Cultural Factors: Human sexual behavior is heavily regulated by internal moral frameworks, cultural taboos, legal consequences, and personal ethics, which prevent most individuals from engaging in illegal or harmful acts purely due to lack of access to preferred partners..

44 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

There are no positive aspects of prostitution for those involved besides getting paid for something they really don't want to do, and wouldn't if the government would help them in poverty stricken countries, especially if they have children.

The problem with this theory is they are not all the same. Biggest flaw I see.

I'm not sure they have talked to any Thai women that work in the male entertainment jobs.

Talked to a few and some want to do something else, some are only planning to build enough wealth and exit and some seem to enjoy the lifestyle.

The West trying to shove and spread this nonsense all over the world.

Some of these girls may not have these opportunities to go places and do the things escorting a foreigner whose looking for fun brings.

This crap about the Government fix things. I seriously believe you never been to Thailand or never traveled around enough to understand the scope of the problems. I know my girlfriend's parents get less than 1000 baht a month from the government being around 70. That's less than a foreigner spends in one day with all the expenses.

Treat these ladies as normal as you treat anyone else because they are just like everyone else outside of work.

Just now, J Branche said:

The problem with this theory is they are not all the same. Biggest flaw I see.

I'm not sure they have talked to any Thai women that work in the male entertainment jobs.

Talked to a few and some want to do something else, some are only planning to build enough wealth and exit and some seem to enjoy the lifestyle.

The West trying to shove and spread this nonsense all over the world.

Some of these girls may not have these opportunities to go places and do the things escorting a foreigner whose looking for fun brings.

This crap about the Government fix things. I seriously believe you never been to Thailand or never traveled around enough to understand the scope of the problems. I know my girlfriend's parents get less than 1000 baht a month from the government being around 70. That's less than a foreigner spends in one day with all the expenses.

Treat these ladies as normal as you treat anyone else because they are just like everyone else outside of work.

I've posted this before on other topics, including studies done in Thailand. prostitutes are much the same worldwide, the exception being a larger percentage of them in poorer countries have lack of money as a reason.I've lived in Thailand the last 9 years and researched about it decades before, as it was always on my bucket list, and talked to many Thais back home who were born here.

What I meant about the government fixing things is that they should here, help the poor better, with more than what's given in health care costs and that pittance for retirees.

Child support, a major thing for single moms. isn't enforced either, which is another reason some think they need to leave their children and go to tourist areas to make a little more money than staying home with their children , living with family, as millions do here, and working locally.

Edited Saturday at 09:01 AM5 days by fredwiggy

14 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

why some go after children, and abstaining from sex isn't a reason.

Of course it's a reason. Why do you think there is a much greater prevalence of pedophilia among Catholic priests? Scarcity of access to women but great access to choir boys.

15 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Bestiality is another sexual deviance. Nothing to do with not being with women but a choice

No, again false. Bestiality is much more prevalent in rural areas where there are no women but plenty of sheep, donkeys, cows, dogs etc. And of course very restrictive sexual mores that advocate celibacy before marriage.

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

Of course it's a reason. Why do you think there is a much greater prevalence of pedophilia among Catholic priests? Scarcity of access to women but great access to choir boys.

There's a famous quote from a French philosopher on this phenomenon.

Gawd, you can’t make this up: 4-5 old guys going at each other's necks incessantly for hours, writing page upon page of long dissertations about the morality and dark sides of prostitution. The majority of people didn’t even read the OP. To think anyone will ever read the rest of this argumentative drivel from serial obsessors is probably giving the situation a little too much credit.

I guess for the 4-5 guys involved it gives their day some meaning and purpose, but after 7-8 hours of this stuff, what does anyone really have to show for it other than a considerable amount of time spent writing about something nobody else seems particularly interested in reading? Still, I suppose everyone needs a hobby to pass the time.

16 minutes ago, Hummin said:

You say it is one perspective, but you keep treating that perspective as the moral and factual baseline everyone else should be judged against.

Fred, this article actually makes my point better than yours. That is a heavily selected population.

It clearly says it is not talking about women who identify as sex workers and choose their own clients. It is specifically talking about prostitution characterized by misery, coercion, pimps, loverboys, lack of alternatives and abusive life histories.

Most of the women they describe are also women leaving prostitution or being helped through shelters and exit programs.

HRW instead argues that sex workers can have agency while still being poor, marginalized or vulnerable. Their South African research found women who had very limited economic choices, but who nevertheless described sex work pragmatically, sometimes preferred it to worse paid alternatives, and in some cases expressed pride in being able to support their families.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/08/07/why-sex-work-should-be-decriminalized

Did you read the post I posted? I think it's an excellent observation that again, mirrors what the pros have said numerous times in studies done, and not opinions made. I agree if you're going to have prostitution, it should be decriminalized which can also curtail trafficking, and along with that trafficking, extreme punishment for those involved, including clients and officials.

Children here, by culture,especially the women, are expected to support their older parents, and with that comes guilt that they should at all costs, and some parents guilt them themselves. Talking your children into being prostitutes is a despicable practice by lowlifes.

Edited Saturday at 09:12 AM5 days by fredwiggy

1 minute ago, Alpha84 said:

Gawd, you can’t make this up: 4-5 old guys going at each other's necks incessantly for hours, writing page upon page of long dissertations about the morality and dark sides of prostitution. The majority of people didn’t even read the OP. To think anyone will ever read the rest of this argumentative drivel from serial obsessors is probably giving the situation a little too much credit.

I guess for the 4-5 guys involved it gives their day some meaning and purpose, but after 7-8 hours of this stuff, what does anyone really have to show for it other than a considerable amount of time spent writing about something nobody else seems particularly interested in reading? Still, I suppose everyone needs a hobby to pass the time.

And there are reasons some will comment without reading the OP . This is a discussion forum, where we can go when it's raining out, as it is now, and discuss things. Many topics here are exactly the same in outcome and scope. This is a topic about something many here are involved in, and if read, it might make them think. Some might change their minds and others might think it's nonsense, and most of us would know why. Let the people talk.

No one has to read anything here, let alone comment on it right? Look at how many topics are about Trump, and no one can do a thing about changing things regarding what he does. in this matter, anyone can change their thinking and actions.

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Did you read the post I posted? I think it's an excellent observation that again, mirrors what the pros have said numerous times in studies done, and not opinions made. I agree if you're going to have prostitution, it should be decriminalized which can also curtail trafficking, and along with that trafficking, extreme punishment for those involved, including clients and officials.

Children here, bu culture,especially the women, are expected to support their older parents, and with that comes guilt that they should at all costs, and some parents guilt them themselves. Talking your children into being prostitutes is a despicable practice by lowlifes.

Fred, you are moving away from the point again.

Nobody is defending trafficking, parents pushing daughters into prostitution, or men abusing women with no real options.

The question is whether you accept that some adult sex workers have agency, make a conscious choice, and do not see themselves as victims.

You now say you agree with decriminalization, but HRW supports that position precisely because they distinguish consensual adult sex work from trafficking and exploitation.

And punishing clients is not full decriminalization. That is closer to the Nordic model.

5 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Did you read the post I posted? I think it's an excellent observation that again, mirrors what the pros have said numerous times in studies done, and not opinions made. I agree if you're going to have prostitution, it should be decriminalized which can also curtail trafficking, and along with that trafficking, extreme punishment for those involved, including clients and officials.

Children here, bu culture,especially the women, are expected to support their older parents, and with that comes guilt that they should at all costs, and some parents guilt them themselves. Talking your children into being prostitutes is a despicable practice by lowlifes.

@fredwiggy Are you able to accept perspectives other than your own or do you imagine your 'research' puts you steps ahead of other people's actual experience?

1 minute ago, fredwiggy said:

No one has to read anything here, let alone comment on it right?

But but but...you wrote that those who didn't read it, were enablers 😊

Your views are extreme, without you realising it.

And let’s not forget you’ve got KSM silently lurking over the topic the entire time like a vulture, not posting a thing on the site for weeks already, somehow managing to restrain his usual obsession with personally going after others, but all the while staying logged in just to keep tabs on who gives whom what emojis. You have to admire the dedication.

It’s only a matter of time before the restraint finally cracks and he swoops back in to do what he does best: a few lines of baiting snark, a personal attack or three, and then off to the races again, posting 50 times a day and getting docked by the mods. I’m sure the suspense for him is becoming unbearable.

Just now, Hummin said:

Fred, you are moving away from the point again.

Nobody is defending trafficking, parents pushing daughters into prostitution, or men abusing women with no real options.

The question is whether you accept that some adult sex workers have agency, make a conscious choice, and do not see themselves as victims.

You now say you agree with decriminalization, but HRW supports that position precisely because they distinguish consensual adult sex work from trafficking and exploitation.

And punishing clients is not full decriminalization. That is closer to the Nordic model.

I'm not moving away from the point I made on the first page. I posted a topic and gave my thoughts, and others either put words in my mouth, insulted and were again warned , as usual, or brought up other things I felt I needed to comment on out of respect. I've always been for the women, as i do see them all as victims of some sort. Why choose this trade if you don't have to? Poverty is the only somewhat legitimate reason, and there are options.

That some women don't see themselves as victims is of course from their childhood. It's normal to them to be looked down upon and treated as second class, especially in a Buddhist country. Their own fathers are to blame, either by not being there or abusing, neglecting or molesting them themselves.

You can research deep into why they go into the trade, and you'll get opinions, bias and then the truths coming from the girls themselves, told to those who did those studies and psychologists. My own experience talking to these women years earlier mirrors exactly what I've read since.

Funny that a couple add nothing to the discussion besides snide remarks and insults, with no knowledge on the subject and just the usual trolling, of which there has already been a warning for the baiting.

Edited Saturday at 09:27 AM5 days by fredwiggy

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

as i do see them all as victims of some sort.

It says more than you might imagine...

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

I'm not moving away from the point I made on the first page. I posted a topic and gave my thoughts, and others either put words in my mouth, insulted and were again warned , as usual, or brought up other things I felt I needed to comment on out of respect. I've always been for the women, as i do see them all as victims of some sort. Why choose this trade if you don't have to? Poverty is the only somewhat legitimate reason, and there are options.

That some women don't see themselves as victims is of course from their childhood. It's normal to them to be looked down upon and treated as second class, especially in a Buddhist country. Their own fathers are to blame, either by not being there or abusing, neglecting or molesting them themselves. You can research deep into why they go into the trade, and you'll get opinions, bias and then the truths coming from the girls themselves, told to those who did those studies and psychologists.

The problem with the first article is the absolutism it demands from the reader.

It builds exploitation, coercion and male dominance into the definition itself, leaving little room for women who describe agency, choice or a different experience.

An ordinary man with little experience can fall in love with a woman without knowing she is a prostitute, build a relationship, and later discover it started on false premises.

Even in my opinion, men should know better and know where they are, but there is still another side of the game. Men can also be naive, vulnerable and manipulated.

15 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Funny that a couple add nothing to the discussion besides snide remarks and insults, with no knowledge on the subject and just the usual trolling, of which there has already been a warning for the baiting.

Who are the people whom you claim have no knowledge of the subject? How do you purport to know this?

Is this another of your assumptions?

You really need to stop discussing moderation within your posts.

46 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

There's a famous quote from a French philosopher on this phenomenon.

So you're saying Pascal had no problem to use hookers now and then?

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

The problem with the first article is the absolutism it demands from the reader.

It builds exploitation, coercion and male dominance into the definition itself, leaving little room for women who describe agency, choice or a different experience.

An ordinary man with little experience can fall in love with a woman without knowing she is a prostitute, build a relationship, and later discover it started on false premises.

Even in my opinion, men should know better and know where they are, but there is still another side of the game. Men can also be naive, vulnerable and manipulated.

He is not able to understand you. What seems obvious to you, he is incapable of understanding.

He seems fixed in his thinking that male dominance is the root of all that is evil.

With @fredwiggy there is no exchange of ideas and opinions. No acceptance that you could both be right.

I don't need to say more on that.

4 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

He is not able to understand you. What seems obvious to you, he is incapable of understanding.

He seems fixed in his thinking that male dominance is the root of all that is evil.

With @fredwiggy there is no exchange of ideas and opinions. No acceptance that you could both be right.

I don't need to say more on that.

Fred is a smart guy. He just suffers from a White Knight complex, a bit like JosephBloggs, he's celebrating himself as the sole protector of women, the only one who understands them and wants to make the world a better place, if only women were more protected.

I still can't believe he quoted Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon mind you. That's out of order even if a woman does it, if a man does it that's rather schocking.

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Fred is a smart guy.

I disagree.

10 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

He is not able to understand you. What seems obvious to you, he is incapable of understanding.

He seems fixed in his thinking that male dominance is the root of all that is evil.

With @fredwiggy there is no exchange of ideas and opinions. No acceptance that you could both be right.

I don't need to say more on that.

That last example is probably the most common. Men know where they are, have often explained the same thing themselves many times, then suddenly when it happens to them they are the exception.

That is where denial kicks in. Knowing the game is one thing, seeing it clearly when you are emotionally involved is another. And once settled with a partner, some suddenly become more holy than the Pope, as I have tried to explain several times here.

Still not worse than those who worship the bar scene and think they are in a candy shop where they can taste all the sweets without consequences, whether that is moral decline or other scars on the mind or body.

10 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Fred is a smart guy. He just suffers from a White Knight complex, a bit like JosephBloggs, he's celebrating himself as the sole protector of women, the only one who understands them and wants to make the world a better place, if only women were more protected.

I still can't believe he quoted Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon mind you. That's out of order even if a woman does it, if a man does it that's rather schocking.

I do not know what is worse, being absolute one way or absolute the other. You tell me, Cam?

I would rather have some empathy with the girls than none at all, but empathy does not mean I have to see every woman as a victim or every man as an exploiter.

26 minutes ago, Hummin said:

The problem with the first article is the absolutism it demands from the reader.

It builds exploitation, coercion and male dominance into the definition itself, leaving little room for women who describe agency, choice or a different experience.

An ordinary man with little experience can fall in love with a woman without knowing she is a prostitute, build a relationship, and later discover it started on false premises.

Even in my opinion, men should know better and know where they are, but there is still another side of the game. Men can also be naive, vulnerable and manipulated.

When people write, they aren't demanding anything as anyone can refrain from reading, and also form their own opinions if they do in fact read, and comprehend it. It's an all encompassing narrative, explaining how male dominance figures into prostitution. This isn't about choices but what happens with those choices made.

There are many reasons people enter the trade but this topic is again what happens to the women and why males are dominating over women in it. Easy to understand if the whole piece is read.

Prejudice towards the writer because she isn't attractive, thinking this means she doesn't know the truth. reading it shows she does, as it again mirrors what many others have also written for years. Does a person have to be attractive to be knowledgeable on a subject?

This also isn't about falling in love with a hooker without knowing she is one, which would be kinda hard unless the man was very blind. Also not about naive men and what certain women are capable of doing, as most adults know full well the evil that is a woman at times.

Instead of reading the whole article, some have already made up their minds what it says, along with what I said. I posted it only for information for anyone willing to read it. The comments I've received have shown that some haven't read the post, as it's gone from what she said into what they think my thoughts are on it, even though I've explained myself a few times, to a couple that are obviously troll baiting replies, coming from the usual suspect.

I'm on the outside here, only going with normal women but respecting all besides those who do use and hurt men. I'm not involved in the trade so I would be on the side of prostitution or the providers.of it.. I'm only against those who use women for their own gains, as all real men shouldn't be. No one can explain that away otherwise.

Edited Saturday at 10:21 AM5 days by fredwiggy

6 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Still not worse than those who worship the bar scene and think they are in a candy shop where they can taste all the sweets without consequences, whether that is moral decline or other scars on the mind or body.

I suppose you can label it "moral decline", although the term is conveniently vague.

If 2 people agree to something, not sure it's immoral. Doing things behind people's back is generally immoral.

But there is plenty of "moral decline" within the institution of marriage itself. Married people having affairs, people choosing partners based on money alone ...

I'm not a huge fan of married men taking part in the bar scene.

Edited Saturday at 10:24 AM5 days by save the frogs