RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please)

RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

hermione83 -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 6:19:56 AM)
That is absolutely ridiculous to think that massage therapists, physical therapists, chiropracters, aestheticians, etc are engaging in some sort of sexual activity. If someone was aroused, they would be asked to leave. Gynecologists aren't engaging in sexual activity. The part about nudie pictures is that someone somewhere is getting off to them. Massage is for healing, post-surgery/accident, relaxation, etc etc etc. And ANYWAY the point is, it wouldn't matter if I was the biggest whore on the planet - I wouldn't be a prostitute if I never charged someone to have me. And just a little FYI - no where in my profile did I say I engaged in any of it. I know what I like without doing it, and you can do things without physically doing them with someone else.. sigh I'm not a hypocrite in that, either. But it's just sort of sad it had to be brought up.

Alumbrado -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 6:27:39 AM)
You don't have a clue do you? Find me a massage therapist who makes every client leave at the first sign of erect nipple or penis, flushed skin, or heavy breathing, and I'll show you an out of work masseuse. In the real world, massage therapists reject clients who behave inappropriately by trying to cross the line into asking for real sexual activity... just as do pro Dommes. If someone massaging a naked client with their bare hands for almost an hour isn't sexual activity, neither is massaging them with an impement made out of wood or leather.

hermione83 -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 6:30:52 AM)
Alumbrado - I'm an aesthetician and about half of what I do is massage, and my dad is a physical therapist, so yes, I would quite know what goes on. Almost everyone who comes in purely for relaxation or skin issues is a female first of all. (otherwise, its therapeutic and for something specific). Secondly, they're not even close to naked. One body part at a time come out as I roll back the blanket. And trust me, no one even looks at me. If they saw me later, they wouldn't even probably recognize my face.

Jasmyn -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 6:36:28 AM)
quote: Almost everyone who comes in purely for relaxation As do a lot of my pro clientel ... no sexual contact, service, innuendo or desire in sight ... They call me their therapist ... I appreciate why they feel that way ...

hermione83 -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 6:50:59 AM)
Jasmyn, I do understand that might be the case in an extremely rare person, maybe. But .. .. submission.. dominance... they're sexual. They don't have to be, and there are every day things involved, but deep down - everything related has something about it that is to most people. That's why people fall in love / marry their Dom / sub. It's to do with intimate relationships. Healing and clinical things.. therapy.. with a real therapist... massage with a professional.. and exam from a doctor... they might involve touching, emotions, relaxation, etc but there's not supposed to be any sexual feelings for the practioner. And to almost everyone who likes D/s, somewhere in them it relates to their sexuality.

Alumbrado -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 6:58:10 AM)
quote: Almost everyone who comes in purely for relaxation or skin issues is a female first of all. (otherwise, its therapeutic and for something specific). That doesn't match up with the experience of any massage therapist I've ever known, or my own experience. Some businesses limit their practice by gender, but the notion that men don't get massages for relaxation doesn't pass muster any more than your earlier claim that massage therapists send away any client who shws signs of becoming aroused. If you are now claiming that no one gets aroused during a massage, you have crossed the line into completely unbelievable. And you still haven't supported your assertion that rubbing someone with your hands isn't prostitution but rubbing them with a flogger is.

Jasmyn -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 7:02:20 AM)
Hermione ... d/s does not have to be enveloped in or lead to intimate relationships ... nor is d/s always about sexual desire ... see my post the MrThorn where I've pointed out a number of non sexual B&D, S&M and d/s scenarios ... Why do these people call me their therapist? I let them escape, I let them step outside their world and into mine ... my world doesn't judge his need to wear a pinstrip skirt and fold laundry, my world doesn't judge why out there he's stressed to the eyeballs or loathing himself for enjoying the ego trip his job/position gives him in society... I guess (it's early morning here in Kiwi land and I need sleep) what I'm wanting to get across is ... try not to romanticise d/s ..because for many it's not about love, intimacy, or relationships

xoxi -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 7:20:20 AM)
laughs I've skimmed this thread but it just makes me think of a pile of rice. How many grains can you add before it becomes a heap instead of a pile? Is a VS model a prostitute? I am sure plenty of men get the catalogue just to arouse themselves...but at least an equal number of women get it to order lingerie. If being a prostitute means being attractive in pictures I'm sure anyone who posed for the 1993 JC Penney catalogue that some horny pimple faced boy jerked off to is a whore - even if they were just modelling jeans and a polo shirt. Some people like that girl next door look [;)] Is someone who writes porn a prostitute? They sell sexual fantasy as much as a model does. What about Danielle Steele? Does writing 50 odd books about passionate lovemaking using every possible euphamism for parts of a man's body make one a whore? Does it matter if women actively masturbate while reading...or just tuck the imagery away for the next time they're in the shower? And for that matter what about the woman who wrote the historical novel I just read about the wife of Pontius Pilate? I used some of the images of their wedding night to help me fall asleep. Maybe I should email her to tell her she's a whore now. I sell fantasy. It's my job. I don't sell sex - I sell an act. I'm a costumed actress playing a role that is apparantly worth a lot of money. I'm sure in quite a few people's eyes I'm a whore for it. Then again, when I worked in the corporate world...every interview I aced that was conducted by a man involved a bit of laughing and friendly banter. I don't know if he fantaized about me or not but I definitely presented the illusion of a personal friendly connection so he would think "I want to work with this person." One interview I had (at a place I was ridiculously overqualified to work in) consisted of "I read your resume - your last name fascinates me. Are you aware of the history of it?" and a half hour conversation about history, religion and literature. I wasn't selling my typing skills - those were on my resume. I wasn't even selling my personality - I was selling the specific aspects of my personality that would appeal to that particular person. I do the same thing at work now. I just get paid about 10 times as much, set my own hours, and am my own boss And I have never gotten naked, either.

Stephann -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 8:22:41 AM)
I think a major underlying issue for the Prostitute vs Pro, is that there are similar social taboos, mixing with frustration (with the taboo often being fed by that frustration.) And I agree shoshi, it's a lot like another grain on a pile; but here it is anyway. No small number of men are frustrated with women, because they are sexually frustrated and see women as bearing (at least part of) the fault of that frustration. It is repugnant to him to think he must pay for sex, because his own skills, qualities, and worth aren't sufficient. This exact same model applies to no small number of men who visit professional dominants; except that in the sexual realm, where there is roughly one man for every one woman, there are many times more submissive men seeking dominant women than there are dominant women seeking submissive men (I'll reference http://www.time.com/time/2004/sex/article/bondage_unbound_growing01a.html for anyone who'd like some support to that argument.) So, we already have a powderkeg of frustration. Some of the social factors behind this simply add gasoline to the stockpile; in the US, women have been taught they are either gatekeepers or whores to men. They cannot be both to the same man, though they can certainly be different things to different men. I've known a fair number of strippers in my time who were ashamed of the work they did as a result of this, going so far as to keep 'respectable' jobs part time, so that they could tell their friends, family, or potential boyfriends something other than they were professional dancers. Men, on the other hand, are presented with the conflicting expectations that they are to be capable of demonstrating sexual prowess, while at the same time keeping a virtuous woman. Any man who fails to meet these standards, plus the expectations of a over demanding parent, can quickly end up with fetishes driven by either/both a sense of inadequacy, or the desire for 'forbidden fruit'; sated by either prostitutes or professional dominants. In this, I believe a similar social function is fulfilled by both prostitutes, and pros; not on a purely sexual basis in either case, but certainly in a psycho sexual function. Having established that they're similar in function, hardly implies they are the same. Oranges and baseballs are similar size, shape, and weight, but freshly squeezed baseball juice doesn't seem to go as well with my pancakes. It's my opinion that people who claim Pro-Dominants are 'just the same as prostitutes' are really trying to say that 'Pro's are just as bad as prostitutes!' This, on the other hand, is a whole other topic. Stephan

susie -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 10:22:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hermione83 That is absolutely ridiculous to think that massage therapists, physical therapists, chiropracters, aestheticians, etc are engaging in some sort of sexual activity. If someone was aroused, they would be asked to leave. Gynecologists aren't engaging in sexual activity. The part about nudie pictures is that someone somewhere is getting off to them. Massage is for healing, post-surgery/accident, relaxation, etc etc etc. And ANYWAY the point is, it wouldn't matter if I was the biggest whore on the planet - I wouldn't be a prostitute if I never charged someone to have me. And just a little FYI - no where in my profile did I say I engaged in any of it. I know what I like without doing it, and you can do things without physically doing them with someone else.. sigh I'm not a hypocrite in that, either. But it's just sort of sad it had to be brought up. It is absolutely ridiculous to suggest that a haute coture model is a prostitute because she models underwear and someone might just get turned on by one of the pictures. I realise that you are young but you have shown by your posts on this thread that you have much to learn not only about the bdsm lifestyle but about life in general.

YesMistressIrish -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 10:42:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jasmyn Hermione ... d/s does not have to be enveloped in or lead to intimate relationships ... nor is d/s always about sexual desire ... see my post the MrThorn where I've pointed out a number of non sexual B&D, S&M and d/s scenarios ... Why do these people call me their therapist? I let them escape, I let them step outside their world and into mine ... my world doesn't judge his need to wear a pinstrip skirt and fold laundry, my world doesn't judge why out there he's stressed to the eyeballs or loathing himself for enjoying the ego trip his job/position gives him in society... I guess (it's early morning here in Kiwi land and I need sleep) what I'm wanting to get across is ... try not to romanticise d/s ..because for many it's not about love, intimacy, or relationships Jasmyn: My email did not get through to you. Please email me! Irish Re: some of the 'pile' of some of the comments on this thread... at least it got me back in touch with Jasmyn! lol Irish

SixFootMaster -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 1:09:19 PM)
There is nothing in the etymology of prostitution that demands "sex for hire', however that is the common parlance meaning. Speaking in strictly literal and not social or cultural terms, prostitution hinges on intent. If you deliberately market sex, or sexuality - regardless of the form that marketing takes, then you are prostituting and by extension, you are a prostitute. As the adage goes 'sex sells" - thats why we see tight little stumpets sprawled across motorcars. Its why jeans ads feature models dressed and designed to look sexually hot and/or wanton. Lets not kid ourselves, an underwear model knows very well that the reason she is modeling underwear and not someone else is for her physical beauty and sexual attractiveness. She knows very well that she is selling the image of herself in scanty undergarments. Does it matter whether the viewer, reader, receiver is turned on by these images or not? no, not at all, because it is the intent that matters, and for an underwear model, the intent is to sell underwear using sex and sexuality. How does this impact on pro-domme? Simple, if it is her intent, through her work, to sell sex, sexuality, or a facsimile thereof, then she is prostituting and is by extension a prostitute. As has been mentioned many times, D/s is not necessarily sexual, and is distinct from sensation play. Is being a prostitute, in technical terms, a bad thing? If you think it is, then it is, if you don't then it isn't. There is a lot of negativity assocaited with the word through its common and derogatory usage, that doesn't mean it is inherently bad.

MsSaskia -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 1:13:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: asubmissiveheart quote: ORIGINAL: MrThorns The only thing I have claimed as fact in any of this is that: 1. Prodommes accept money for their services. 2. Prostitutes accept money for their services. 3. Prodommes perform what some would refer to as sexually-related activity 4. Prostitute has been legally defined in at least 3 countries and multiple states within the U.S. as accepting money, goods or services for sexual and sexually-related activities. I have no issues with pro dommes. I am not "picking" at what pro dommes do. I am STILL not judging sex workers, pro dommes, prostitutes, or anyone else's choice of profession. Hope you all have a pleasant evening... ~Thorns Mr. Thorns said it best, and these are the facts. Pro Dommes charge for sexually related activities. Prostitutes charge for sexually related activities. These are the facts, and anything that you feel or say does not change the facts. Gracious, you're just stuck stuck stuck on pro dommes doing sex acts. Why are you so insistent on that when we don't perform sex acts? And by sex acts, I mean what the legal definition is in almost every state in the country, which specifies acts that involve genital/genital, oral/genital, anal/genital, object/genital or object/anal. You may find pro domme work morally objectionable, which is your opinion, but that does not change the fact that it is not illegal, which is a fact. Here are your facts, but in actual fact form: Pro dommes charge for floggings, canings, bondage, roleplay, etc. and do not do sex acts. Prostitues charge for sex acts. These are the facts, and anything that you feel or say does not change the facts.

SixFootMaster -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 1:19:24 PM)
FWIW "sex acts" includes any form of inappropriate or intimate contact, including touching of the breasts, thighs, and buttocks.

MsSaskia -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 1:21:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster There is nothing in the etymology of prostitution that demands "sex for hire', however that is the common parlance meaning. Speaking in strictly literal and not social or cultural terms, prostitution hinges on intent. If you deliberately market sex, or sexuality - regardless of the form that marketing takes, then you are prostituting and by extension, you are a prostitute. As the adage goes 'sex sells" - thats why we see tight little stumpets sprawled across motorcars. Its why jeans ads feature models dressed and designed to look sexually hot and/or wanton. Lets not kid ourselves, an underwear model knows very well that the reason she is modeling underwear and not someone else is for her physical beauty and sexual attractiveness. She knows very well that she is selling the image of herself in scanty undergarments. Does it matter whether the viewer, reader, receiver is turned on by these images or not? no, not at all, because it is the intent that matters, and for an underwear model, the intent is to sell underwear using sex and sexuality. How does this impact on pro-domme? Simple, if it is her intent, through her work, to sell sex, sexuality, or a facsimile thereof, then she is prostituting and is by extension a prostitute. As has been mentioned many times, D/s is not necessarily sexual, and is distinct from sensation play. Is being a prostitute, in technical terms, a bad thing? If you think it is, then it is, if you don't then it isn't. There is a lot of negativity assocaited with the word through its common and derogatory usage, that doesn't mean it is inherently bad. Intent may be what you feel defines various sex workers, but the legal definition of prostitution in almost every state does not include language regarding intent; it specifies acts. My intent as a professional dominant is to provide a therapeutic, empowering experience for all clients, and that is exactly what they receive. My intent is to help free my clients of inhibitions, to help them become stronger, to give them a non-judgmental space to express parts of themselves that have no other outlet, and to help couples enhance their relationships by being able to do all those things with each other in a safe way. If a client comes to me and has sexual release as their prime directive, they do not get to see me. The fact that people become aroused is certainly OK with me, but their arousal is not the focus of my work with them. It's part of who they are and it's treated as just another indicator of headspace. And it's all about headspace, not orgasms, just like everybody else in the scene. That's my intent.

SixFootMaster -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 1:35:55 PM)
Well, are we talking a legal prostitute or a literal one? That's a prostitute of a different color. Do you believe that the law defines what is and isn't a prostitute? Or only what is or isn't prostitution in the eyes of the law?

MsSaskia -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 2:06:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrThorns In the future, please find a way to support your argument... and learn to quote me accurately. You said, "I think you'll be hard-pressed to find any law dictionary that defines flogging, caning and the like a sex act." I believe I provided you with fairly clear legal definitions regarding prostitution and they really weren't hard to find. Perhaps you passed that over and just went straight to being defensive. You seem to talk a lot about legal definitions, but have yet to produce any. In fact, you don't really provide anything but a lot of ..well.. unsupported whining, really. You say that, "Sex acts involve genitals with genitals or anus and genitals or anus with mouths." Is that the legal definition in Colorado? So paying for a handjob on Colfax avenue is okay then, by your legal definition? "We, unlike you, are very clear on exactly what the law states.." You have yet to provide that you know anything about the law beyond your own (mis)interpretation of it. "Police are very clear on this, too, and do not target pro dommes because they are clear on our job descriptions. They test everyone out to see if any of us are willing to bend the rules a bit, keep an eye on those that are to be sure they aren't becoming a public nuisance and leave alone the ones that don't bend the rules. If no sex acts are being performed by their own legal definition, there is no cause for arrest or prosecution." I suppose I will again have to take your word for it.. I mean, all these legal definitions you tell us you know about without providing any actual definitions... and your in-depth analysis of the workings of the local police is simply stunning. "It's good enough for the legal system, but clearly not good enough for you. Perhaps your next step should be lobbying your Congressional representative to get those laws changed so people like me know our place a little better." Don't... just don't. In all your overreactions and your defensiveness you think to color me as some kind of pro domme-hating prude from the religious right who is out to bring fire and brimstone down upon the sinful hussies that like to eat babies and are destroying the morality of our fair youth..or some other such horseshit? I have never said anything about what pro dommes do as being wrong. I have never called a pro domme a whore, hooker, or any other derrogatory term. I answered the OP's question by providing my viewpoint on the difference between someone who offers sex in exchange for money and someone who offers BDSM in exchange for money... and you want to get your panties in a twist over it? Fine.. argue your position.. develop some kind of coherent rebuttal.. but leave your melodramatic, meaningless meanderings about what you think you know about me by the wayside. "BDSM is not all about sex. Sex is a small part of it and no, it is not standard operating procedure that the client gets his rocks off/achieves orgasm with a pro domme." Never said it was... That whole "I got no problem with prostitutes, and I don't care what you say, you're a hooker" is ridiculous and transparent. Well, you're right... I don't care much about what you have to say. However, I do care that you never seem to quote me correctly. I do care that you choose to try and put words in my mouth and that you assume to know something about me. "You want to reduce what we do to sex acts, whether we're performing sex acts or not. The idea that couples might come to us to learn to play with each other, or that crossdressers might need a non-judgmental place to go to learn to be more passable, or that someone just needs to be beaten til they fly sounds a little too much like what everyone else in the scene does. We're good enough at it and we love it enough that we devote ourselves to it 24/7, and a lot of lifestylers resent that and try to find reasons to pick at it. Whatever. Knock yourself out. Continuing to spread misinformation about what pro dommes do might comfort you somehow, but it's weak as hell. " There you go again... I mean, did you ever read my original post, or did you just go straight to Defcon 1? Did I say anything about BDSM being only about sex acts? Those are your words. What the hell do you know about what I want? The only thing I have claimed as fact in any of this is that: 1. Prodommes accept money for their services. 2. Prostitutes accept money for their services. 3. Prodommes perform what some would refer to as sexually-related activity 4. Prostitute has been legally defined in at least 3 countries and multiple states within the U.S. as accepting money, goods or services for sexual and sexually-related activities. I have no issues with pro dommes. I am not "picking" at what pro dommes do. I am STILL not judging sex workers, pro dommes, prostitutes, or anyone else's choice of profession. Hope you all have a pleasant evening... ~Thorns Here's some more "melodramatic rebuttal" for you. What you provided was not a fairly clear legal definition. What you provided was your guess at a legal definition of prostitution: your opinion. Got a link to the section of the Colorado Penal Code or the City and County of Denver's legal definition? Got a copy of the text? No? I don't have it right on hand, either, but after checking up on it every now and then for the past 10 years with my attorney, I'm comfortable with my interpretation, despite having spaced the handjob part of the law in a previous post. So good of you to remember. I'm a professional in my industry and I've been working within the law for a decade and networking with other professionals in m industry across the country during that time to keep an eye out for changes in national trends pertaining to my chosen industry. Call me melodramatic, but I'd say a professional in an industry is going to be more aware of the laws pertaining to their industry than a non-professional or non-lawyer. And I would hope I have an in-depth understanding of the workings of local police. If I owned a bar, I'd be as informed about legal issues and current police attitudes in my district as possible, too. That's just good business sense. In the absence of regulations pertaining to my industry, I conform to my interpretation of the spirit of the law as best I can, on the ongoing advice of my attorney. I do what's classified as sex work and Colorado law does not sanction it or criminalize it professional domination or address it in any way. There are pro dommes I know in other states have good working relationships with police in their cities and the cops help them be aware of any issues that may come up pertaining to their work, such as noise complaints, traffic complaints or, in one case, warnings about a new pro domme in the area who is known to do illegal acts and might bring trouble down on them if they rent dungeon space to the offender. Cops understand the difference, but you appear not to. Yes, pro dommes accept money for their services AND prostitutes accept money for their services AND strippers accept money for their services AND phone sex workers accept money for their services AND nude models accept money for their services. That doesn't make anyone but the prostitute a prostitute. It does make the rest sex workers. Implying that what sex workers do are doing illegal acts, which is what you're doing when you equate a pro domme to a prostitute, is insulting. Insisting that the work pro dommes do is illegal is insulting. Your purported ignorance of the insult you're offering is merely passive aggression, and not very passive at that.

MsSaskia -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 2:10:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster FWIW "sex acts" includes any form of inappropriate or intimate contact, including touching of the breasts, thighs, and buttocks. Not sure what criminal code you're citing, but that's not the code in my state.

MsSaskia -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 2:15:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann Having established that they're similar in function, hardly implies they are the same. Oranges and baseballs are similar size, shape, and weight, but freshly squeezed baseball juice doesn't seem to go as well with my pancakes. It's my opinion that people who claim Pro-Dominants are 'just the same as prostitutes' are really trying to say that 'Pro's are just as bad as prostitutes!' This, on the other hand, is a whole other topic. Thank you. I'm accustomed to people trying to assign the "just as bad as" judgement to pro domination. That's their opinion and I have no interest in trying to educate them otherwise. Insisting that we're legally equivalent, however, is something I (clearly) object strenuously to. Baseball juice? LMAO!

MsSaskia -> RE: Pro-stitute? (no flames please) (11/14/2007 2:26:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hermione83 I pretty much think anyone who sells their love, affection, friendship, body, etc etc is doing something wrong, whether you call it prostitution or not. And you know - anyone who sells anything that gives anyone any sexual fulfillment at all, in my eyes is a prostitute. Whether you're a haute couture model posing nude or partially, doing some entertainment ala-Britney Spears, a stripper, a phone sex-op, a pro-domme, a pro-sub, a girl in a pink fur coat with spots on it hanging out a central park at night looking for a car to hop into, or a person selling her body for a meal to feed her five kids who were born with her HIV in 3rd world country. I'm so relieved you feel that way. I'm not selling love, affection, friendship OR my body or posing in a pink fur coat with spots on it. Maybe I should get one. I'm just selling my skills and my reputation as a nationally-known top-notch dominant, educator, activist and performer. I'm slated to be selling my BDSM skills as a writer, too. People might become titillated by my writing. Hm. Would that be prostitution? You seriously figure model = prostitute? Seriously?

Page: << < prev 14 15 [16] 17 18 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875