Why is prostitution illegal?
Christopher Ryans book: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... rpunchmaga
And, a brief synopsis: http://www.counterpunch.org/2010/08/19/ ... rehistory/
Why is the sexuality of our ancestors some 100,000-200,000 years ago such a huge deal to us now—even to those of us who don’t care about history, let alone prehistory? Because the human body (featuring, of course, the human brain inside that body) evolved under these prehistoric conditions to be, essentially, what it is today: a highly social, communicative and very sexy beast....
By the by, as Christopher Ryan's book Sex at Dawn seems to have raised the ire of evolutionary psychologists and other individuals who have a vested interest in the standard narrative concerning human sexuality, you can get one book-length rebuttal here:
http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Dusk-Lifting- ... 1477697284
which is summarized here:
http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/upl ... 611616.pdf
The rebuttal book tended to get somewhat poor reviews on Amazon. One reviewer, who liked the rebuttal book, wrote:
An excellent point there.
I'm having a hard time following this logic. Because everyone acted like whores, this suddenly means women don't care when men FORCE sex upon them?
See, that's just the kicker: Our ability to derive knowledge about our hunter-gatherer ancestors is limited because they're all dead, and the vanishingly few extant hunter-gatherers might not be reliable analogues.
And most likely monogamy as well. Monogamous species also tend to have smaller testicles, I forgot to mention that. All three strategies were quite possibly present throughout our evolutionary history. The reality is that we might not ever know.
I could care less what a bunch of s**t that isn't peer-reviewed says. The last one's a start.
No. If they were all acting like bonobos (maybe they weren't, but if they were) then they wouldn't have been acting like whores (i.e., receiving payment or other favors in exchange for sex), but just freely enjoying coitus with anyone who happened by, then rape probably wouldn't have been regarded as any great tragedy.
See, that's just the kicker: Our ability to derive knowledge about our hunter-gatherer ancestors is limited because they're all dead, and the vanishingly few extant hunter-gatherers might not be reliable analogues.
Good point.
That last one, although peer-reviewed, was just a review of the book that was written to rebut Sex at Dawn. So, Sex at Dawn is obviously getting the big-shots who right peer-reviewed articles a bit anxious.
Well, that's what I meant. I'm not known for being very delicate, sorry for the confusion.
Unless you can demonstrate that the rather devastating reactions to rape women have are entirely socially-constructed, this argument has no basis. As it were, given the body of scientific evidence that we have, I'm more inclined to believe that throughout human evolution, our ancestors used a variety of strategies, possibly concurrently.
Admittedly, it seems as if most anthropologists these days are obsessed with a monogamy-only hypothesis. However, even the big bang theory, when it was still MOCKINGLY known as such, had a small but core and dedicated element in academia that eventually won out. If there's any credibility to your ideas, chances are there's at least a half dozen or so academics out there who have a body of evidence for you to present in this thread to support any ideas you might have about whatever.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(law)
Well..considering that about 41% of births happen out of wedlock..
It is somewhat shaky ground to suggest that humans are monogamous...now..
But seriously..it is a mix of both..with culture playing a large role..NOW everywhere..
Interestingly..though..since birth control .. per the pill starting in 1960 ..the free loving 60's eventually
turned into the religious 90's to 2000..'the day of the conservative'...
But..birth control is known as an influencing factor for the mating habits of humans..
with women more likely to select the breadwinner..than the 'bedding maker'..'while under
the influence' of the pill..
But as far as free sex goes..rape is unwanted forced sex..
there is no desirable rape..
that's technically an oxymoron..
It was either consensual sex..
or forced sex..
and no.. women do not like forced sex..
It doesn't matter what a person wants to symbolize IT with in words..
But in general the actual sex act between sexually dimorphic species is not always
what ya might call an 'act of love'..
It can even be downright brutal..for non sexually dimorphic species..like cats...2
who are pillaged by more than one cat..at a time..
And those barbed penises..can't be a joy ride..either..i would GUESS..
But it works..
to get the job done..
Humans tend to romanticize stuff..
that ain't always sugar and spice..
puppy dog tails..are part of the story too..
and some fairly brutal stuff..to get the job done..
It ain't easy being a female...overall in most SOCIAL animal species..
But it is much better than ever before..
in our current day..for hu mans...
where women do have reproductive freedom..more than
ever before in history...
Particularly the LEGAL RIGHT TO SAY
NO!
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
Another article by Christopher Ryan (he has a PhD, so that means that he is smart).
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex ... ve-and-sex
Presently, with our restrictive sexuality, we are much more like chimpanzees than bonobos. But, perhaps, 100,000-200,000 years ago, our ancestors were more like bonobos.
Either way: the right for a woman to decline coitus is socially constructed.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex ... ve-and-sex
While I don't disagree with what this guy is saying, having a Ph.D doesn't mean s**t. You can have a fancy doctorate all day and say whatever you want in some pop psyche website, at the end of the day, pop psyche websites are not peer reviewed. I'd take the word of a guy with a BSc in a peer-reviewed article over anything said in any pop psyche article any day.
Quite possibly.
Non sequitur. Nothing you have said supports this conclusion. Being less-restrictive sexually is not the same as being incapable of not wanting a sexual advance.
I would never, ever, ever leave any woman alone with a person who believes this, especially with such a nonsensical argument. I quietly wonder how many women you have molested in your many days. Let's hope none.
Non sequitur. Nothing you have said supports this conclusion. Being less-restrictive sexually is not the same as being incapable of not wanting a sexual advance.
I would never, ever, ever leave any woman alone with a person who believes this, especially with such a nonsensical argument. I quietly wonder how many women you have molested in your many days. Let's hope none.
Of course none. I'm a nonviolent chap. Moreover, I don't want to get beaten up or imprisoned.
But, ancient law codes:
http://books.google.com/books?id=tVeh3C ... nt&f=false
Non sequitur. Nothing you have said supports this conclusion. Being less-restrictive sexually is not the same as being incapable of not wanting a sexual advance.
I would never, ever, ever leave any woman alone with a person who believes this, especially with such a nonsensical argument. I quietly wonder how many women you have molested in your many days. Let's hope none.
But, ancient law codes:
http://books.google.com/books?id=tVeh3C ... nt&f=false
Yes..it is still a dog rape dog..reality in some cultures..
But that is certainly not to suggest that it is still not rape...
Legalization..of rape..or a cultural sanction of rape..neither excuses the rapist or
the culture from committing..horrifying harm to a woman when considered nothing but property..
And yes this is apparent in the code linked above...a woman while married and raped..was considered worthless..
and put to death..
So obviously the culture only considered her valuable for one thing..in marriage..
cattle to bear the genetic material of the direct sire of child....
And yes..this still goes on..
particularly in Muslim countries..even with female college graduates..fully understanding the freedom of other countries..
they submit to rape..as it is their culture's way to pay for the economically suitable..husband by Dowry..and then the future wife of the unknown husband
must submit..by cultural norm..whether she wants it or not...
So many sacrifice their will..for what culture brainwashes them to do...
But some instead..kill themselves..
Nah..women do not like to be raped..not even when they are brainwashed
to think they have to do it..if they don't want to do it.
Well..at least we do not live in these dark ages any more in the US..
People have the cognitive abilities..to respect other folks desires and wishes..
whether their loins say i would like some or not.
NOW that is a culture that works..
and does not work to harm others..in this way..AGAINST WOMEN...
AND back in the so called cave man days..men and women were not nearly as sexually dimorphic..
ya wouldn't wanna piss one of 'them' women..off..they could kick some serious ass...if they were not
in the mood...the odds were much more even..where will ruled WITH CULTURE overall...
and everyone was as strong as the 'incredible hulk'..in metaphor and analogy.
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
When a new lion assumes control of a harem, he kills the existing cubs and impregnates the lionesses. Neither the cubs nor the lionesses have any rights.
Of course...morals AND rights are socially constructed...
But social construction..is also a natural process of the human animal..
So i'm not sure what your point is..
We are not Lions..per language..collective intelligence and the natural consequence that comes after that..
Culture..
Perhaps in the grand scheme of life on the planet IT (OVERALL human culture) is a virus in metaphor...
but never the less..rights AND morals ARE NO LESS NATURAL than
your guitar...
or the digital ART in CREATIVITY..IN WORDS..and GUITAR VIDEOS..MADE POSSIBLE
BY YOUR dam Computer...
Can you see the common sense in that..
No thing..IS UN NATURAL..
IN THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE..OR beyond.
MAN MADE YAH..LIKE A BEAVER MAKES A DAM...
BUT THE ONLY THING THAT SETS HUMANS APART..
INITIALLY..IS COMPLEX SYMBOLIC LANGUAGE..
A PREHENSILE THUMB..WRITTEN LANGUAGE..
AND
THE
REST
IS
HISTORY
AND YES...
YOUR dam GUITAR...:)
computer and all of THAT... THOSE
CULTURAL BYPRODUCTS...
and YES ..ETHICS..MORALS..
AND RIGHTS TOO...
AND OH MY GOD..YES! EVEN JESUS
CHRIST..BUDDHA..MUHAMMAD
AND ALL THOSE YOGI DUDES..
WHOSE ENLIGHTENED CULTURAL AND YES
STILL NATURAL WAYS OF GREATER ENLIGHTENMENT
BRING STRONGER AND BETTER ETHICS..MORALS..HUMAN
ANIMAL RIGHTS..AND OH MY GOD YES2..
EVEN
MORE BLISS!
TO OTHER FOLKS...
and OH MY GOD YES!! !
THIS IS kinda a natural CULTURAL..SOCIALLY
CONSTRUCTED.. mind and body
orgasm.. if ya get my drift!
without all the 'messy stuff'.....
BUT YA SEE..
IT'S STILL NATURAL..
IF YA CAN OR WILL...
And this is like a parable Arrant Pariah..
just to help ya..understand the common sense of this.
i read people fairly well visually .. and looking at
your guitar playing..ya seem like a nice..
but lonely guy...and yah.. in 'that' way too....
and i hope ya are finding some connection here..
whatever it is ya are seeking;)2
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
Why is that, just out of curiosity? Do you also hate people who pay for non-therapeutic massage? Consumers of pornography? Strip club patrons?
Because I don't want to have sex with someone who can have sex with a person who doesn't want to have sex with them for its own sake. I have this standard for myself of not having sex with someone who doesn't desire me or the sex itself. I wouldn't have sex with someone if I'd have to pay for the privilege. I want a partner with the same standards as I have regarding that.
You could say that I should include more people that johns in this, and I do. I like the type of partner who makes sure that their partner definitely wants sex with them and isn't doing it completely for another reason (to get status, security, because they can't say no, etc) but that's always tricky to be 100% sure about, whereas with prostitution, it's clear-cut what they want out of the encounter. I prefer a partner who makes the effort to ensure that sex is mutually desired and pleasurable. It's a big ask, but I've decided to not settle for any less, and I think I've met someone like that.
This standard doesn't apply to porn and strip clubs simply because whilst the sex workers in those areas are doing sexual things purely for money rather than pleasure, they aren't having sex with the people themselves. You could argue that morally, it's the same thing, but there's less personal involvement there than actually sticking your penis into someone. It's like the difference between someone buying consumer goods made in a sweatshop and someone owning a sweatshop - and no I'm not implying prostitution is inherently exploitative like sweatshops are (though it can be) it was just the only analogy that came to mind.
A better analogy is professional psychologists. They are sitting there, listening to people, whom they might or might not like, and listening to problems which might or might not interest them. After 50 minutes, the session ends, and they collect their fee.
Are the services of a psychologist somehow invalid because she is collecting a fee, and is not, with her whole heart, completely consumed with interest in her client's problems?
An executive ejaculatory administrator might or might not like a particular client, but still collects her fee at the conclusion of the session. If she has 10 clients during a day, you can't really expect her to have an orgasm during every session. Any more than you can expect a psychologist to be thoroughly thrilled with each and every client that comes in.
A psychologist's clients have their problems. An executive ejaculatory administrator's clients also have their own problems.
http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2010 ... f-control/
jrjones9933
Veteran
Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage