Is marriage prostitution?

Post Reply New Topic

well deserved praise, imo
Well done indeed!

Thanks to you, too, slave! I've struggled with this question in the past, so I guess I have a lot of information inside of my head about it.

Yes marriage is prostitution. When you agree to give someone access to your body for a length of time (in this case "life") it becomes a contract. Would a man marry a woman who would not agree to have sex with him? Is he supposed to stay if she won't? It's the oldest contract in the book. Exclusive sex for protection. Problem is it's not needed anymore. Hence all the pent up guys who are now invading PPR.

Relationships of the opposite sex are extremely transactionary and revolves around a business proposition.

The so called immaterial is very material. Statistics, biology, economics, and psychology has a lot to say on the issue.

Many times over society has shown that Segregation and Discrimination go in circles reverse discrimination is eminent. Feminiesm has to the extent of spreading false rumors like the 'Mom' figure stereotype, have led to discrimination. This is how it works see they are in your mind, making you think something that is not. Making you believe things that are false. It is a endless cycle. Also while to a extent allistics are mentally disabled, we should ont treat them as inferior for we'd be no better than colonial days, of Slavery, and the following Segregation. People have to learn their lessons, Though it is not to say we have our advantageous factors.

No, marriage is not technically prostitution. One partner is not being paid specifically and expressly for having sex with the other partner.

That said, obviously having sex on a regular, frequent, and exclusive basis is pretty much a requirement if you want the marriage to continue. You are not, in fact, merely obligated to HAVE sex with your spouse. You are also obligated to initiate sex with your spouse, to enjoy sex with your spouse, to make sure your spouse enjoys sex with you, and to fulfill any sexual fantasies your spouse may entertain unless said fantasies endanger your life or well-being.

That's not a business contract. That is a basic need of the majority of human beings.

Can't do it?? Don't marry.

My Point Exactly No One Thinks that it is a Male CARE GIVER and a FEMALE BREAD MAKER BREAD MAKER They assume that it is a FEMALE CARGIVER and a MALE BREAD MAKER ! !! This is in and of it self inequality that is what people don't understand Prejudice of Females being the ones raped and thinking men can't be raped, and is in and of it self Prejudice. It's called Segregation Get over it people. It's segregation no matter rather it is of Disableism (Mistreatment of Able people {aka neurotypicals/Allistics}) Ableism, Reverse Segregation, Racism, Sexism (Not just Female but Male to!!), ETC. The Problem is that people say Racism, Sexism and only think of it as against Colors people not against White people, and of Sexism as Against Females not against Males. Which by their very definition is NOT what it means so. Yeah, now I'm going to have to fight the captcha for a long time and might have to post this at my school (They have 1 Gigabit Ethernet.) So yeah. Also by Definition if it is "Racism to call Black people Black" then shouldn't it be Racism to call "White people" white. Like What the hell. It what happens believe it or not. Also, My Parents that I live with have never engaged in sex even though they are married. Have only discussed it for the purpose of sexual reproduction so no marrige is not prostution

I think it is sad that he thinks so poorly of himself. Are you trying to be Noble or something?

My guess is that most "johns" are married. If marriage were prostitution then the business of "prostitution" wouldn't exist.

Perhaps I should ask a different question

Say you want to have biological children. You earn your money. You want a beautiful women that are willing to get knocked up by you.

That's what you want.

And you don't want government to regulate your relationship.

What would you do?

I can't believe some of the viciously ugly ideas on this thread.

Does anyone actually realize that sex or "exchange of sexual favors" or whatever nasty thing some of you are reducing an intimate partnership to, is:

1) Not the only aspect of a marriage, in fact it's only one of many reasons people marry.

2) Women actually enjoy and want sex as much as men, therefore it's a mutually agreeable activity as one of the bonuses of married partnerships, thus NOBODY is being a "prostitute."

3) Even if a woman stays home and raised the children rather than go out to work and earn a salary that adds to the finances, and she is financially supported by her husband, sorry, still not "prostitution." She's doing the work of raising CHILDREN and running the house. And once again regarding sex, it's ideally a mutually desired activity no different from both partners agreeing they want to stream a movie they'd both equally like to see.

Holy god, I can't believe anyone needs these explanations in this day and age. There are some people here with the darkest, nastiest minds toward women.

What is the big deal? I can only speak from my experience but I have been in 3 long term relationships (9, 7 and 10+ongoing) and they've all boiled down to sex. And for me, intercourse got old a long time ago. So maybe it's prostitution but I don't think it's nasty, just practical. Men need sex, that's why they want relationships with women (my opinion.)

It's not just men that need sex, though. Most healthy adults of both genders want sex, and to promote the idea that women mostly aren't interested in sex is old fashioned and sexist. I'm a woman and I like sex, and there are guys out there who aren't interested in sex at all (ever heard of asexuals? There are a few on this forum, and some of them are men.) These sweeping generalisations about genders help no one and they are damaging.

AgusCahyo . . . I don't know what government you are referring to, or what regulations you're referring to.

I live in the United States, and for many decades the trend here has been for government to stop regulating adult, consensual "relationships". These are personal relationships, though. That would include things like dating couples, and even marriages. Professional relationships are regulated, though. That would include things like surrogacy, or prostitution.

It seems like you want both a personal relationship, and a professional relationship in one person. Around where I live, it's frowned upon for a hired professional to initiate and maintain a personal relationship with a paying customer, or client, and in some cases, it can even be illegal.

The primary reason seems to be that it is viewed as being unethical to pursue an intimate relationship with an employee at the same time as the person is your employee, and so it's considered to be misconduct.

When you hire someone to work for you, there is a natural, and inescapable imbalance of power between the employer, and the employed. If you want to know more about that, you could research sexual harassment in the workplace.

Another thing to think about is the element of passion. If you have hired a woman who is passionate about you to bear your children, and she should contract a sexually transmitted infection, she has double the reason not to tell you. Firstly, she may lose her livelihood, but secondly and more importantly, she may lose your "love". This could pose a risk to you, as the employer, and also pose a risk to your unborn children. (The same risk as if you had a normal girlfriend or wife who wasn't "hired". So what good did it do you to hire someone, then?) And what about you? If you are passionate about your pregnant employee/girlfriend, and she suddenly decides to partake in activities that may harm your unborn child, how do you handle that? Do you fire her, and find another employee/girlfriend, and start over? If so, did you really want biological children? Or did you just fancy the idea that you could impregnate a woman, and also hold all of the power over her? Because you just made the decision to fire your girlfriend/employee, and she is in possession of "your" biological child(ren). Furthermore, if she's an "employee", and not a "slave", then I assume that she has the choice to quit whenever she likes. There go your biological children you were so interested in, again.

Sometimes ethics seems kind of fuzzy, though! I guess some people are of the opinion that it would be okay to start a personal relationship with an employee some time after the professional relationship has dissolved - anywhere from about 6 months to 2 years. Some people might feel that it's okay to pursue a personal relationship with an employee if the professional relationship was brief, or not intimate in any way. In other words, most people would feel more comfortable saying it isn't concerning if a woman starts dating this eye doctor she had an appointment with two years ago, but if it's her gynecologist, and she's been his patient for years, most people would find that to be inappropriate, and possibly even concerning.

So . . . some people would feel that if your "professional" relationship didn't involve something as intimate and lengthy as you impregnating her and raising children together, then it might be okay to date her . . . later.

But your question is, "What would you do?" What would I do?

The variables are:

I want to have biological children.
I earn money.
I want a beautiful woman who is willing to get knocked up by me.
I don't want the government to regulate my relationship.

First, I think I would have to find a beautiful woman. Then I would get to know her, and ask myself if I want my children to know her. If the answer was yes, I would sweep her off of her feet! I would let her know how much appreciate her, because of the wonderful qualities she has shared with me, and explain to her that I want to have children, possibly with her! I would disclose to her that I have money, and I feel capable, currently, of providing for everyone myself, financially, and I would prefer if if she tended to the housework and child rearing, mostly. (Of course with the understanding that she is always welcome to change her mind in the future, regarding her career choice, but that if she does, I reserve the right to change my mind about the relationship choice. And, of course, also with the understanding that just because I have money right now doesn't guarantee that I will always have money. I could go bankrupt! My mother might get sick, and need palliative care, whilst our children are attending college, reducing us to beneath the poverty level for years! I could get sick, or injured, or incarcerated, myself, and then I would be unable to provide the same financial resources! But I wouldn't want her and my children to leave me because I couldn't work anymore! And so if we were in financial distress, as a family, we might have to consider whether she will have to help provide an income. Or I will have to help more with the housework and child rearing.) If she thinks she wants to have children with me, and she's agreeable to trying to adopt home-making as her career, at least so long as I'm able to provide financial support, then I would discuss how we both felt about marriage, and things like pre-nuptual agreements, or relationship agreements, and shared responsibility, so that we both understood what was expected of us in the (personal) relationship. If she and I are in agreement, then I get to pursue my dream of having biological children. I don't have to worry about the government regulating my relationship, because I've already done it myself, when I drew up a pre-nuptual, or relationship agreement/contract.

You can look up pre-nuptual or relationship contracts/agreements online.

But you should read with the understanding that contracts are binding, but not really eternally binding, and all parties to a contract should have the right to renegotiate the terms at any time. A contract shouldn't probably be viewed as a way to guarantee that a woman will be forced to have your children, and raise them in your home, until she dies.

If you want to purchase a woman, impregnate her without her consent, imprison her in your home, and force her to labor for you, those behaviors would more likely fall under the categories of human trafficking, rape, false imprisonment, kidnapping, slavery, and possibly other felonious crimes.

Most people find those kinds of acts to be distasteful, and so most governments have outlawed them. It is unlikely that you'll convince most other people to overturn those laws, simply because you have fantasies about those kinds of things. If you are seriously considering turning those kinds of fantasies into real life events, I urge you to seek professional counseling.

Women are not objects to be purchased and used for human reproduction and management for your domestic affairs.

No.

This is the correct answer. Marriage is not prostitution. It's a relationship contract between two people -- sometimes with a religious component -- that provides legal benefits to the couple, such as access to spousal employer-based health insurance in the United States, the right to jointly file taxes, etc. Sometimes people will purposefully marry someone else to gain access to the other person's wealth -- a phenomenon known as "gold-digging" -- but these situations are obvious and accepted by both parties.