View Single Post
  #8  
Old 02-14-2012, 03:15 PM
Scott's Avatar
Scott Scott is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: near Toronto, Canada -.-
Posts: 237
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
I`ll say it right here. And, having read the link you posted, Natja was making a similar point in your thread in that forum.

I do think prostitution is the outcome of social monogamy. Social monogamy requires that sex outside of marriage be had hidden from your partner. And, that is one of the biggest services prostitutes offer: privacy. It also requires that women be prudish (otherwise, how would she honor monogamous vows?), and self-entitled (men have to jump through numerous hoops to get the pussy) in order to be deemed desirable marriage material. Not exactly what makes a woman fun in bed...more demand created for hookers.

I also feel marriage to be a long-term, public, monogamous, sort of prostitution. It`s a parallel institution.
Very interesting points. An article in the blog of an ex sex worker said something quite similar:
marriage v prostitution..good girl-bad girl!

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
And, finally, if what many of the whores I`ve been with have said (as well as, surveys) is true, the vast majority of johns are married men.
I've heard something similar from a sex worker; that 80% of clients are cheating on someone. This is a field where anecdotal evidence is king, so few studies have been done on this, but she seemed to be someone who knew more then many on the subject, and even provided me with some good online material to look at.

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
Finally2, were it not for social monogamy, I would assume sex would be more widely available to men, and therefore prostitution would become redundant.
Very good point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
I pay because I don`t want to play the gender pursue, date, & marry game (which, is also paid).
Aye.

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
But I make no mistake about prostitution being a precarious substitute, for what I wish were polyamorous, reciprocal, non-pay relationships with women.
Agreed. That being said, I think I understand why there are many more female sex workers then male sex workers and why women are generally more interested in the marriage game then men (it would seem to me that the fact that she generally walks off with a fair amount of money the man generally had if things don't go well is probably a part of it); Sex at Dawn, a book that many poly people I've met have highly recommended (and that I've now read a part of myself) put it this way:

****
we argue that women’s seemingly
consistent preference for men with access to wealth is not a
result of innate evolutionary programming, as the standard
model asserts, but simply a behavioral adaptation to a world
in which men control a disproportionate share of the world’s
resources. As we’ll explore in detail, before the advent of
agriculture a hundred centuries ago, women typically had as
much access to food, protection, and social support as did
men. We’ll see that upheavals in human societies resulting
from the shift to settled living in agricultural communities
brought radical changes to women’s ability to survive.
Suddenly, women lived in a world where they had to barter
their reproductive capacity for access to the resources and
protection they needed to survive. But these conditions are
very different from those in which our species had been
evolving previously.
****

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
To that extent, I feel the prostitution/marriage complex is the biologically determined (the species still needs it more than individuals who think of child-rearing as secondary), and that full polyamorous reciprocity is none other than mutation.
Again, Sex at Dawn says that it's the reverse. Here's another excerpt that I found to be quite intriguing:

****************************
If you spend time with the primates closest to human beings,
you’ll see female chimps having intercourse dozens of times
per day, with most or all of the willing males, and rampant
bonobo group sex that leaves everyone relaxed and maintains
intricate social networks. Explore contemporary human
beings’ lust for particular kinds of pornography or our
notorious difficulties with long-term sexual monogamy and
you’ll soon stumble over relics of our hypersexual ancestors.

Our bodies echo the same story. The human male has testicles
far larger than any monogamous primate would ever need,
hanging vulnerably outside the body where cooler
temperatures help preserve stand-by sperm cells for multiple
ejaculations. He also sports the longest, thickest penis found
on any primate on the planet, as well as an embarrassing
tendency to reach orgasm too quickly. Women’s pendulous
breasts (utterly unnecessary for breastfeeding children),
impossible-to-ignore cries of delight (female copulatory
vocalization to the clipboard-carrying crowd), and capacity
for orgasm after orgasm all support this vision of prehistoric
promiscuity. Each of these points is a major snag in the
standard narrative.

Once people were farming the same land season after season,
private property quickly replaced communal ownership as the
modus operandi in most societies. For nomadic foragers,
personal property—anything needing to be carried—is kept to
a minimum, for obvious reasons. There is little thought given
to who owns the land, or the fish in the river, or the clouds in
the sky. Men (and often, women) confront danger together.
An individual male’s parental investment, in other
words—the core element of the standard narrative—tends to
be diffuse in societies like those in which we evolved, not
directed toward one particular woman and her children, as the
conventional model insists.
****************************

The authors of Sex at Dawn argue that it was this transference from public to private property that created the desire for private, monogamous relationships as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
Edit: I should say it`s encouraging to have this exchange with a thoughtful person who`s had similar experiences to mine. I am also encouraged by the fact that your threads seem to be given fair consideration in both polyamory forums.
Um, I wouldn't say that about this particular polyamory forum, although atleast they didn't delete the thread or worse yet, remove me from the forum (it happened to me in another poly forum); this thread was moved from the general discussion forum because the thread was deemed to not have anything to do with polyamory -.-

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
That is so much more than can be said for the hypocritical response you get in mainstream circles.
Aye :-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
Do you have (a) partner(s)?
Nope. You?
Reply With Quote