in a thread titled "The Best Thing TER Ever Did" that someone had started, the page had turned over and few had read it.
I think it's important as some of we ladies do like to engage in discussion of politics and world affairs and do like to read the political commentary made here and elsewhere. Here are the comments I had made to that post:
Chrissy Stone makes the ultimate point when she says that the topic might never come up in conversation when meeting. "Might not" is the operative word here though. I like to talk about current affairs.
I admitt to being rather passionately interested in the current political climate and in the happenings around the world and to having posted my opinions in a passionate manner on the board.
I believe that in doing so it is a definite turn off for some of the men who might have entertained the idea of meeting me. If our political perspectives are so divergent and we are passionate about those opinions it can be hard to hold any respect for one another and thus negate my wishing to meet them as well.
However, I do admitt that when it comes to some viewpoints that diverge from mine, if they have been presented in a thoughtfull manner and the childish vitriol left out, that I would not only enjoy meeting someone such as this, I would enjoy talking with them about their views to see why and how they arrived at them. Political discussions are not taboo in a courtesans world. To the contrary, any topic of intellectual interest is on the map for discussion.
Passionate people have passionate sex. Just as I take world affairs seriously, so too, do I take my sexual expression seriously!
1) You have opinions that you have arrived at with some thought.
2) You are willing to put your opinions to the test in a public forum.
IMO, These make you more attractive. I hope you stick to your guns. I can't say if it will hurt your business, but I think you will be a more fully realized person for being true to your sense of your self and what you believe.
I hold the same respect for many of the men who post here -- whether they agree with me or not.
expected that they would be able to do so intelligently. This ability was an important part of their appeal.
Having a dinner conversation with Nicole which is enlivened by political discussion is a terrific part of an evening that just gets better and better. This is a person who is truly passionate in more ways than one, and I recommend her highly to those who appreciate genuine passion.
It's one of the reasons that I have so greatly enjoyed your company, and in particular, one of the main reasons that when I spend time with you, I so much want to spend PROLONGED periods of time with you. It makes being in your company a truly multidimensional experience.
Sex is great. But it is limited, in and of itself. Someone who can truly interact with another across the complex range of human communications, be it physical, mental, and emotional, is a treasure to be experienced.
I agree with your comments and the responses.
When I am with a ladie, I don't want to limit my discussions to any particular topic. I think that being able to openly talk about current events, even with different viewpoints is as stimulating as any small talk. The whole purpose of talking is to get to know each others thoughts, dreams, wishes, and yes, politics. Thats all part of the intrigue.
Would it be a turn-off if someone didn't agree with me?
Not at all, I think it might just get the blood flowing hotter, add a little passion.
Yes, opposite political opinions might undermine mutual respect, and be bad for your business or, more possible and worse, detract from the passion of your encounter. However, there is something else to consider here.
What is wrecking our political climate its parochial and incestuous nature. People are far too willing to retreat into their own faction and talk safely to others of their ideology, rather than anyone in disagreement with it. This isolation endangers us, because every ideology in humanity has its liars, opportunists, and psychopaths. The less a faction trusts all others, the more falsehoods are likely to circulate within that faction, unchecked against anything outside, and the more likely the liars, opportunists and psychopaths are to take control.
Now, disagreement is intellectual, but animosity and suspicion are emotions. If you disagree with a man politically, but you still satisfy him completely, you've most likely reduced that hostility, if only for a while. This is something that only a courtesan can do. It might make him more receptive and less judgmental of yours, or others.
Actually, courtesans are a banished political resource. Just by being in business unashamed, they could act as "cross-polinators" and reduce factionalization (strange as it is to refer to a female courtesan as a cross-polinator). They really need to get more politically interested, just from their self-interests, because this society's shameful treatment of you is due to wrongful political decisions made before any of us were born. These should be reversed, as they are connected intimately to most other political issues.
However, any political discussion fit into a two hour, sexually charged session is likely to be rushed. If you're talking about a 48 hour, then your client is wealthy, and more likely to have the political outlook of the wealthy.
I do have more to say about this... but I am now dead tired.
Thank you, Harry. I appreciate the fact that you recognize that the opinions of others in their expression, are part of being true to oneself. No matter how we arrived at them or whether fact gathering changes them as time goes on, or whether they may seem foolish to others.
I guess in perspective from the standpoint that when it comes to our political views, we hold them near and dear, and each of us no matter what the partisanship or non partisanship, holds our nation near and dear
Within the framework of my own business, I have felt it important to retain my sense of self and to be who I am and draw on the best of who I am. Thereby, I feel I have retained respect from others, in so doing. In that perspective, I have benefited and there is no loss, but only gain.
While I am charmed by your reasoning that we ladies could become the "cross polinators" to bridge the factionalization, I doubt very much that we would make much headway with the determined stances others take on politics.
However, any headway at all is of benefit. Anytime we take our focus off of the narrow restrictions that we have imposed on ourselves via our own life exposure and circumstances and listen to anothers perspective and wonder if there might be another angle or perhaps several angles beyond what we have thought of, is a breakthrough.
Any efforts made to discuss opposing views in a rationale and non invective fashion and armed with some logical discussion of a topic that does not include discussion of whether a person is a moderate, a liberal, or a looney or an incompetent, may start to evoke a more cosmopolitan thought process in others. However, it is hard to get past the invectives and the lables for some and indeed; as can be witnessed in my own postings on Bush earlier; for myself too.
Frankly, what I am beginning to realize is just how very parochial (as you put it) our general base for reasoning and dicussing politics is. The majority of us, myself included; have much to learn.
Learning the art of diplomacy and negotiating a political conversation that enables both parties to take a look at the other as a thinking, reasoning, human beings with an emotional and intellectual interest in how the nation should be governed, whether deemed rightly or wrongly by the parties engaging in it; is an art form that most don't wish to work on nor see a need for.
Reversal of the fashion in which society's oldest profession is viewed is not likely to occur given the sociological makeup of our culture and indeed, mankinds overall makeup.
Perhaps culturally it might be challenged here in the U.S. to the point of making it more acceptable and at least dealt with in the fashion of the half world, but never will it be something that can be flaunted. Even when the demi monde was socially acceptable in Europe to the point of the publics interest being piqued and fed on via the newspaper of the day and the ladies promenading in their carriages, it was always marked by attempts to keep the lid on it.
There have been cultures where prostitutes were viewed quite differently. Mostly, they were venerated as temple prostitutes. A different way of dealing with the some of the emotional-social problems posed. Judeo-Christianity changed that, because it eschews pleasure and promotes other emotions aroused by sex, namely jealousy and nausea, and it presents them in a mantel of morality and divine authority. It also embitters people with sexual starvation and enforced monogamy, which aggravates the negative emotions to a fever pitch.
It's true that attitudes won't change, given our sociological makeup, but this assumes that sociological change is impossible. It may be difficult, and it's risky, but it has to be done, because we might face extinction if it isn't, not over this issue alone, but also over related trouble.
The demi monde example you gave came from a Christianized Europe, that was perhaps not under the thrall of the religion anymore, but didn't have another system of social values to compete with it.
"Flaunting it" will always be dangerous to a courtesan. Sex is very primal, first of all. Where there's pleasure, there's always jealousy lurking somewhere. A high-priced courtesan will attract jealousy from this, and from the fact that she has wealth, and suspicion over the contacts she has.
There may be means of social engineering to diminish these, but I'm too tired just now to think of them.