Asking only workman's wages
I come looking for a job
But I get no offers,
Just a come-on from the whores on Seventh Avenue
I do declare, there were times when I was so lonesome
I took some comfort there



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky57Jo3-BaU

Why do I feel like I connect with this?

The only time the term seems derogatory to me, is when the person you are referring too, is actually NOT a whore.

I agree, I do love whores. In fact, I have never sought any meaningful relationship with any chick who wasn't fast enough to earn such a title. Cause boredom is like cryptonite to me, and no one knows what to do with a dull moment like a slut. Some actually embrace it, wear it like a badge of honor; they own it - I respect that....I more than respect it. (insert beating heart emoticon here)

For a long time, this section of lyrics seemed contradictory to me. The word "whore," despite it's early origin(s), pretty much never has a literal meaning in its modern context; rather, it carries a high level of disrespect, even when at it's most literal. So, how do you take comfort (comfort having two meanings, so I mean the more conventional) from someone you don't respect?

But at some point it became more clear/obvious to me that the song also was also talking about the loss of self-esteem that can come with such struggle and perseverance, so the comfort was sought from peers.

Mystery solved and it was no longer a flawed song to me.

I'm not talking about the OP here, but wonder how many hobbyists think they're better that their providers? Or how many see a provider more than once that they don't respect?

....................

And if you're not asleep by now, condsider this excerpt from the famed "missing lyrics," sometimes played live:

After changes upon changes
We are more or less the same

Within the hobby I have never considered the term to be negative, condescending, nor derogatory. However I do use it as defamatory term otherwise, ie: "that Kim Kardashian is a total whore". lol.

I've never considered myself to be better than a provider unless she was slovenly or dishonest. Even then, better would not be the right word.

or "i am older than i once was/but younger than i'll be--that's not unusual" . . .

i always thought this song was a wonderful example of weltschmerzen . . .  along with "only living boy in new york city" . . .

Never would I use the term whore.  I once had a lady refere to herself as a prostitute , I chewed her out (verbally) and told her I didn't like that word and please don't use it.  Provider or pleasure dispenser sounds so much nicer.   bigdell

I don't think I'm better than providers because they are providers.  There are some I don't think much of but that is because of specific things they have done and that could be applied to the population as a whole.  There are also some providers that I think are marvelous people.  They come in all types, like the rest of us.

Hopefully, most of feel we are ''better" than some people. In particular, I'm thnking of those that are dishonest, as you mentioned, and those that are disrespectful without cause.

To me, "better" is as good a word as any.

As for me, I'm all about a woman "who knows what do with a dull monment," but all the more when she's doing it from a position of self-confidence.

Maybe it's symantics ... but to me, a provider and a whore are differnet things. Language evolves and I think the distinction holds.

Hmmm is right.  I had to think a bit before responding.  I agree that, frankly, I do feel I am better than many providers.  When I say many I am referring to what got them into this business.  I got into this business because of an extreme lack of sex with a frigid ex-wife.  That has since changed since my divorce, which is why I don't hobby anymore.  That need doesn't exist anymore.

Providers seem to get into this business for three reasons.

1.  They are very sexual and use this business to get some extra money (very good money) with minimal effort for a no-strings attached activity that they enjoy.  They are either working another job, or comfortable with child support, other assets/income, or, like our fantasies say, are a beautiful married housewife doing this on the side. I have never met the last one, but several of the others.  It's a good deal for them.  For this one, I consider myself an equal.

2.  They cannot or are unwilling to hold a regular job.  They could work in the real world like anyone else, but they are unorganized and unhappy getting up in the morning to work.  They are beautiful and sexually desirable, so it is easier for them to sell their bodies for quick, easy, and high end cash than toil like their brethren.  The other option is a sugar daddy, but that brings commitment that doesn't always interest them. I have know many women like this and one very, very personally.  Yes, I consider myself better than this type.

3.  They are forced into the business by a SO or a pimp.  It is a pathetic situation wherein they have no other options, although the scenerio is not necessarily self-made.  I don't quite know how to use or not use the word 'better' here.  It is just bad all around and the few times I gave money to these types for sex it just felt bad all around.  I quit seeing them many years ago.

Ok ladies, permission to tear into me now.

It's much simpler. How do you treat people (including your kids)?  What level of lying, stealing and/or abusing does a person allow themselves to rationalize?

When wealth is lost, nothing is lost. When health is lost, something is lost; when character is lost, all is lost.
— German proverb

Character is like a tree and reputation like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing.
— Abraham Lincoln, 16th U.S. president (1809-1865)

Why are we surprised when fig trees bear figs?
— Margaret Titzel

The hobby has all kinds of people, and all can make their own choices about the company they keep.

Regardless of why they are doing it, they are working and supporting themselves (hopefully).  Heck, if I had a way to make good money only working when I feel like it, I might well do that.

-- Modified on 12/15/2011 10:30:41 PM

It's typically the best option available for them.
Does that make "us" better than them? Of course, not.

It might mean we have more options for a variety of reasons,
but it doesn't say anything at all about character.
It doesn't mean they're anything special, either; that's an individual matter.

Not everyone chooses the Military because they don't have any other/better options. Believe it or not, some do it out of patriotism and sense of duty..............none of them do it for the money, which is very little considering what they do.

I wrote, "It's typically the best option ..."   No "believe it or not" is necessary; I allowed for exceptions.

Although, I would argue that among the smaller subset that do have other options, an unfortunately large percentage of those have a misguided sense of patriotism (a separate political discussion) combined with a poor understanding of what they were getting themselves into. The stories of those who realized they made a mistake by joining are many.

So, of course, there are those that serve for the "right" reasons, but it's not the norm. My political opinion is that there hasn't been a "conflict" warranting today's extreme patriotism since WWII and that hero status is not earned by serving alone. To this day I'm always a bit puzzled when told, "Thank you for your service."

Anyway, this is far off the point of my comparison, which was that a difference in options available is not a reason to feel you're better than someone else, that character is what matters.

PS The money is actually pretty good when benefits are considered, often more than the civilian counterparts.