But maybe if the powers that be can see the therapeutic benefits of paid companionship, it might shed some light in favor of hobbying. I don't know if "studies" are used in court cases, but I wanted to share a study from 1974. Feel free to share your thoughts!

Copied from The Sex Researchers by Edward M. Brecher pgs. 348-351 (Copyright 2000)

Friends, Lovers, Slaves (1974), by Martha L. Stein, M.S.W., is focused on the sexual transactions of 1,242 upper-middle-class Caucasian males with 64 call-girl prostitutes charging $50 per 40-minute hour on the average for their services-a substantial fee back in 1972. It is notable in part because it is the first major study of male sexuality by a woman, but primarily because of its remarkable findings.

Women, as everybody knows, are interested in romance, and affection, and depth of interpersonal relationships. Men, in contrast, want to "get their rocks off"-to reach orgasm. That, at least, was the conventional model popularly accepted for generations and still widely believed. If this male stereotype is true in general, moreover, it must a fortiori be true of men who patronize prostitutes, buying sex in 40-minute time segments.

But the vast majority of the 1,242 call-girl encounters Stein observed turned out not to be like that at all. For a high proportion of the men, Stein reports, "sexuality demanded its expression in the context of a relationship meaningful to them. The object varied-romance, companionship, domination, filial affection, maternal comfort." Only a small minority of male patrons wanted merely sexual release-and this minority was balanced by another minority who neither sought nor achieved sexual release yet got what they wanted from the encounter.

Half of the men, Stein was amazed to discover, "actually imposed a therapeutic role on the prostitute"-sought her help in dealing with precisely the kinds of problems patients and clients bring to intimate friends and to other therapists. Stein lists four major areas in which clients used these call girls therapeutically:

1. Ego support and reassurance in the face of business, marital and personal problems.
2. Crisis intervention in cases such as divorce, death, loss of a job, severe financial difficulties.
3. Help in expressing suppressed sexual material usually involving such socially disapproved impulses as masochism, homosexuality, and transvestism.
4. Sex counseling, including information, instruction in basic techniques and help with sexual dysfunctions.

Men, as everyone knows, savor sexual variety while women are sexually more conservative. What everybody knows, however turns out not to be true. Some male clients, it is true, consort with prostitutes for variety; but others, especially among those Stein classes as Friends, seek durable relationships even at $50 an hour. "They were called 'steadies' by the women. Some of those relationships lasted years. Most of them visited regularly, whether weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly, and they valued the friendship to overcome their loneliness."

Intimacy is commonly gauged in terms of willingness to confide; thus an intimate friend is one whom we feel free to pour out our innermost feelings. Judged by this criterion, most of the clients in the Stein study sought and achieved an amazing degree of intimacy during their 40-minute hours; in the popular phrase, the "spilled out their guts" as an integral part of the $50 encounter. Many clients similarly solicited intimate confidences from the women, and reacted appropriately to those confidences. In a culture where one of the commonest complaints of "straight" women to their therapists is that their husbands or lovers stave off intimacy, repress emotions, and refuse to communicate openly, the level of intimate male-female communication achieved during the 40-minute call-girl hour is surely a phenomenon worthy of further study.


So anyway, the study goes on for a few more pagesoutlining different types of clients and encounters. The point I am trying to make is that there is alot more going on in a session besides sex and money. I guess what I don't understand is why paid companionship is reduced to this one point.

Anyone care to share their thoughts?
xoxo
Gina

Gina
I absolutely agree with you, that there is a lot more going on in a session besides the obvious. That's why you're such a wonderful GFE. Have a great weekend.

> The point I am trying to make is that there is alot more going on in a session besides sex and money.

But this is the part that is illegal - almost uniquely in the U.S.  That is why we need to fight to change the laws.

All the wonderful good of sexwork which I 100% agree with and have promoted for decades makes no difference when sex for money is included and therefore illegal.

And sadly like in Phoenix certain DA's on a witch hunt often for political gain.

Could a case be built on the therapeutic benefits? Would a judge/jury listen and sympathize? I really think that to legalize (yes, legalize with regular check-ups and hopefully some positive sex education for providers) that the language will need to be changed. Right now, Escorts=Prostitutes and nobody likes Prostitutes. But if we were Sexual Healers or Sex Educators or something along those lines, public opinion may change.

Just my thoughts

And thank you Dave for keeping up with all this.


Have a great weekend everybody!
xoxo
Gina

As long as the religous right has the amount of power they do nothing will change!

Gina,

I doubt any testimony about therapeutic benefits would even be allowed.  It is irrelevant to the prostitution law in Court.

That is why we have to either fight the law or get public pressure not to enforce in private consenting adults.  

Of course I agree that the therapeutic benefits are very good and important - but irrelevant in Court since "good intent prostitution" is still the crime of prostitution if you pay for anything sexual.  

Of course you may have an argument that it was non sexual therapy time which was paid for not sex. But whether sex was the intent of the payment is still up to a judge or jury and untested other than in one NY case win before a jury, which has no precedent in any other courts.

A potential problem to that may be reference to Tantra since by definition that is sexual- is an argument the DA could legitimately make in my view.

There is also the hope/prayer in Jury Nullification but that I've also written a lot about but actually getting a jury to realize this right which judges will not allow to even be suggested. So it is a very long shot.

That again is why the law is the problem, either getting it changed (unlikely) or the constitutional argument under Lawrence.

In the Sheriff Joe busts when the deputies went too far there was enough of a public outcry that the DA choose to drop the cases.  Today we have a DA that is very aggressively prosecuting the DD witch hunt.