Who would have thought that in all of the USA the one board that seems to have the most compassion and commraderie would be the last place on earth you were told you would find any.  I am of course speaking of Los Angeles.  All my married friends say if you want to get married and have kids move out of L.A. there is no sense of community and no family values.  But the irony is look where you find the sense of community and family values in L.A. on TER Where all of us outlaws and infidels hang out and help each other so I guess it's true there is honor among criminals.  All said with love  

"there is".... "honor among thieves"

am certainly no thief I must admit I thought about writing it verbatim but then again if your not a thief then you are simply an outlaw on the wrong side of the law as a provider and I do provide so therefore I am no thief

well, don't forget that any mature, employed client is almost certainly a liar, to cover the hole in his daily schedule needed to see you, a con in order to obtain and hide the use of the cash necessary to see you, and an adulterer if he's married.

we can debate the social stigma of prostitution all day, and whether it should be legalized in a modern society. but most clients come to you morally compromised on principles that go straight back to the ten commandments, and their lies and cons create at least an equal moral burden even if they wouldn't be prosecuted anywhere outside a divorce court.

This is Not SASHA LOVE Just to make sure everyone knows.. That this person whomever she/he is is NOT me the one that posts on here!
Kisses
sasha

I will not post her link, because I don't know if she wants me to.

The rules of societies, religions and governments are based on a "once size fits all" system of absolutes.  That inflexibility is making those institutions increasingly at odds with the beliefs of large postions of the population, as well as forcing them to fight for relevance in a complex modern society.


Most people will, at some point, find themselves willingly on the wrong side of the pronouncements (rules, mores, laws, decrees) of these institutions.  Did you break the speed limit  driving to work, or were you that guy that we were all flipping-off this morning?  Did you wait until you were 21 to have your first beer or smoke a cigarette, or until you were married to have your first sex?    What names should we call all the people that can't answer yes?

Of course, these questions are easily answered in intolerant societies dominated by extreme fundamentalists.  But they are a little harder to answer in a free society.  Is a father and husband who is married to a woman that prefers not to have sex making a better decision to:
1. See a provider and keep his marriage and family intact.
2. Force his wife to have sex because it's her duty (according to many religions)?
3. Get a divorce and break-up his family in order to pursue his sexual needs?

Maybe in Los Angeles were just a little more tolerant than other places I've lived (Midwest and New England) because of all the different cultures represented here.   While I'm not trying to direct this at you personally, Drollere, I am surprised that a guy with a Ph.D. in Psychology sees the world in such absolute terms.  Usually, psycholgists are on the forefront of relativism.  Just goes to show the dangers of "one size fits all" thinking-  guess I should have known better than to label and make such assumptions about others whom I don't know.

i made a pretty clear distinction in my post, but let me get my highlighter pen here and write in big letters.

the social prejudice against prostitution is a legal and social norm: it's directed impersonally, mechanically, institutionally, in the spirit of mob mentality. i affirm that resisting those kinds of rules is often good for individuals and for societies.

telling your wife you are going out to get milk and seeing an escort instead; telling your boss the personal expense was a sales dinner and not a blow job ... these are face to face deceptions of people who trust you. only a fool would confuse violating personal trust with violating social norms.

is it ok to violate personal trust if it suits your interests, your needs, your view of morality? i never addressed that issue. i merely said that the moral stain in the sexual encounter doesn't have anything really to do with sex, and often is not carried by the minx, but by her client.

do most "hobbyists" acknowledge that, confront that? no ... they pretend that a penis is a prerogative to lie. is lying a bad thing? it depends on the situation. is a justifiable lie an excusable lie? i think it depends on the trust that was broken, and the foreseeable consequences if the lie is exposed, throbbing and hard, for all to see.

Here we have a post on the National Board saying something nice about the compassion and comraderie on the LA Board, and what happens?

A couple of posters get into a spat.

Another poster, who has been posting on the National Board for less than a month, tries to point out that the original poster (SASHA), who has posted occasionally and responsibly here since Thanksgiving, "this person whomever she/he is is NOT me the one that posts on here!"

I'm going back to LA-LA land, where I belong.

Single, self-employed.  Lies to no one.  Uses his own money.  Deceives nobody.  

Unwarranted arrogance and condescension is also a hallmark of something... perhaps something to which the original poster was referring.  Consider that sentence highlighted.


-- Modified on 8/12/2002 1:10:03 AM

I was not spatting but just making sure no one got us mixed up because on ANOTHER BOARD the members were saying it was me posting... and I wanted to make sure there was no confusion thats all, I was not spatting at all

sasha

I wrote:
***************************************************************
Here we have a post on the National Board saying something nice about the compassion and comraderie on the LA Board, and what happens?

A couple of posters get into a spat.

Another poster, who has been posting on the National Board for less than a month, tries to point out that the original poster (SASHA), who has posted occasionally and responsibly here since Thanksgiving, "this person whomever she/he is is NOT me the one that posts on here!"

I'm going back to LA-LA land, where I belong.
****************************************************************

You are the "another poster" to whom I referred. I said nothing about you being in a spat. It is two posters other than you who are in a spat. I thought that would have been clear enough.

But, really, the point is that SASHA was saying something nice about the LA Board; it occurs to me she might have been trying to gently encourage the National Board to show more compassion and comraderie. Whatever her motives were, hers was an upbeat post. And then the thread (on the National Board) turned less pleasant. That's the irony I see in it.

are one of the many positive reasons the L.A. Board is such a great place to be heard and if I haven't already I would love the opportunity to make your aquaintance one day

No, we have not met yet. I just sent you a TER PM. I hope you can receive it.

the above hotmail address is correct and will reach me just as well if you care to resend I will certsinly resspond.