With apologies to 2sense, I am putting up below an interesting post he just put up on the Political Board, which has got to be of more general interest:
When considering why it is that 'monogamous' housewives are unanimously against prostitution, one could consider the relationship between DeBeers and diamonds.
On an objective level, diamonds are at best semi-precious jewels. After all, virtually every married woman in the U.S. has one or more gem-quality diamonds. This is generally called the float by DeBeers, and it is the one thing that DeBeers is dedicated to maintaining through its expensive and imaginative "Diamonds are Forever" advertising campaign. The basic idea is to convince women of the emotional 'investment' that they have in their diamonds, that should transcend even the death/divorce of their husbands. That is, the diamond float is so huge, that even small trafficking in diamonds by widows/divorcees could deflate the market. DeBeers overt message: lose the man, keep the stone.
The regulation of diamond availability by DeBeers is remarkable, and is probably the envy of so-called wannabe monopolies like OPEC. Anyplace in the world where there is a diamond strike, DeBeers is there to buy up/seize the supply. Technology has improved so much that synthetic diamonds, virtually indistinguishable from the real ones, can be made cheaply, yet somehow DeBeers maintains their monopoly. And of course, the ruthelessness of DeBeers on the African continent is legendary.
So an efficient monopoly can readily drive up the price of an otherwise common but desirous commodity.
The implications for our hobby are readily apparent. On the one hand, pussy is also a common commodity, so it is important for monogamous housewives to maintain it in artificially short supply. Zinaval is correct that prostitution threatens to break this monopoly, and so would be avidly opposed by them. Recent advances in neurochemistry and neuroimaging argue that sexual activity shares the same pleasure pathways as drug addiction, so it would not be unreasonable to suggest that women are acting as "drug dealers" in limit the supply of pussy (i.e., the drug of choice for most of the participants on this board).
One last point, it has often been cited on these boards how expensive it is for hobbyists to participate in their favorite activity. For example, in San Diego, you have a very active LE which helps to lower the number of available providers. If you consider the high cost of living in San Diego, along with the extremely low salaries paid to young women, the wonder is why there aren't more than a handful of providers in SD. I would submit that Zinaval's point that "monogamous" housewives are among SD LE's strongest supporters, and provide a necessary climate to maintain their monopoly hold on pussy. It's a monopoly that I'm sure would bring a tear of admiration from DeBeers.
