"Men of all ages, races, religions, and backgrounds do it. Rich men do it, and poor men do it, in forms so varied and ubiquitous that they can be summoned at a moment's notice."
"And yet surprisingly little is known about the age-old practice of buying sex, long assumed to be inevitable. No one even knows what proportion of the male population does it; estimates range from 16 percent to 80 percent."
I don't know what group of guys they found to interview, but they got the real asshole group! This is one quote "In their interviews, the sex buyers often voiced aggression toward women, and were nearly eight times as likely as nonbuyers to say they would rape a woman if they could get away with it."
I am sure there are men like that, of course. But to lump ALL buyers of sexual services in the same category as violent men like this is simply wrong. Just like saying that all women who provide these services are attention-starved crack whores who need the $ to feed their drug habits. Just plain wrong. A terrible article, and we should all write to Newsweek to show the other side of this hobby.
article says: "Overall, the attitudes and habits of sex buyers reveal them as men who dehumanize and commodify women, view them with anger and contempt, lack empathy for their suffering, and relish their own ability to inflict pain and degradation."
Can anyone see the glaring rhetoric in the article relating to this statement. I'm actually surprised it made it past editors as presented.
But on the other hand...
I do read a lot of comments by ASSCLOWNS that give credence to this conclusion.
i doubt i am the only one here who would disagree with some of what was said like the quotes below. but i mean you don't need to tell any somewhat sane person that sex trafficking is wrong. but as long as it stays in the shadows thats what will happen. prohibition does not work.
"Overall, the attitudes and habits of sex buyers reveal them as men who dehumanize and commodify women, view them with anger and contempt, lack empathy for their suffering, and relish their own ability to inflict pain and degradation."
at least for me, when i found out one girl absolutely hated this line of work, i felt really bad for her. tried to offer help, and i am gutsy enough to say i felt so bad for her that when she started crying, i teared up too.
“Over time, as a result of their prostitution and pornography use, sex buyers reported that their sexual preferences changed and they sought more sadomasochistic and anal sex,” the study reported.
really????
"Sex buyers often prefer the license they have with prostitutes. “You’re the boss, the total boss,” said another john. “Even us normal guys want to say something and have it done no questions asked. No ‘I don’t feel like it.’ No ‘I’m tired.’ Unquestionable obedience. I mean that’s powerful. Power is like a drug.”
Paint my house!!!errr, i'm the boss right?
"But the sex buyers in Farley’s study overlooked such coercion and showed little empathy for prostitutes’ experiences or their cumulative toll. "
“Modern-day prostitution is modern-day slavery...that it’s enslavement"
i know sites like this are just a microcosm of a bigger wold, but i just think the idea of completely doing away with the demand (ie: a mans sex drive) is a pipe dream . i guess if they want that too happen... castrations all around. there idea makes me think it will just go deeper underground, making it an even more dangerous line of work
Google Melissa Farley and her "Prostitution Research and Education" outfit, and there's little wonder her "research" is so hysterically one-sided. Newsweek simply printed it without any critical examination or journalism. In addition to smearing all the responsible hookers and johns, IMO it's a blatantly cynical exploitation of the actual victims of trafficking and abuse.
The article in question was published in Newsweek, which is part of the Kool-Aid drinking media/Democrat party machine that seeks to limit Liberty and Freedom to us all. Not everyone who engages in the hobby are bad guys or girls...though you would never know it if you believe the BS presented here. While I support taking down the sleazy, evil scum who exploit those who are unable to fight back, this article paints us all as bad, and that's wrong. And they call themselves enlightened...NOT!
It's the same generalization that news articles & documentaries portray the providers. Whomever is writing the article, interviews a small percentage of people & basically turns their statements into a generalization. It happens w/providers ALL the time.. the general public has such a skewed perception of us, it's disheartening sometimes, as they choose to interview SW's, trafficked, or gals on drugs, versus the larger population, who as a whole, are actually quite normal... most would never know what we did for a living just seeing us on the street, or at the grocery store. Same with this article... yes, there is a small percentage of gentlemen that have issues, & think messed up... but in whole, most guys are completely "normal".. society would never know by looking at them what they did behind closed doors.
It's just another attempt to generalize and bring a bad light onto the "hobby". I'm sure it wasn't the first article, & it won't be the last. Maybe they figure since they can't get us to stop offering services, that they'll make the men guilty of what they do in their private lives, & men will stop participating in the "oldest profession in the world"...
I usually don't post just to agree with prior posters but this article pissed me off so much I can't help it. I don't doubt the survey is correct re one particular low-end slice of this world. But it does not describe me, hardly anyone I've met on TER, and nobody I've met at an M&G. Are we all so high-end that we're completely un-representative of the rest of this world? I sincerely doubt it. All this article will do is re-inforce existing prejudices. Gawd! I hope my wife doesn't read it! PS: Thanks to the OP for posting this.
I usually don't post just to agree with prior posters but this article pissed me off so much I can't help it. I don't doubt the survey is correct re one particular low-end slice of this world. But it does not describe me, hardly anyone I've met on TER, and nobody I've met at an M&G. Are we all so high-end that we're completely un-representative of the rest of this world? I sincerely doubt it. All this article will do is re-inforce existing prejudices. Gawd! I hope my wife doesn't read it! PS: Thanks to the OP for posting this.
I don't think I am delusional or in denial in my belief that my experiences are from a different sector of society than what the article describes. 10 times a day? 10 year old? raping? Women hating the guys they are with? I've tried to be a selective gentleman in this hobby. The most awkward moments I've had in the hobby are generally when the lady is telling me to spank her. I usually have to be asked more than once, and I'll comply if SHE demands it but my instinct when a gorgeous woman shows me such pleasure and intimacy is gratitude, not violence. I am not going to ignore the socio economic issues addressed, that would be naive, but their examples for that issue came back to minors. I'm shocked Glorida Allred wasn't quoted in the article it was so slanted and biased. Am I wrong? Have the ladies been hating on me all this time? You mean that BMW one of my current favorite ladies just bought herself is an example of how she is a victim of trafficking?
The researcher says they couldn't find men who ARE NOT in the catagory of sex buyer, so they reduced the criteria?
Thereby saying that base on the hypothesis of his approach almost ALL men are sex buyers.
Then, he goes onto say that all sex buyers are basically psychopathic mysoginists.
If one follows the siomple logic the"researcher" (READ THAT AS PROPOGANDIST) is laying out, then... most men are woman hating sexual abusers. Anyone with one iota of critical thinking skills can see that there is no logic to this let alone a research standard.
That isn't just a steaming pile of shit, it is not even worthy of being printed in a national "news" magazine.
Newsweek has become the National Enquirer. Fucking morons!
They have much higher standards Newsweek. Even if most of what The National Enquirer prints is half truths(which it is), they get it right a whole lot more often then Newsweek which is all BS.
First of all, I never pay for sex. I pay for companionship.
I also noticed how they had to keep loosening up their criteria to find men who are not "buyers". What a joke. And what about the guy who shells out big money -- buys -- after he watches the TV commercials where a hot, almost naked sexpot jumps some guy and appears to shove her tongue down his throat because of the premium shampoo he uses or the designer shoes he wears? SEX SELLS.
All I know is, it didn't work for me. I'm going back to my regular brands.
I haven't looked into the stat but I am guessing that is a world stat and I wouldn't be surprised to hear it's correct, in North America we have a certain standard of living and rights that prostitutes in other countries don't have. Often stats on prostitution here in North America are admittedly flawed as the researchers know they have difficulty reaching inside workers, outside workers are the most vulnerable group and also the most visible and easy to speak to, inside workers are an estimated 80% of the workforce but not easy to connect to so it's generally accepted that the statistics in this area are not accurate - of course the article doesn't make any mention of that (or if it does I missed it).
In counter to the article I was just reading Sci Am Mind the other day and it had a short article countering the common belief that porn increases violence. Perhaps like many things in life porn can be a problem for some individuals but does not pose a problem for the majority of users.
....seems way off base to me. And I wonder if it's because the men who are more likely to participate in a study like this are more likely to be assholes.
Most of us who "hobby" keep it under the radar, use aliases and fake names, disposable cell phones, etc., etc. Even if I were assured it was completely anonymous, I don't know that I would participate in a university study on prostitution.
Maybe the guys willing to talk about it are also the guys who get off talking about it, bragging on their own supposed masculinity, about how they hate women, would rape women if they could get away with it, etc., etc.
The real and reasonable "johns," meanwhile, stay under the radar and keep our damn mouths shut.
this article is OBVIOUSLY written from a TRADITIONAL, MIDDLE CLASS MORALITY for a middle of the road mainstream publication catering to a middle of the road audience. While I thank the poster, the article itself is WORTHLESS, simply trotting out the same old tropes/stereotypes about the biz. 2 things:
1. reporters REALLY should differentiate between prostitution, the CONSENSUAL exchange of a service for payment between ADULTS, and the trafficking of CHILDREN, which i think most, if not all, would agree is WRONG and should be outlawed, and NOT equated with the former.
2. Anyone seeking an ENLIGHTENED view of prostitution really should watch "CLIENT NO. 9" While a fascinating look at the scandal that fell former gov. Eliot Spitzer, it also offers an ADULT, realistic portrait of prostitution. For example, Ashley Dupree was NOT Spitzer's no. 1 girl. His favorite PROSTITUTE remains anonymous, and in fact became, a commodities trader! Hardly the picture of someone with limited opportunities forced into the profession.
Sure, abuses exist, as the do in ALL walks of life. But to paint the entire industry in the same light is shoddy and lazy journalism at best!
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
VIP MEMBER
, you are now a VIP member!
We thank you for your purchase!
VIP MEMBER
, Thank you for becoming VIP member!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!
