Is prostitution "immoral"?

[nnmartin]

But promiscuity requires that it works both ways. How could you have men who have multiple partners without women who also have multiple partners? How exactly is it only natural for guys, but not gals, to be promiscuous? That makes no sense.

but I've already answered that one.

in one of my very recent posts I said that some women will have a lot of sex (ie: the prostitutes) with many men.

surely you can work the logic out here - the amount of partners does not have to be equal as we are really interested here in the amount of activity.

Girls do not need to be promiscuous because the egg can only be fertilised the one time, yet the man can fertilise many eggs. God gave him this ability and intended him to use it until such a time as seed and egg unite.

 

[Koldo]

By the standards of social science. If you want to throw out all the findings of social science based on the size of the sample group then you have to throw out the majority of its findings. 43 prostitutes is a good sample group. If you don't think so show me why and where Dalla went wrong. Refute the relevance of the findings.

I am particularly curious as to how you ( and the researches ) came to the conclusion that 43 is a good sample group. Would 30 be good enough too? How about 20?

 

[nnmartin]

By the standards of social science. If you want to throw out all the findings of social science based on the size of the sample group then you have to throw out the majority of its findings. 43 prostitutes is a good sample group. If you don't think so show me why and where Dalla went wrong. Refute the relevance of the findings.

43 women from the whole Western World as a basis for a 'scientific' study is a pitifully low amount.

Maybe all these women were from some drug ridden inner city area - that would skewer the findings somewhat don't you think?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

I am particularly curious as to how you ( and the researches ) came to the conclusion that 43 is a good sample group. Would 30 be good enough too? How about 20?

If I drop an egg 43 times from a tall building and it cracks 75% of the time, that is a pretty good sample that an egg will crack 75% of the time or do I have to do a infinite amount of experiments to determine whether an egg will crack 75% of the times if you drop it from a tall building or would 43 suffice?

 

[nnmartin]

Lmao...I don't even know where to start. Let me ask you this, how is my personal sex drive not ordained by nature?

of course, it is still ordained by Nature but in a different way.

The Seed has to find the egg - this is usually done by the sperm swimming towards it, in other words - the seed must find the egg. However there are many seeds all competing for the same prize.

extrapolating this clear natural action to the sex life of men and women we can see that a man must seek the womb which contains the special egg. However there are many men competing for the womb hence he must spread his seed around in order to be successful.

The woman does not need to do this - she must only accept the seed.

so from this, it is fairly obvious how Nature works in the same way but on different levels.

thus male promiscuity is natural but female is not.

It is what Nature intended.

 

[Koldo]

If I drop an egg 43 times from a tall building and it cracks 75% of the time, that is a pretty good sample that an egg will crack 75% of the time or do I have to do a infinite amount of experiments to determine whether an egg will crack 75% of the times if you drop it from a tall building or would 43 suffice?

Why 43? Why not 20? If the rate is 75% then you would have no problem to achieve the same result with using 20 tries, right?
Other than that, why is the egg cracking? And why isn't it cracking sometimes? Is someone/something preventing the egg from cracking?
Either way, I hope you realize there is a considerable difference with eggs cracking from falling, which are rather simple events, and prostitution being the cause of something, which is far more complex and needs to take into consideration a multiple number of factors.

You should consider surveys on regards to intention of votes for elections as a good example. For the results to be as accurate as possible, the individuals of the sample have to be taken into consideration in a proportion as closely related as possible to the group they correspond to. If 50% of the sample consists of rich people ( just one factor to take into consideration ) , while rich people only correspond to 5% of the total population, you are likely to end with very awkward results.

I highly doubt every important factor could be taken into consideration on regards to prostitution with a very small sample as it happens worldwide and not just in a specific small region. Several questions have to be made: Do they work close to drug dealers? What are their work conditions? How much are they being paid? Why did they engange into prostitution? Is prostitution legal in that country/state? Are drugs legal in that country/state? And so on. That is because not every prostitute is under the same conditions. One would have to keep in mind multiple factors that could affect the results to make such a blunt statement that prostitution, in general, makes women more prone to use drugs in such a considerable rate. In other words, you have , at very least, to provide compelling evidence that the sample corresponds in a ( nearly ) accurate proportion to the total population of prostitutes.

 

[Banner]

of course, it is still ordained by Nature but in a different way.

The Seed has to find the egg - this is usually done by the sperm swimming towards it, in other words - the seed must find the egg. However there are many seeds all competing for the same prize.

extrapolating this clear natural action to the sex life of men and women we can see that a man must seek the womb which contains the special egg. However there are many men competing for the womb hence he must spread his seed around in order to be successful.

The woman does not need to do this - she must only accept the seed.

so from this, it is fairly obvious how Nature works in the same way but on different levels.

thus male promiscuity is natural but female is not.

It is what Nature intended.

You are getting too big for your britches with this biology lesson. There is something to this but it's not where you're taking it.

And what if a woman's body is looking for the "right" seed?

How is something made "unnatural"? Having sex for pleasure is not immoral (your words) so I guess female promiscuity isn't immoral then right?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Given the world wide number of prostitutes is around 40 million The Stats on Prostitution a sample size of 43 is absurdly low

 

[Me Myself]

fair share would be along the lines of required sexual activity - say around two times per week.

male promiscuity is different because it is ordained by Nature and is needed by the species.

I didn´t rape her on purpose. The Order told me to do it!

Do you know that rape is perfectly "natural" for our species? Like war over territory.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Same with murder of rivals so that we can take their 'mates', of the young offspring of our rivals (those that are still dependant on their mother for survival) so that they can look after our own offspring etc

Edit:

Monogamy is the first and most unnatural behaviour that we humans have adopted; if we are to use the 'natural order' argument you love oh so much, it would be the first thing we should get rid of as it perverts the course of natural selection, it is because of monogamy that human evolution over the last few thousand years has been so.... unimpressive.

 

[Sunstone]

male promiscuity is different because it is ordained by Nature and is needed by the species.

Back when I screwed around a bit, I was always mindful that I was doing it for the sake of our species.

 

[garrydons]

in the Bible perhaps, but I think the topic here is more about the secular field.

do you think whoring is wrong - either by worker or john?

Shalom! since the question is about immorality which is the opposite of morality then we have to get the meaning of the word moral. So, the Bible defines immorality as against the commandments of God. Since prostitution is against God's commands, then it is immoral.

 

[Storm]

Shalom! since the question is about immorality which is the opposite of morality then we have to get the meaning of the word moral. So, the Bible defines immorality as against the commandments of God. Since prostitution is against God's commands, then it is immoral.

You'll find that the Bible's not really a trump card in this forum, as many of us reject it.

That said, I believe that prostitution, much like porn, is exploitative as the industry is now.

 

[garrydons]

Shalom! Storm I thought this is a religious forum. I simply understand that the word religious speaks of different religions and various religious books. How then can we set aside the Bible. How can we say then that one is immoral or not? Based on our own carnal reasoning? How about if I say that what is good for others is not good for me. Is this logical? What I am saying here is that what is wrong is wrong and what is right is right. Because the Bible provides these laws and in fact nations have adopted these laws. We can not deny it.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Rather that setting aside the bible, I believe she was attempting to state that merely because one specific religion or religious text says one thing doesn't mean that it is universally true, for example the moral laws and guidelines portrayed in the Bible may be held as absolute truth by believers of that religion, however it is be no means a 'trump card' in that people may feel free to dispute the morals espoused by that book - so merely quoting that text does not provide a perfect judgement on morality, only what that text (or some specific religious institution) holds to be the morality revealed by their God.

Just as many people question whether that religion is correct, there are many who question whether a specific moral law proposed by that religion is correct - that many nations have adopted it is immaterial - for there are many laws that have been adopted over the years which we now recognise as being immoral, such as slavery for example, we see examples of slavery by the 'good guys' in the Bible, slavery was adopted into the laws of many nations, but since then we have come to realise that it is immoral.

 

[nnmartin]

as for those who are making analogies with the Order argument the point is as follows:

The Reproduction section of the Order governs sexual behaviour of men and women.

Our sense of morality and gift of intelligence allows us to channel the actions of the Order along a path that causes least harm to others.

So we can still abide by our naturally given tendencies in the sexual field without resorting to barbarity.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

So in other words you take the order of nature and instead of following it you go along a different 'path', one that you choose as a result of some sense of 'morality' and intelligence.

Sorry martin but even in the thread that you dedicated to it you simply never could redress the fact that 'nature' does not deal with morality or social contract, those are perversions of nature arising from intellect and are unique to humans.

 

[Me Myself]

Lets be straigth forward on how would things be with this "Order" :

There are more women than men in the world, but only barely. (not like 10 to one, but like 49 to 51 kinda more women)

In order for men to have sex the way nmartin proposes and women to not to, there would be A LOT OF MEN that would never get laid.

I explain:

We have 20 woman and 5 men. Let´s say each men is alowed to have sex with 4 women in his live and women with 1 men in their life (so we would be saying that this "order" is making men hacve 4 times the amounf of sex partners than women which I am sure is much less than what nmartin suggests, but let´s say it is only 4 times the amount for argument´s sake.). the systems works, because there are a lot more men than women.

Man- Woman woman woman woman

1st Man- Woman woman woman woman

2nd Man- Woman woman woman woman

3rd Man- Woman woman woman woman

4rd Man- Woman woman woman woman

5rd Man- Woman woman woman woman

Now, let´s say the system is actually like today´s world. It would be more or less: 19 men and 20 women. It would look like this:


1st Man- Woman woman woman woman

2nd Man- Woman woman woman woman

3rd Man- Woman woman woman woman

4rd Man- Woman woman woman woman

5rd Man- Woman woman woman woman

14 virgin men that can´t have sex with any women

All of them have already had sex with the amount of men they are allowed to be the "order of nature".

So now this "natural Order" is making 3/4 of the men to be completely unable to have ANY sex partner.

How can they get to have sex? The natural Order has an answer!

Rape

It is proven and indisputed by biologists that our species, as one of the species were the male is capable of raping the female to have sex (this doesn´t happen in all species) is naturaly predisposed to this scenario from a buiological "evolutionary" stand (naturaly civilization evolved awahy from it, as sociologically wise, but we are still bilogically apt and prone). For this species that are biologically cappable, it always happens when the male cant take a female by normal mating.

So, according to the "Order of Nature", men should be raping women more and this shouldn´t be ilegal.

Or do you se any way arond it? cause from where I stand, this whole "order of nature" thing is completely ridiculous. As someone else said, the monogamous relationships aren´t even very natural for our species.

We made that because we found it MORE FAIR and convenient in many cases.

The issue with the sex would be the same.

Or rape.

Personally, I kinda favour simple sexual freedom of the woman to be what it is: perfectly natural and only immoral for those who are blinded to how would this work.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

In the human population there is one answer that has taken place to such a dilemma, it is not uncommon for women to be attracted to two sorts of men, one who is the provider, who will provide for her offspring and another who is the reproducer who will be the one to pass on their DNA. The 'natural order' which Martin proposes in such a case actually encourages women to commit adultery and attempt to pass off the offspring as that of their partner (this is a phenomenon which is actually believed to far more common than most people expect, given that males are typically seen as the offenders with adultery).

 

[Me Myself]

In the human population there is one answer that has taken place to such a dilemma, it is not uncommon for women to be attracted to two sorts of men, one who is the provider, who will provide for her offspring and another who is the reproducer who will be the one to pass on their DNA. The 'natural order' which Martin proposes in such a case actually encourages women to commit adultery and attempt to pass off the offspring as that of their partner.

That is very true, what you mention is common in primates and similar species. The female accepts sex from both the alpha male and the betha males that provide her with fruit. They even tend to make sure that the baby is of the alpha male and the beta only gets the free sex.

Pretty much a fruit whore