Are women who use their sexuality for personal gain any better than street whores?

And those of us who are not emotionally retarded should be impressed by that because...?

Sure, and the Bolshevik Revolution was "progress" for the Russian proletariat, even though millions of them would find themselves starving to death in short order.

What I like is beside the point - not that egomaniacs can possibly comprehend the point, as their perspective is limited to their own lifespan and the prosperity they vainly imagine their descendants will enjoy.

Anyone who thinks being a mother/homemaker isn't a life doesn't know what life is.

Please, you're giving me a headache.

 

Tried repping you but couldn't.

 

Attractive and/or successful people are at a decided genetic advantage in the breeding game...

It's called reality.

 

Pilots are higher status than doctors, btw.

Under no circumstances would a stethoscope wielder ever get laid here. Doctors...yuck. Doctor Death. Horrible hospitals. Smell of death and sickness. Associated in my mind with a world only peopled by pain and death and horribleness. Doctors have the same effect on me as cemeteries. To add to that horror, I have been groped by doctors several times. They are morally no more ethical than any other man in my experience. Possibly worse, as they chose a profession where they have ability to indulge in.... malpractice. No offence to your doc, UOTG, sure he would never.

No idea what that means.

No idea what that means either. I'm not an egomaniac though, so you maybe refer to yourself.

Hahaha...If that is the case, why don't you and other male chauvinists value that job enough to want it as your own life? Total hypocrisy.

You may have missed the subsequent post, I stayed at home when my family was young. Nevertheless that is not what most women aspire to today and they are absolutely entitled not to stay home in exactly the same way men don't want to stay home.

Goodo.

Once you are in a monogamous relationship you are just the same as anyone else, with only one partner.

 

I agree. I don't understand these women who want kids, have kids, then complain about being 'saddled' w/the kid(s) and griping about hubby being able to go out and work, away from the kids, crying that they don't have 'equality'.........

Yes, many mothers have to work also to make ends meet, but if couples live within their means, cut corners on extras, so they can live on his salary so the kids can be raised by MOM, instead of a day care provider, that's what's best for the kids......

I was a stay-at-home mom when my 3 were little and that's how we both wanted it..... when they were in middle/HS school, I went back to work. Those young yrs of childhood are just to important to hand over to someone who doesn't love/nurture your kid like you do......

 

no but theirs nothing wrong with selling sex with yourself on the street for either gender necessarily

 

Like everything else in life, there's good and bad in every group of people...

To have such a low opinion of doctors in general is rather pathetic....

Did you report those groping doctors?

 

I laugh when people say it's impossible for a family to survive on one paycheck. My hubby is military so we aren't exactly rolling in the dough, and I stayed home for 13 yrs to raise our kids. Our youngest is now 6, so I've been back in the field for a little over 2 yrs now. We had bills just like everyone else, BUT we lived within our means. Our bills got paid, we had enough for gas and groceries, and the occasional emergency. We just bought a new car last month. The last time we were able to buy NEW was before kids, 17 yrs ago. There's a time for everything! We enjoy being able to buy nicer things and having more play money, but as I look back to when I wasn't working, we were never in lack. I never felt like we were poor and we certainly didn't look it or act it!

I guess not everyone is willing to give up ''stuff'' for what they know to do is right.

 

Right on! I wouldn't have given up those memories of my babies/toddlers/kids growing up fast and the pix taken of that special moment for ANYTHING..... that's what life is all about.....

 

Did I assert there is not? No. But don't let that get in the way of a good condescend.

Thank you for your opinion. To have such an uniformed low opinion of me is rather offensive. My opinion of those doctors is informed by personal experience.

What makes you think that is your business? No matter, it isn't your business and the circumstances of those incidents are not your business either, so I have said all I will say on it other than a doctor taking advantage of a critically ill child is fairly serious business...

Not all of the aversion to doctors is related to that. If you have watched loved ones suffer terminal illness and the doc is on the scene for much of the time, there can be a little part of your subconscious which may instinctively forever creep on sight of that doctor as the subconscious can associate him with that horrible time. Even if he was there only to help you, it is an instinct to avoid further contact or memory of anything relating to such a dreadful experience. Unfair on the doctor, but there you go. He creeps me out and he knows it... we have discussed it at length and apparently it is a fairly normal reaction.

Many people have similar aversion to hospitals after being treated there..

 

At risk of being pack attacked by JudgeMental Judies, can you paint it with such a broad brush? People can plan as much as they like, but personal circumstances easily can unpredictably change beyond recognition and that can be outwith the person's control.

For example...one may plan accordingly and then find one's husband made redundant. In which case he may go back to college to qualify in accountancy while working nights, which can alter the entire set up.

What is right for you is not right for everyone. Freedom of choice is what the west is about, I don't see it as great for society that women go out to work and leave children with others, but it is great that people have freedom to choose their lifestyle.

And...the balance had to be redressed. If men are now unhappy about how much independence and choice women have, they need to look at how it came about because they are victims of their own intransigence. Too many women have been left literally holding the baby. How long did men think they would be able to act irresponsibly and let children suffer because of the hit and run syndrome? Women needed the ability to provide for themselves.

 

I think it's okay to have sex for money and it's more moral if you're honest about it. Therefore, I think "street whores" are generally on higher moral ground than women who use their sexuality for personal gain in an insidious way. There's nothing wrong with being a street whore as long as you take precautions to protect your clients and prevent pregnancy.

Women who use sexuality for gain in a dishonest way are no better than men who manipulate women for sex. Not that it should be illegal, just frowned upon. But personally, I think the world would be a better place if we could get rid of STDs and then have sex whenever we want with whoever we want. It's really only the spread of STDs, unwanted babies, and breaking a promise to a spouse if applicable, that makes random sex immoral.

 

Does it ever occur to you that if men did not react to such women, they would not be able to use their sexuality for anything at all?

Honestly, it is laughable. Everything is the fault of someone else.

 

Free will granted, I'd call that a design flaw left over from evolution that rewarded those who obsess over inseminating as many women as possible. Doesn't make as much evolutionary sense for women to have the same tendency, they still can only reproduce at most once a year and then need help taking care of it, so their underying tendencies make a lot of sense as well. Much like our desire to eat a lot when food is plentiful, these are vestigial instincts we must struggle to suppress.

 

What a coincidence, I have been advocating for a federal research hospital system (with a campus in every State of the Union and the federal districts, with its own supercomputing array and dedicated fiber optic network), to solve for those forms of dis-ease which may afflict us, in order to reduce that cost to the private sector.

Would we still have any need for Iron Age morals in that case?

 

It's a male issue. If men want more control, they have to take control of their own urges. Otherwise what is the next step? Women are not allowed to go out uncovered in case they inflame some poor man who can't control his natural urges? Don't make me laugh.

 

Iron age morals belonged in the iron age, as my point to some extent is that conditions do determine what is moral. When a John and a prostitute want to have sex, neither are in a committed relationship, and both understand the risks of sex with a prostitute (or anybody else for that matter), and they use a condom to prevent pregnancy, it's really not being any more immoral than somebody who places themself at risk in other ways.

Contrast this to the past, when pregnancy was harder to avoid and pregnancy was more likely to kill the woman, and everybody was actually even more ignorant of the facts of the matter. It really was more immoral at that time to have random sex.

 

Ordinarily, I would agree with you; but, some women may get much more actual practice than most men.

So, from one perspective, many men may be more at a disadvantage in that regard, than many women.

Are you claiming that appealing to ignorance, is never a fallacy or that form of less ethical behavior, if not necessarily immoral behavior in regards to social transactions that may involve sex?

Many women complain about men lying for sex; but, in my opinion, lying for a relationship should be considered worse.

 

I don't believe that's what I said. In summation, men have this leftover weakness that was adaptive in the past but is not so adaptive anymore. I actually did say that it ultimately is they who must learn to control their weakness bolded here:

However, it is immoral to exploit people's weaknesses for personal gain. I didn't say anything about legislation to regulate such behavior. Legislation to me isn't primarily about what is moral but about what the effect of the legislation would be. Legislation such as what you described does much more harm than good.

 

How is that then? Because I don't see it. What I see is men who don't fulfill their responsibilities within a relationship, yet complain of being nagged or manipulated when in reality if they did what they know it is their responsibility to do, women would not have to resort to any kind of strategy whatsoever just in order to get them to behave reasonably and get done those things which need to be done regardless of male irresponsibility.

Yeah right.

I am claiming men need to get control of themselves. If they do that, no woman can "take advantage"(excuse me while I laugh out loud) of those poor gullible men.

..because? There are plenty of men who like manipulative women. That is why they get into the relationship.

 

Let's say for a moment, that what you describe regarding some males is actually the case in one instance; from one perspective, if it is that much work to get a guy to do something, why not better engage your superior relating and relationship skills, like it says you are capable of in your gender studies?

Would men feel the need to be less responsible, if they had better helpmeets? How does that work in the military for comparison and contrast?

So, I take it you agree with me that appealing to ignorance regarding a relationship is no better than lying for sex.

Why bother complaining about men being liars, in that case?

 

LOL! Good grief ..... you said what you said about drs and when I pointed out that they're not all bad, you think my comment was condescending - lol. Oh well.....

If you don't want someone asking if you reported drs groping you, then m/b you should keep that info to yourself...... and where do you get this stuff about me having an 'uninformed low opinion' of you? You're really acting silly here.... I never implied that. You said something about a critically ill child, but I won't ask if that was you since it's not my business.....

I have been in the hospital w/a loved one who was suffering - my guy had terminal cancer and his dr gave him the best of care that he could for the last 4 days of his life......

And other times w/a child or myself ......

5 yrs ago my youngest daughter was diagnosed w/Leukemia and I never saw a team of doctors act so fast - from day 1 w/her doctor to a specialist to an oncologist, on the 10th day she was diagnosed w/the cancer and that included blood work b/t here and Seattle. She was admitted into the hospital the next day and they kept her for a month - she's now cancer-free.

There's a lot of people who have the 'white-coat' syndrome or distrust of doctors.... the one thing I don't like is that to many of them are pill-pushers when the pills aren't necessary........

 

That might be the case in the UK. You paint a pretty terrible picture of healthcare, but it's not true in the US.

 

Give it time...

 

I very definitely have white coat syndrome. It is a real problem and last time they tried to test me in a CT scanner, claustrophobia stepped in. I have no patience for people who lack logic or are irrational, so this was a novel surprise to me but it's tied in with the very rational experience-based fear of doctors. They gave me enough sedative to fell an elephant, but unbeknown to them sedatives don't work well and I was still standing looking at them an hour later.

My doctor is a family friend and loves my family. If I'm in his surgery, he will take me in before anyone else and will insist on doing that even when I protest that my appointment is with a different doctor. But it doesn't help. In my mind, they are associated with death and maltreatment.

There are other reasons, I won't go into it all and bore people, but suffice to say family members were misdiagnosed and ill treated and I was myself almost killed by the same. I've spoken about a near fatal illness here, but it was caused by misprescribed medicine. Anyway, I don't want to derail, but you can be assured I have very good reason to despise and fear doctors.