Meal Tickets and Sex Objects, Prostitutes and Punters

Women have to understand that all men who fuck them are punters, and men have to understand that all women who let themselves be fucked are prostitutes.

Only love can can sanctify such a transaction.


nobody said…
That doesn't make any sense. Why does having a vagina make you a prostitute?
My point is that it is OK to be a prostitute and a punter. I am all for legalising brothels. Prostitution is an honourable trade compared to single mums who are a burden on the state.

If you have sex with some bloke and expect something from him, apart from the pleasure of his company for the night, you are a kind of prostitute, aren't you?

You are just choosing to have your pay-off later when he marries you perhaps, or at the divorce settlement or when you inherit his property as his widow.

I am not saying there is anything bad in any of the above as long as both of you are getting what you thought you bargained for.
nobody said…
Why are you assuming that a woman sleeping with a man would be the prostitute, and the man the recipient? Isn't that kind of stereotyping? I'm pretty sure there are many men who use sex to get money, power, love, etc, while there are many women who use those things to get sex.

I agree that there is nothing wrong with equal bargaining, but I don't see how each position is limited by one's gender.
Claire Khaw said…
A woman is expected to be the prostitute and the man expected to be the punter. I don't think one is morally superior to the other. So it wouldn't change that much if the man were a gigolo and the older wealthier lady his client. What does it matter anyway?
nobody said…
It matters because your original post implied that the way men and women are viewed is the way that they really are.

You may not think that one is superior to the other, but the very reason the woman is labeled a prostitute and the man the purchaser is because the negative connotations given to prostitution.

Women are expected to be filthy and low, just like prostitutes are seen as; men are expected to be the ones with money and the power, just like the johns are seen as.
Claire Khaw said…
Actually, in many jurisdictions, both the punter and prostitute are seen to be low: the man because he can't find a partner; the women because she is impoverished or addicted to drugs that she has to sell her body for the use and abuse of strange men.

In practice, both punter and prostitute are criminalised.

I am in favour of the legalisation of brothel-keeping.

At least prostitutes have the virtue reminding men that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Imagine if a prostitute came up to a punter and said: "You know when we last did some, er, "business" a few months back? Well, I'm now up the spout and knocked up. You better help me look after it or pay a contribution towards its upkeep."

He'd tell her where to go, wouldn't he?

"What we transacted was an ad hoc bargain for sex," he could point out. "If I am not your husband, the presumption should be that whatever I meant to transact was a bargain for sex. It was certainly not to assume the burdens of fatherhood."

So why the hell should the taxpayer pay up like lambs?

Popular posts from this blog

Divorced women who literally turn their sons into women

The 30 second rapist

Religion and Recreational Sex: sharia-compliant threesomes and mini-orgies?