Prostitution-what to do

quote:

---

My purpose in using this portrayal of a "marriage for a night" is solely to express my opinion that a one night stand should be considered legitimate in a free thinking society, even when it is a "for profit" agreement.

---

OK, but "legitimate" as a sexual experience is not the same as "this is just like modern marriage, just for one night."They simply aren't the same thing.I mean, mastubation is a "legitimate sexual experience" but it would be inaccurate and silly to describe it as being married to my hand for a little while.

I'm fine with that.

Marriage can be devoid of these things, though. Or filled with them. But I agree that calling prostitution 'marriage for a night' is strange. I suspect a skewed metaphor.Prostitution is a contract, surely, just as marriage is a contract. Just as ordering dinner, getting a haircut, and entering a 12-step program are contracts. Human beings make all kinds of contracts.A complicating factor in this picture is this: even where a 'standard contract' exists, the actual contract in each instance takes different forms. Individuals are different; each brings to the contract a different set of needs, strengths, and expectations. In the last analysis, all contracts are custom contracts. Even those that appear to be conventional.I did read a citation, about a decade ago, of a particularly telling study. Sorry I can't find the document now, but maybe someone here knows of this. Prostitutes and their customers (Western country) were surveyed to determine their perceptions of who 'wins' and 'loses' in the transaction. The result: each side saw the other as the one being taken. The customers saw themselves as successfully exploiting a prostitute's economic needs in order to get sex, while the prostitutes saw themselves as successfully exploiting a customer's emotional needs in order to get money.____

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

I'm not. It's a bad metaphor.Marriage is a contract. Solo masturbation is not a contract.One does not make a contract with one's hand. One does not need to. The hand is part of you. Thus, one cannot be married to one's hand.One can only be engaged with it for a while.____

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

quote:

---

... Solo masturbation is not a contract.

​

One does not make a contract with one's hand. One does not need to. The hand is part of you. Thus, one cannot be married to one's hand.

​

One can only be engaged with it for a while.

---

Hehe, the above is classic, deserving of consideration for post of the month.

quote:

---

Marriage can be devoid of these things, though. Or filled with them. But I agree that calling prostitution 'marriage for a night' is strange. I suspect a skewed metaphor.

---

Sure.

quote:

---

Prostitution is a contract, surely, just as marriage is a contract. Just as ordering dinner, getting a haircut, and entering a 12-step program are contracts. Human beings make all kinds of contracts.

---

The last thing I characterize my marriage as is a contract.None of the important parts of my relationship with my spouse have to do with the contractual part.To me, a contract involves an agreement to get someting in return for providing something. That concept, when applied to the most important aspects of my marriage, just doesn't apply. Love, friendship, compassion, putting someone else first...none of those things work that way.

Of course they do. All of these things are part of the contract.They are clearly part of your marriage contract, as you state it. And they are plainly stated in the standard contract as well. They have been for centuries.

The Celebrant says to the woman

​

N., will you have this man to be your husband; to live
together in the covenant of marriage? Will you love him,
comfort him, honour and keep him, in sickness and in health;
and, forsaking all others, be faithful to him as long as you
both shall live?

​

The Woman answers

​

I will.

​

The Celebrant says to the man

​

N., will you have this woman to be your wife; to live
together in the covenant of marriage? Will you love her,
comfort her, honour and keep her, in sickness and in health;
and, forsaking all others, be faithful to her as long as you
both shall live?

​

The Man answers

​

I will.

Sounds like you're taking the word 'contract' in a narrow, literal, sign-the-dotted-line business-suit way. That's only a subset of all the contracts people make. I'm talking about all relationships. All relationships involve contracts. We have understandings with each other. We have expectations and we feel obligations. That's what a relationship is.Human beings make contracts that address many things--not just impersonal matters and not just finance--because we have many needs. The contracts we make often address matters of emotional support, mutual protection and safety, compassion and companionship. They have to.A lifelong contract to meet each other's sexual and emotional needs and to provide a safe and nurturing mutual environment is a serious matter. Such a contract naturally has to address emotional support, sexual behaviour and many other things that are not normally part of the contract one makes with the telephone company. No surprises there.____Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Yeah, but c'mon. Marriage would have to be the only contract in the world where the contract is dissolved and your obligations waived just because you don't feel like meeting them.The strictly voluntary nature of marriage makes it pretty obvious that we're not talking about a contractual arrangement at all, to me. In a contract, you can't renege on payment for services duly rendered just because you don't feel like paying. But despite my fulfillment of the obligation to "love honor and obey", you the spouse could simply dissolve the contract because you didn't feel like loving, honoring, and obeying in return.

You can use a wide, broad definition of "contract" if you like, but then it just becomes less meaningful and useful.The only reason anyone is making the marriage/prostitution comparison is because of the fucking.

On the contrary: the term remains precise and very useful. The essential definition of contract is intact and still applies.Conventional habit of thought is the only reason to assume contracts have to be written or cannot address emotional needs. Neither of these limitations is inherent in the definition of the word. More to the point, neither limitation is observed in human behaviour.In any human relationship one party supplies this and this, the other supplies that and that, and there is a mutual benefit. That's a contract. Violate the terms and the contract is voided.Marriage, far from being an exception, is Exhibit A. It is manifestly a contract. Marriage is an agreement between individuals (parties). There are expectations and obligations (terms). There are behaviours (breaches of contract) that would be grounds for separation or divorce (voiding of contract). Otherwise marriage lasts until one or both parties die (termination of contract).Marriage generally makes use of paraphernalia like documents and signatures and witnesses, too. It is thus a contract even by the most conventional understanding of the term. And that contract, as we have seen, includes a responsibility to provide love.So yes, human relationships are contracts, and yes, these contracts address emotional needs. One may prefer the term 'arrangement' or 'understanding' or some other word to describe this situation, and many people do. The idea remains the same. The two oontracts have sex in common, yes, and that's about all. I agree that calling prostitution 'marriage for a night' is to overemphasize that shared element. The two contracts are far more different than they are alike. This affects the meaning and purpose of the sex along with everything else.Prostitution resembles more the kinds of contracts made between any short-term service provider and client. These are very simple, straightforward business arrangements. Emotional involvement is not a standard part of the transaction the way it is in marriage and other more complex, personal relationships.____Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity.Edited by Archer Opterix, : typo repair.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Contracts are mutually defined. Contracts are generally dissolved by (1) mutual agreement, (2) breach of the contract by one or both parties, (3) inability of one or both parties to meet terms.The standard contract in marriage obligates each party to 'love' the other in good times and bad. The expectations represented by the word 'love' are worked out by both parties. For either to withdraw love (as mutually defined) is a breach of contract. It is grounds for dissolving the agreement altogether: the two people are no longer married.Nothing unusual. This is how contracts work.Friendship is another contract. The standard contract involves mutual support. The exact nature of that mutual support is defined by the parties. Withdrawal of the agreed-upon level of support by either party represents a breach of contract. It is grounds for dissolving the agreement altogether: the two people are no longer friends.Nothing unusual here, either. Contractual arrangements are voluntary.Once entered into, the parties are bound by that voluntary agreement to meet certain obligations.How the terms of the agreement are enforced is a matter that differs from contract to contract. It depends on the terms of the contract. You can renege all you want if the contract permits it.Few profitable businesses would agree to such terms, true. But there's nothing to stop a contract from being drawn up along these lines as long as both parties agree. The party incurring more risk may decide the mutual benefits are worth it. Or that party may not view the risk as anything very great. Regardless, all it takes to make a contract is agreement between two parties. The terms can be anything. The party who fails to meet contractual obligations is violating, not dissolving, the contract.Breach of contract can be grounds for terminating it, yes. But violations do not always result in this.____

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Yes. That's my point. In a marriage, you aren't bound by the initial agreement. You're not bound at all, except by your own volition. True. In the terms you specified before, was there an "escape clause?" I don't see one. I see a pledge to love, but there's no enforcement mechanism. If a contract is just an agreement that nobody's under an obligation to honor, then I'd suggest your use of "contract" is uselessly broad. Everything's a contract, at that point.