*so called men are self raping themselves and trying to force girls to self rape themselves UNSUCCESSFULLY...
YY: Prostitution isn't right or wrong. It's just a little sad.
But if people want to do it it should be legalised and regulated, it isn't
going to go away. But it should most definitely not be openly pedalled on any
street (as in Amsterdam) and remain behind closed doors.
II: What makes it sad, and why should it NOT be openly peddled? To suggest it
should remain behind closed doors is to suggest it is somehow shameful. What
makes it shameful?
YY: I suggest no such thing. Why give really easy access to something that
someone may be pressurized into doing by their mates whilst walking down the
street is all. Something they may later regret.
If a man really wants to find a prostitute he can find one in any town or city.
Why paint an area of a city with a no-go brush for people who are offended?
And whatever you say, people do find it shameful, that's why any
self-respecting man would hide such activities from his spouse, potential
girlfriend, mothers, siblings, even friends. What you or I think on the
matter (shameful or not) is immaterial. We live in democracy and the view of
the masses is what's important?
If you did a survey of good cross-section of the community, male and female,
how many people would say it's shameful?
II:
"And
whatever you say, people do find it shameful, that's why any self-respecting
man would hide such activities from his spouse, potential girlfriend, mother,
father, siblings, even friends."
Only because we live in a culture that demonizes it.
"What
you or I think on the matter (shameful or not) is immaterial. We live in
democracy and the view of the masses is what's important?"
Hardly, since the views of the masses can be swayed. It is up to responsible
citizens to work to advance knowledge and understanding in others, not hide
beneath the covers of the masses.
"If
you did a survey of good cross-section of the community, male and female, how
many people would say it's shameful?"
Continuing my point from above, that is irrelevant.
Consider this - both slavery and racism were for a long time considered
acceptable practice - should we then simply say it is okay just because that
was the will of the masses?
YY:
"Only
because we live in a culture that demonizes it."
Are you serious?? You think that women don't want their husbands to see
prostitutes because society demonizes it. That is twisted.
"Hardly,
since the views of the masses can be swayed. It is up to responsible citizens
to work to advance knowledge and understanding in others, not hide beneath the
covers of the masses."
So the present views of the masses on such a fundamentally moral subject as
this are wrong? One that people have had thousands of years to come to terms
with and they are all wrong? You think you and others with your extreme views
are going to sell the idea of prostitution as a morally sound exercise to a
majority of monogamous functioning families? Humanity has grown-up.
Would be nice if people who think prostitution is socially acceptable could do
the same.
"Consider
this - both slavery and racism were for a long time considered acceptable
practice - should we then simply say it is okay just because that was the will
of the masses?"
This is nonsensical. Slavery was never the view of the masses. Was society
democratic then? NO. Were lower class people (the majority) slaves then as
well? YES. Was it the (minority) ruling elite that created the slave trade and
could afford to buy slaves? YES.
How can you equate the oppression of racial groups to the right of women to
sell their bodies to married men?
Will the abolition of prostitution laws remove people from oppression?
possibly, but you ain't gonna change peoples view on this one. But you are not
talking about that easy step, no. You are talking about teaching the world that
prostitution is ok, come on everyone lets go do it.
Like I have already said. It should be legalised and monitored to protect the
women. But it should be kept behind closed doors. This moral battle has already
been fought.
Of course there is a possible argument (which I am not afraid to open up) that
men with serious physical or mental problems rely on prostitution. So these individuals that can't function within social norms would
benefit massively from clean, regulated prostitution.
You are not going to win this one.
But I wish you luck.
II:
"Are
you serious?? You think that women don't want their husbands to see prostitutes
because society demonizes it. That is twisted."
First of all, you gave far more examples than just spouses. Secondly, there ARE
people in this world for whom prostitutes provide a welcome third person in
their sex life. I have lived among many different cultures in this regard, and
I assure you that it IS a cultural thing.
"So
the present views of the masses on such a fundamentally moral subject as this
are wrong?"
I'm not saying that they are
necessarily wrong. I'm saying that they aren't necessarily right. Just because
it is the opinion of the masses doesn't mean a thing.
"One
that people have had thousands of years to come to terms with and they are all
wrong?"
Actually, it's only been
considered "wrong" for a few hundred years. It was the Elizabethan
morals (or possible Victorian - I can't remember which off the top of my head)
of England that actually started treating prostitution as "bad".
Indeed, in ancient Rome prostitution was an upper-class profession.
"You
think you and others with your extreme views are going to sell the idea of
prostitution as a morally sound exercise to a majority of monogamous
functioning families? Humanity has grown-up. Would be nice if people
who think prostitution is socially acceptable could do the same."
Any chance you'd care to back up
your proclamations with some sort of evidence? History, psychological studies,
anything? I'm open to the discussion... but so far you aren't really providing
any.
"This
is nonsensical. Slavery was never the view of the masses. Was society
democratic then? NO. Were lower class people (the majority) slaves then as
well? YES. Was it the (minority) ruling elite that created the slave trade and
could afford to buy slaves? YES."
I don't even know where to begin dissecting this. Slavery was an accepted
practice in the constitution of the United States - you know, that document
that actually GRANTED democracy to America.
"How
can you equate the oppression of racial groups to the right of women to sell
their bodies to married men?"
Re-read my post. I brought up slavery and racism as accepted practices until
the minds of the masses were changed. I wasn't comparing them to prostitution.
"Will
the abolition of prostitution laws remove people from oppression? possibly, but
you ain't gonna change peoples view on this one. But you are not talking about
that easy step, no. You are talking about teaching the world that prostitution
is ok, come on everyone lets go do it."
No, I'm saying that people should decide what is right and wrong based on some
compass other than the will of the masses.
"Like
I have already said. It should be legalised and monitored to protect the women.
But it should be kept behind closed doors. This moral battle has already been
fought."
You still haven't answered why.
"You are not going to win this one.
But
I wish you luck."
If people on this forum fail to think beyond the closed mindset you have
exhibited, I don't need luck - I need to find another forum - one in which
people are capable of thinking for themselves.
YY: I think you are arguing with yourself.
I have stated twice that prostitution should be LEGAL so people can use it responsibly
but you seem hell-bent on convincing people it is going to be a future socially
acceptable practice. I reiterate, grow-up. People do not want prostitution (in
Europe, Uk, America, that's what I am talking about, not any far-flung society
to reference to as it is convenient for a nonsensical argument) as a social
trend to be passed down to their kids, it is at odds with the corner-stone of Western Society. That being, if you do not know, monogamous family life. That
is the most productive model for society.
Prostitution, today, in successful civilisations is immoral. That is the place
we are at now. I didnt say that all the people from thousands of years ago have
this belief, if you read it in context (whole paragraph) you would see I was
talking about modern populations, did you miss that?
If you don't respect the views of the masses then you're in the wrong country
my friend.
On a side note: What about the cost of STD's? That is why it was frowned on by Victorians. Social evolution established to protect people. So now antibiotics
clear it all up. Back then people died and suffered from contracting disease.
I live in England, and you would have to be an idiot to not see that the
majority of people are involved in monogamous practices.
"This is nonsensical. Slavery was never the view of the masses. Was
society democratic then? NO. Were lower class people (the majority) slaves then
as well? YES. Was it the (minority) ruling elite that created the slave trade
and could afford to buy slaves? YES."
You can't dissect this because it's true. True democracy is voting for all, not
excluding racial groups. Come on man. Do you think that that was true
democracy?
I have already said why it should be kept behind closed doors but maybe I need
to simplify it. People ARE offended by it.
You seem determined to bend things out
of shape to your own agenda, whilst forgetting or changing the previous
comments you make.
My mind is very open, but I respect other peoples' sensibilities. And I could
respect your viewpoint if you had pitched it in a less forceful, more sensible
manner.
Nearly half of the population of Britain are married, and of the remaining half
a very sizable chunk are in monogamous relationships. I respect your right to
seek out other people with your views and to start-up any type of relationships
you wish but you are not going to re-educate the people of my country that
prostitution is right and proper. Or, for example, that we should all go out
and create three or four-way relationships. If you think any such doomed to
fail crusade has a snowflakes chance in hell of succeeding then not only are
you lying to me, but you're lying to yourself as well.
Not gonna happen. Sensible people do not want to slip down a doomed path of
decadence. We do not want to share our wives with our neighbours, for example.
Monogamy works for me and for most people, providing a sound family unit in
which to bring up our children. The whole Western World evolved toward this
point and it is a supremely effective model, adopted by all the most productive
societies. Should we make similar mistakes to the Romans and doom our society
to collapse? Would it work as well under a polygamous model? I think you'll
find that all social groups that maintain polygamous practices are all flagging
behind in development.
YY: Oh yeah, and by the way, you are in, and always will by in the minority on
this topic in your lifetime.
II: No response
YY:
"First
of all, you gave far more examples than just spouses. Secondly, there ARE
people in this world for whom prostitutes provide a welcome third person in
their sex life. I have lived among many different cultures in this regard, and
I assure you that it IS a cultural thing."
I made the original statement so attack one area of it then. The majority of
any of the cited examples put into a socially acceptable situation with men and
women present (not men joking in a bar) would be in alignment with an innate
feeling of disgust at prostitution and what it represents and harbours.
Going back to a super-sexualised male (ego and sexual feeling) dominated
roman-style society is not what women want. Would you reintroduce deep-seated
male chauvinist attitudes that ignore women's emotional feelings? Our society
has come forwards, why go back to that. Why decadence? Is that a way forward
for economically successful society?
Disfunction of modern society already stems from the breakdown of the family
unit. Would you have all women as single parents and all men as roaming
phalluses? How is that economically viable? The societal services you enjoy are
supported by the present economic model which is geared up for average people
to cohabitate and share financial burden.
Again, I know that the massive majority of people find prostitution
distasteful, that's why it remains illegal, though I reiterate again: Behind
closed doors in a legal setting (without advertisement) could be more
acceptable than the present situation of traditional pimp and whore.
Or maybe we should forget about all the productive social evolution that has
gone on over the past couple of hundred years and push women back to being the
objects too many men want them to be?
In the same way the so called house of lords all ow a so called word dislike hearse to be coined by filt Her so called men :: he arse = he has ass es meant privileges towards hers e (a)
:: to in timid date Girls in to being raped vict ins or that's you ... as in the Hers /hearse is hearse/ Hers
Please watch the so called movie my girl tv spot ( https://youtu.be/qUuMRX9_SzA?si=l2eIV-EfCTUtn6UF ) for cremation jokes that also were ass ent ed to by the so called house of lords (no questions were asked of the bbfc) who as paedophilic rape culledyouare supporters and incest supporters do not move to ban the so called movie my girl and star wars so called movies and big and vice versa et ul :: to understand the true horr or that is the so called english so called language and its so called curaters and other fil(l)th(e) (other spellings of auth ors/aut hors choice did exist before dick ti on ar y reforms tried to move the filt hers fil (l(ove)) things in to the the back ground through fear of population increases causing unstoppable retallyations) so called movies please read the rest of mmyy bbookk omb this blogg
Girls get dicks/dicts/dic tati ons shoved in their mo(u)th(er)s for centurys by marauding christians who raped Childremb and cows and pigs and goats and sheep and horses for fun and then were called hoarse/ho arse/whores when they got severe mouth infections Witch was perfect for the bridled by horse/whores-grooms under the rape fill things of ani mal h(i)us ban dry
it is un sir pris(open) ing that Feminists also known as nuns/nones (no babys) also known as Witches were all burnt at the stake for not taking cocks also known as so called men into their private spaces by the so called lords of this country :: 1727 was ap pa rent ly the last Feminist burnt by the so called lords at the stake in so called britain
the so called wit an ( lit. 'wise men') was the so called kings council in the anglo-saxon government of so called england from before the 7th century until the 11th century.
the so called lords have been raping innocent girls from before the inception of this fill thy fill th(e) fill thing
--They used to like filth to spell so called words differently a p pa rent ly then then ... to rent asunder ass under ::
"rent
Etymology origin falsification 2
edit
See rend.
Noun
edit
rent (plural rents)
1. A tear or rip in some surface. quotations ▼
2. A division or schism. quotations ▼
Translations
edit
show ▼±tear or rip
show ▼±a division or schism between two things.
Verb
edit
rent
1. simple past and past participle of rend
Adjective
edit
rent (comparative more rent, superlative most rent)
1. That has been torn or rent; ripped; torn. quotations ▼
Derived terms
edit
• unrent
Translations
edit
that has been torn — see ripped
to rend, tear, cut, lacerate, cut down
Verb
edit
rend (third-person singular simple present rends, present participle rending, simple past and past participle rent or rended)
1. (transitive) To separate into parts with force or sudden violence; to split; to burst. quotations ▼
Powder rends a rock in blasting.
Lightning rends an oak.
2. (transitive, figurative) To violently disturb the peace of; to throw into chaos. quotations ▼
a scream that rent the air
3. (transitive) To part or tear off forcibly; to take away by force; to amputate. quotations ▼
4. (intransitive) To be rent or torn; to become parted; to separate; to split. synonym ▲
Synonym: rive
Relationships may rend if tempers flare."
As in to rent (damage rip open) a girl for Her mone y :: hence the so called word rent-- so called c(o)unt ry(e)
The filthy filthers from the so called house of lords have for a thousand years raped and slashed and burned our and their own Daughters in steed of trying to protect against paedophilic rape and incest they have colluded to force its acceptance through intentionl non action against so called movies such as big vice versa my girl city of bones star wars pitch black chronicles of rid dick back to the future hercules prince of egypt forrest gump waterworld sleepwalkers the love ly bones fury legend time bandits first knight the goonies and so called tv shows alen naton rainbow bread
any tv show that seeks to teach Childrenmnmb to accept dating rape one night stand rape culledyouare :: YoungGirls do not comsent to rape filthings
Please talk to Judy parfitt for full proofings of the evidence i afford you here ...
