Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2010 21:51:05 GMT -5
I just thought of this today. I am always curious about sexual attitudes.
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Sept 29, 2010 22:50:50 GMT -5
It's not like being paid to hurt somebody else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2010 22:53:49 GMT -5
What if the person being hurt was also compensated?
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Sept 29, 2010 23:21:58 GMT -5
Maybe not so bad. It's not just the consideration for them though, it's the doing. Perhaps I rather like the Marquis de Sade on that one - everyone is entitled to visit a brothel where they can do anything they like, payment being that they perform the same service.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Sept 30, 2010 2:10:18 GMT -5
I wouldnt have sex with anyone for money...so its a non starter.. have sex with whom you fancy..but just for money what if you found them quite revolting...
|
|
aubrey
Journeyman
There will come a time when you can even take your clothes off when you dance
Posts: 385
|
Post by aubrey on Sept 30, 2010 4:56:17 GMT -5
Only euros? Anyway, of course I would. Jeez. Probably prefer not to see them again afterwards, though. (That's the thing about an orgy - maybe it looks as if it would be fun, but what do you talk about over breakfast next morning?)
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Sept 30, 2010 9:15:24 GMT -5
One caveat, they have to be infection free.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Sept 30, 2010 9:33:49 GMT -5
Before or after taxes?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2010 10:07:37 GMT -5
I wouldnt have sex with anyone for money...so its a non starter..have sex with whom you fancy..but just for money what if you found them quite revolting... Revulsion is ephemeral.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2010 10:43:00 GMT -5
I wouldn't have sex with a man no matter how much money I was offered.
For that matter I wouldn't want to have sex with a woman for money either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2010 11:09:23 GMT -5
I wouldnt have sex with anyone for money...so its a non starter..have sex with whom you fancy..but just for money what if you found them quite revolting... Revulsion is ephemeral. Not necessarily.
|
|
aubrey
Journeyman
There will come a time when you can even take your clothes off when you dance
Posts: 385
|
Post by aubrey on Sept 30, 2010 12:08:57 GMT -5
One caveat, they have to be infection free. That'd go for anyone though, wouldn't it? In Victorian times there was not so much distance between homo and hetero - Victorian pornography often has a bit of (male) homo action. And the author of MySecret Life (Walter" - Maybe Henry Ashbee) says that he occasionally gets the letch to handle another man's doodle (his term). And does, as well. (Some of the book might be made up; but fantasy is as revealing here as what really happened.)
|
|
|
Post by beth on Sept 30, 2010 12:15:39 GMT -5
Had to vote "no" I'd have flashbacks the rest of my life Mental health has value, too
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Sept 30, 2010 12:45:45 GMT -5
In Victorian times there was not so much distance between homo and hetero - Victorian pornography often has a bit of (male) homo action. And the author of MySecret Life (Walter" - Maybe Henry Ashbee) says that he occasionally gets the letch to handle another man's doodle (his term). And does, as well. (Some of the book might be made up; but fantasy is as revealing here as what really happened.) That's always been my contention. It's not particularly Victorian, more a case that they were the last to think that way. Our present distinction seems to be very much a local cultural thing and in some way seems to have sprung from Oscar Wilde's prosecutions and maybe other social factors in the 20 or 30 years following. In some ways that period was more sexually divisive than before, including the Victorians. Those still had something of an act to clean up, but by the First World War it mostly has been cleaned up but continues along the same path. It's not so hard to see how a homosexual youth would have been almost inevitable for the Brideshead Revisited set even if they had occasional insignificant experiences with prostitutes. Boys were locked away with their own sex from about age 7 to 20 including segregated university. What respectable girls they did meet were strictly controlled and seemingly less educated and more frivolous than in Victorian times. The unrespectable girls they met were not to be taken seriously and even if not actually on the game, often behaved as good as because if they had had the money, they would not have been available. They would much more likely be theatrical, which was always not quite respectable and brash, than the local shopgirls. Girls would be more a matter of casual fun than people on a level to talk about anything serious with as well. They must have been almost two different species! Most of them did grow through it but just how heterosexual their married life really was emotionally is open to question when you consider that they usually slept in separate rooms and lived a social life centred on gentlemen's clubs and women's associations doing good works.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Oct 1, 2010 4:50:09 GMT -5
bit of a generalisation....
|
|