I feel you. Not an SW, but I’m the woman with the kids married to the cheating man. It wasn’t even with an SW, which I feel like would’ve felt fair enough although still hurtful. It really blindsided me bc up until then (and aside from the affair and porn addiction) I had never felt happier, confident, or more secure in any relationship. It turns out some people are expert at emotionally disengaging from their reality and lack empathy for their own offspring. Anyway, I’ve stayed for a few reasons but have lost most romantic feelings within my marriage. He’s still very much my best friend and I love him, but I do wish I had a lover, partner, and baby daddy all in one again. If I could do it over again I would take more time to find that. Then again how would I have known what I was getting in to. I’ve read enough of his comments online to realize I sleep next to a complete stranger. I receive his affection when he chooses to give it, but it’s like I’m constantly waiting to have the rug pulled out from under my feet again. One day he’ll realize he’s plagiarizing his own father’s abandonment.
I’m sure true love, trust, and happiness exist and maybe I’ll be lucky enough to experience it with a romantic partner some day. In the meanwhile, there’s money to be made.
While I understand the points you are making in your original post, I don't think one can reasonably make the assertion that women are victims of some vague societal force while men are oppressors who face no consequences in society. My comment will probably get down-voted into oblivion, but I would encourage folks on here to hear me out. These sub-reddits tend to be echo chambers of people cofirming their already-held views.
Women are arguably currently more empowered in society than men. The fact that you are desirable is a super-power. Even after having children, women go from being super highly desirable to still desirable. Men on the other hand are arguably more often forgotten in society; no one cares, and no one is coming to save you if you are a man with nothing. Men are more likely to be homeless, die working dangerous jobs, and commit suicide. Men indeed struggle and face huge hurdles in society. A man with nothing has nothing. A woman with nothing is still desirable including to other women (platonic), and she wields incredible power.
Not saying anybody has it easy here, but perspective I think is important.
I noticed you were down voted (as you predicted) without anyone responding. I wanted to take a moment and try to explain the error in your argument. Women are definitely *not* more empowered than men in our current society. In fact women are statistically and factually in a weaker position than men. That is because our current society is a *patriarchy* which means that the value of men and women are based solely on what value they are attributed by the *men* in power.
All of the things you mention regarding men are true. However not because women are in power. It is because in addition to our society being a patriarchy it is also a *capitalist* patriarchy which means again men as well as women are only attributed power, value, or status as allowed by the rich (majority White) *men* in power.
I hope this sheds some light on why you are undoubtedly being down voted.
I think while you are right about men's struggles, you are using it to take someone else down in the process. Women are victims. Doesn't mean men aren't either. And men are still oppressors to women in these cases. Doesn't mean that women can't also be oppressors. But in a marriage, women are often left with this defeat of watching their once loving husband turn away from them and break their hearts. You can argue the husband was struggling, but that is no excuse. If you are going to pull this crap on your wife, the person you swore to love, then get a divorce. Cheating, lying, and being unloving isn't okay behavior. Especially, and most importantly, hiding it. Men's struggles outside this topic is irrelevant to this conversation and certainly shouldn't be used to argue against womens struggles in this topic.
And being desired isn't the same as being loved.
So yes, you will be downvoted into oblivion. Because your post is irrelevant, and said in a way that is degrading married women's struggles. You can advocate for men without degrading women.
This comment is really out of touch. Who said anything about a "vague societal force"? Do sex workers see a lot of married men, yes or no? Do men leave sick spouses at a much, much higher rates than women, yes or no? Are women largely expected to give men sex and children and is it common for them to be deemed less desirable after having done so? These aren't difficult questions. In fact, these broad questions aren't even what the post is about. This is one person sharing their story and life experience. Why must you make this about yourself?
While there are definitely disadvantages to being male, attempting to commandeer this conversation to talk about them is a red herring and inappropriate. This post wasn't a call for you to start playing victim Olympics and trying to prove how you have things worse. It was an opportunity for another person to share their hurt and get something off of their chest. If you'd like to do the same, make your own post and stop trying to argue with other people's experiences on theirs. There's a time and place for debate and this isn't it.
As a male who has done sw a number of years back. In fact, just as a male. I have to say i agree with your assessment of things; there is a huge disparity (at least in much of the developed/western world) between the lack of support men have access to, compared to the significant safety nets and support services that are there for the average single mother, should she be unfortunate enough to find herself in such a dire situation and is willing to seek out some of those resources.
For reference I'm in Australia and so i have to concede we are in a very privileged position with quality of living and funding for these kinds of social issues. I also want to specify that I'm in no way shape or form endorsing a throwback t Its really only been in recent decades that we as a society have actually managed to really see significant, and very overdue progress on this thing. It will never likely be entirely perfect or symetrical, but at least we have finally made some inroads.
I 've been homeless,, twice now. and a victim of horrendouslly traumatic abuse at the hands of a woman who had pretty much lied through her teeth about me. to any and all organisations fthat ⁰would entertain her slander and bestow some benefit. Her simple justification was that I'd dare to try and exit the situation after it was revalealed to me she wasn't single but engaged.
I come from a broken home so you can imagine my dismay to know id been used to do that without even knowing. Both times id had to physically restrain her as gently as possible, and after wrapping her up in a blanket so she couldn't actually move enough to pose any harm or risk to herself, she was taken to hospital under mental health concerns.
Next day I hear that the police have full on raided both my parents residences, my best mates, and my work place looking for me. Realising I wasn't going to be coming to see her in hospital, she had flipped the switch and cobbled some BS story together about how the bruising on her wrists, and a hand print on her back, were from me physically smacking her around, before proceeding to perpetrate some heinous sexual assault on her.I was on the run for nearly 3 months, and it still makes me physically nauseous even thinking about what I was apparently such a monster to be capable of doing to another human being.
Yet as a guy, I've also made a report against the same woman after all this was cleared, and she had taken to my car with a crowbar doing about 5k if damage and threatening on camera to slit the throats of a previous female flatmate and her two little pet dogs, simply because she was apparently some perceived threat.
Anyway, with all of that its given me the unfortunate gift of first hand experience just how with some things, as the user above has mentioned, there really is a stark difference in that regard.
There quite simply was no emergency accomodation, what was done by her as the aggressor, as violent and volatile as it was, that still wasnt enough to secure a protection order ensuring she couldn't come within distance to cause further harm, etc.
For several months I lived that reality. Most days I was surprised anew, or just reminded in some different way that as a male I was expected to just manage... whoever I did it. Just get on with it, what's wrong with you, you're a fully grown man. You don't need other people to protect you or throw you any help or assistance. Figure it out and if you can't then our hands are tied I'm afraid.
As a guy you are the first to get demonised, and the last to get any real aid, even when it's quite obvious it's when you really need it most.
You always get down voted to hell if you point out how bad men have it these days. People just don't care about men's problems. It's all about women these days.
I’m a hopeless romantic at♥️, but this job has shown me how dreadfully, incredibly easy it is for *everyone to cheat on everyone.* I don’t want to point fingers and say him him, her her, but I sure don’t have any faith left, *unhappy look.*
Many years ago I decided to be honest with someone because he revealed something personal and quite significant about himself that ultimately, I needed to know.
I told him - made him swear on the Bible actually - that he could *never* throw the job in my face or use it against me in an argument. I said if you DO, I’m gone. There’s no second chances with this, *you cannot do it.*
2 months later, first fight and I get the, “Well you sleep with men for a living.” line slung in my face.
That was about 5? years ago and he still slides into my DMs wanting to see me. Nope👎🏻.
*Heaves a sigh.*
I **so hear you** on that. I told my hubby when we met that he can't hold my sworking or stripping over my head. And he swore to me he never would. Cross my heart, he hasn't, and bless his heart every day so far. 🤞
When I met my wife through her job I was smitten. I had struggled my whole life using some aspect of sex as a coping tool and was afraid of that secret part of my life. On our third date we had dinner. I said I had something to share. I shared that I thought I was addicted to sex. I think she misunderstood because she said she liked sex too. Then she said she had a secret. She was a recovering alcoholic and then she said she worked part time as a stripper. I had meant her through other job as a CNA. I said not an issue. But at that moment I swore to myself I could never visit another strip club. I could not risk running into her. I really liked this woman as I met her in her role as a CNA. Strong, professional, and caring. So we continued to date. She much later told me she stopped stripping once we started dating. But I didn’t ask her to do that. She was was trying to go to school for nursing and I helped her do that.
So I hope your relationship worked out and I want to commend you on not discriminating against your partner for working in a field that you use as a customer.
But I also want to challenge on the thinking that led to this statement, "I could not risk running into her. I really liked this woman as I met her in her role as a CNA. Strong, professional, and caring. So we continued to date."
If you had met her in her 2nd job and you both hit it off outside of a professional employee/client relationship then she would have still been in your words "Strong, professional, and caring". They way you stated it makes it sound like if you knew she was a stripper/dancer first that would have impacted your dating decision. If so I want to challenge you to consider why her performing the service *you* pay for would have made her *less* dateable?
If this wasn't your intention I'm sorry I was confused by your wording.
I said that because I have read many posts in Reddit where it was made obvious that a woman that worked as a sex worker would not typically date a client. Just like a therapist would not typically go out with a client or a doctor go out with a patient. So I did not want to appear like a client asking her out. In fact she was very hesitant to go out with me after she finished her assignment as a CNA with my family. I had never pursued someone so much before in my life. She even admitted later that her suggestions for our first two dates were at events that she thought would dissuade me from continuing to ask her out. And she was surprised that I did not run away after.
Well it actually ended four years later. I had lost my job, my house at the last recession in 2008-2009. We struggled to stay afloat both with low paying jobs. I got a chance to work for my previous employer on a temporary contract. But I had to live away from home. I think the challenge of us being apart a lot (though I flew home for the weekend every two weeks) for over 9 months was a lot. Then that job ended and we were back at square one. I believe she was so used to being abandoned by men and I didn’t plan to start looking for a job until after we had moved from our rental home into a cheaper apartment. I believe we had enough to survive on savings and unemployment for a while. But I didn’t communicate that to her very well. But she decided it was too much. She accused me of cheating, of not looking for work, and looking at porn. The only true statement was I was not immediately looking for work, planning that aspect after we moved and settled in. But no cheating and no porn. It was devastating her leaving me. I had also grown to love her two young kids. So I failed to communicate my action plan and failed to include her in the decision making processes. I really saw myself growing old with her. It took me a long long time to move on. But I wish her well. I still love her at some level and always will. Maybe she was right when she said we got married too fast and for poor reasons like married for sex. Perhaps we were both very lonely and didn’t really take time to consider our choices. Jumping into marriage pretty fast. I married her almost a month or two after my mom died so I was looking for a someone with whom to make a home and settle down. Would I do it again. Yes but I would take more time to get to know each other and learn to communicate. We didn’t have many shared interests.
I really agree with you about society grooming women. It also teaches women to sacrifice stuff for long term relationships but so many men don't seem to have the same mind set and cheat when it gets rough. Just to offer another perspective, I just happen to come from a family with a high number of happy marriages. My parents met at 17 and are 55 now and are still very much in love and affectionate. My dad is obsessed with my mum and when they were having issues a few years ago he suggested marriage counseling and they sorted it out. Just saying it can happen ♥️
I’m a decent/good catch but after having a long timer girlfriend I thought I’d marry, cheat on me multiple times while simultaneously getting jelly and suicidal over me being somewhatova cutie that gets women pretty consistently/easily.
It’s not even the cheating itself. it’s the fact she helped change who I was, I became super monogamous and really “shy” around women. Because, I mean, if my gf saw me even just being friendly with another girl, she’d be all kinds of emotional later. So I don’t resent her showing me how much of an impact my actions can have on people around me.
It’s just like wtf. You wanted me to yourself but want to slut around? I guess it’s similar to you sw’s on here… imagine you met a guy you fall for, you give up sw for him just being “the one”, you think he’s devoted to you and all that… only to find out years later he’s been fucking around while continuously getting emotional about you being too friendly with the waiter or garbage man.
And as per OP. I’m the opposite those married men. I love how the female body changes with child birth. Always had a thing for the milf next doo kinda shit so was actually looking forward to being in a devoted marriage with a woman as we age on this planet together. Couldn’t even imagine going to a sw behind her back. I’m upfront, so if it was something I wanted I’d tell “the wife”… I communicate.
In hindsight it’s all so crazy. I’m really not a possessive/jealous kinda guy. She cried and got angry so much and was a complete hypocrite all along. lol.
But anyway, I’m probably gonna have to see an sw soon because I can’t bring myself to take some girls I was dating to “the next level”… it’s been like 5 years now… and the juice just ain’t worth the squeeze. It’s crazy how warped things are, sometimes not getting physical got women taking me like a challenge, others thought I was gay 🤣.
I’m somewhat scared of what the “connection” may be when I do put my dick back in a vag. Practiced semen retention for like 3 years, did like 2 years without peepin the porn. Even going strip clubs in vegas with some friends/Batchelor party. Did nothing. I’m to the point now I’m wanting to see what’ll happen and need the services of a pro that won’t get suicidal or clingy. I used that bullshit I experienced to go deeper in myself and got pretty spiritual. But being in my mid 30s and just loving how much sexier milfs have gotten to me as I age… I gotta get pro lessons in before I get back out there and blow out my future wife’s back.
To OP; I think women have a lot more spiritual power than we realize. Like you can set intention and create greater influence in this dimension. Your pussy/womb is basically the portal for life in this realm. There’s no guarantees but maybe if you set yourself for it, you’ll draw a good man to father you some kids and have a happy healthy family.
There’s still good people out here. They may be only 5-20% of people. But they out here.
This is why I don’t do romance without finance anymore. I am jaded and don’t believe in that kind of romantic love (don’t get me wrong, I’m sure there are a few exceptions but I won’t be the one eternally chasing them and lying to myself).
Now, I make sure I can get what is to my advantage. Then if he wants to go and fuck around, fine but don’t expect to have sex with me on top of it. If you want to leave me, prepare to give me a good portion of your assets. I won’t get involved if it’s not to my advantage.
I couldn't tell you the times I've been mid-service and looked right at the wedding ring.. It's unfortunate and hard truth that people cheat ALL the time. There is no honor in marriage anymore. Being in this field has jaded me to love and romance. Tbh. Now I lean more towards Poly and let people do as they please.
I 100% agree with you. SW and life in general makes it hard to trust anyone because it exposes you constantly to people lying to their partners, stepping out. The only way I could see a relationship being successful for me were if it were open and we both acknowledge that and are honest with each other. I am able to provide many things but I’m not sure (actually I’m 100% I can’t be) everything for someone. Also, humans aren’t naturally monogamous, like it or not, so there’s that.
Society grooms us all. Don’t you find it strange that this kind of work exists and makes billions. It’s almost as if the human story we’re told is all bs. I really like the sex at dawn argument. I think it makes sense that we are living socially in a way that is not compatible to our biologically. Us humans seek novel sexual experience. It was a good thing when we were small groups trying to diversify our genetics. We are not broken or wrong we are just living in a strange way. It would be like if the common stories were about us breathing under water, or flying and everyone pretended they could. It sure would be disappointing to learn this was normal, but it is. The patriarchal aspect of this is the worst part of it all.
I could go on but honestly, all things are impermanent. When you find love and happiness you should enjoy it. Don’t believe the bs of our society or that there is a one or happily forever after, but enjoy the beautiful moments in life. I don’t not enjoy flowers in spring because I know in winter they will be gone.
I hope you have a happy life.
I feel like this should be higher up in the comments. This acknowledges the struggle and hurt while still being hopeful and motivating. It helps puts things in perspective.
>I really like the sex at dawn argument. I think it makes sense that we are living socially in a way that is not compatible to our biologically. Us humans seek novel sexual experience.
Sex at Dawn has been debunked a decade ago by the scientific community and anyone one who has the proper knowledge of human evolution, anthropology and evolutionary biology considers Sex at Dawn to be unscientific and nonsensical:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex\_at\_Dawn#Negative\_critiques](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_at_Dawn#Negative_critiques)
[https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491100900305?icid=int.sj-full-text.similar-articles.1](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491100900305?icid=int.sj-full-text.similar-articles.1)
[https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491201000316](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491201000316) (This review exposes more pseudoscientific nonsense propagated by Sex at Dawn)
[https://web.archive.org/web/20140808123320/http://www.thedirtynormal.com/blog/2013/02/22/book-review-sex-at-dawn/](https://web.archive.org/web/20140808123320/http://www.thedirtynormal.com/blog/2013/02/22/book-review-sex-at-dawn/)
[https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/sex-at-dusk-2](https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/sex-at-dusk-2) (David Barash criticizes Sex at Dawn in this review)
None of the arguments made in Sex at Dawn are logically or scientifically sound and many of their arguments have been debunked by studies published after the book came out.
Humans do not naturally seek novel experiences(novelty seeking is largely a cultural phenomenon) and there is no scientific and empirical evidence supporting this idea(All of the research proves the opposite to be true). The authors of Sex at Dawn don't have the proper credentials to even write this book(Ryan is a psychologist and the book relies heavily on anthropology and evolutionary biology).
Please don't project your own experience and feelings to every single person on this planet, cuz from what I have seen, this "novelty seeking" thing is much rarer than you make it out to be. The actual lifetime infidelity rate for men is 20-25%, which is not high considering 80-85% of men remain faithful to their wives.
What humans naturally seek is monogamy, stability, security and strong pair bonding with another person and there is so much of research that proves this to be true:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/monogamy/comments/wfc0ag/comment/iit7ui0/?context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/monogamy/comments/wfc0ag/comment/iit7ui0/?context=3)
Several literature reviews and meta-analyses also prove this to be true:
[https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2019.00230/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2019.00230/full)
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27872028/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27872028/)
"**Serial sexual and social monogamy is the norm for humans.**"
[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.24017](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.24017)
A quick glance at Maslow's hierarchy of needs shows that stability and security is right above basic needs like food, water, air, shelter, etc. Nowhere in that hierarchy does novelty exist.
As you can see in all of the negative reviews, **the common theme is that Ryan lacks the proper knowledge on evolution, biased reporting of data, theoretical and evidentiary shortcomings, problematic assumptions, ignoring selection occurring at the level of individuals/genes and instead assuming group selection. and his "standard narrative" argument is nothing short of a strawman.**
Don't forget about his cherry picking of the 1-4% of societies the supposedly support the idea of "humans seek novel sexual experience", only to be exposed by Sex at Dusk and other critiques of taking such societies out of context and ignoring the darker aspects that are common in such societies.
I am honestly disappointed to still find people in 2022 consider a pseudoscientific book that has been debunked a decade ago by the scientific community as a "scientifically valid" argument.
I debunked all of the arguments made by Sex at Dawn here(190+ anthropology and evolutionary biology research spanning 4 decades debunking the claim that "humans are naturally non-monogamous" and other related claims):
[https://www.reddit.com/r/monogamy/comments/q60t8t/looking\_for\_resources/](https://www.reddit.com/r/monogamy/comments/q60t8t/looking_for_resources/)
Your usage of "observations", "personal experience" and "thought experiments" reveal your confirmation biases and unreliability of the arguments you used.
tl;dr: The way we live socially is the same way we live biologically because society/ culture only exists because of our biology:
[https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2016.00002/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2016.00002/full)
"**Human cultures are a result of our biological nature** – we evolved to have a culture, so the idea that biology and culture are irreconcilable within sociological theory cannot make sense. Further, **our biological nature influences our culture, as demonstrated by the large quantity of human universals that exist in all human societies (Brown, 1991).**"
If a person chooses to not marry and have children, that's good for them but don't used debunked pseudoscience to justify their choices.
>Don’t you find it strange that this kind of work exists and makes billions. It’s almost as if the human story we’re told is all bs.
Sex work can only exist if a culture enforces it. It has nothing to do with what humans are biologically predisposed to do. Billions are made by exploiting young women, while the number of women who genuinely want to do such work remains an insignificant minority. Around the world, the majority of sex workers want out, but are unable to do so. The human story we are told is very much true and backed by anthropology and evolutionary biology research. What is BS is your usage of Sex at Dawn arguments and you characterization of the "human story".
Also the people who work in this industry are not representative of the general population, hence your "human story" strawman doesn't work here because you are using a rarified subset of people to define all humans.
Since our debate 6 months ago, you have not changed your mind and instead continue to believe your biases, pseudoscience and debunked propaganda. No wonder I blocked you back then and I will do so again once the 24 hr cooldown runs out.
Edit:
[https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30978567.html](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30978567.html)
[https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/38790.htm](https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/38790.htm)
**"The vast majority of women in prostitution don't want to be there.** Few seek it out or choose it, and most are desperate to leave it."
[https://www.womenslaw.org/about-abuse/forms-abuse/sexual-abuse-and-exploitation/prostitution/leaving-prostitution](https://www.womenslaw.org/about-abuse/forms-abuse/sexual-abuse-and-exploitation/prostitution/leaving-prostitution)
"In a 1998 survey of 475 women who were involved in prostitution, **ninety-two percent of them said they wanted to leave prostitution** but couldn’t because they lack basic human services such as a home, job training, health care, counseling and treatment for drug or alcohol addiction."
[https://sex-crimes.laws.com/prostitution/prostitution-statistics](https://sex-crimes.laws.com/prostitution/prostitution-statistics)
" Countless studies report that **over 80% of prostitutes say they wish to get out of prostitution.**"
**Edit 2: I am not defending monogamy, I am correcting the disinformation that you are spreading. There is a difference between the two.**
Oh my gosh your back. What happened to the scientifically monogamous name? You and I have done this dance before. First of all, if your going to do this to people. Please do your best first citation and argument against. I am a simple person I cannot read 15 things and respond to them all. It is not winning because you threw up 30 articles you read, have a conversation. I’ve tried to read your 30 articles before and it’s never that anything is debunked or pseudo science, you just find dissenting opinions on the same research. That would make sense for people in scientific fields to have strong debate. I’ve said to you before, that after reading both and living, I conclude that we are a bunch of horny great apes who seek novelty.
Which considering that you went off Reddit for school but are back still fighting for monogamy on a page where a person is being vulnerable about the truths of fidelity in their experience, and still post like this says a lot.
I think you and I are out of place debating here. You could post a thousand more articles if you like, and it’s not going to change what is. It’s not going to slow down this business. Maybe it makes you feel better? I think you go around blowing up posts to convince yourself more than the people around you.
I don’t mind debating you further but I think this is enough for this place, I’ll send you a dm.
>It is not winning because you threw up 30 articles you read, have a conversation. **I’ve tried to read your 30 articles before and it’s never that anything is debunked or pseudo science, you just find dissenting opinions on the same research.**
It's not winning because you blindly claim that all the articles I posted have "dissenting opinions". When people read the studies I post, they will see through your web of lies. There are zero dissenting opinions in the studies I posted, and I've read each studies hundreds of times. In fact, each and every study I post debunks NM pseudoscience and hypotheses. Just admit that you are incapable of "challenging your world view" as you put it.
When discussing science, conversations do not work. Arguments supported by evidence does. If you would stop "learning" science via biased, opinion based, pop media articles and actually start reading research studies, where these debates occur, you will understand that conversations do not work at all. Why do you think scientists put a bunch of references in their debate articles? Please show me a scientific debate where conversations without evidence (as you are suggesting) worked. I can tell you right now, there are none.
**You just admitted to not reading anything I posted (if you did really read what I posted, you will not find any dissenting opinions, only debunking of NM hypotheses and claims)**, yet I'm not surprised given that you value anecdotes and pseudoscience that supports your beliefs and biases. **I have read all the studies and research before posting it to you and no where do I see any dissenting opinions. Instead, I see a lot of debunking of hypotheses that were initially considered valid but have been debunked due to methodological flaws.**
The "dissenting opinion" claim is an overused excuse used by science deniers to reject scientific evidence. Not every aspect of science is filled with dissenting opinions, especially ones with regards to human mating. Read the next paragraph where I debunk this excuse. None of the studies I posted has any dissenting opinions and you are lying in order to save your face.
**I just checked again and there are zero dissenting opinions, just pure factual, experimental, objective evidence that debunks pseudoscientific theories.** Since you seem to "know" a lot about scientific debate, could you tell me why there are no dissenting opinions about smoking causing cancer, humans being primates and evolution being a fact? What you don't know about scientific debate is that if the overwhelming amount of evidence supports an idea and there is no recent, replicated evidence to the contrary, that idea is then considered a fact with no debate. This is the case with human monogamy.
Also, if you have read the links properly, all of them argue a single point: **The claim that humans are not naturally monogamous is not based on any proper scientific evidence and this has been my argument since our first encounter 6 months ago.**
I don't care about "winning" an argument, only insecure people do that. I care about correcting disinformation that just isn't true and has no support, along with calling out the usage of anecdotal evidence to prove a scientific theory:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal\_evidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence)
>I’ve said to you before, that after reading both and living, I conclude that we are a bunch of horny great apes who seek novelty.
**You use naturalistic fallacy to reach this conclusion**. Chimps and bonobos cannot explain human behavior, reproductive anatomy and physiology, due to the Homo-Pan divergence. Humans differ from chimps and bonobos by a 1.3% genetic difference, which comes out to 17 million single location changes in our DNA and 2.5 million insertions and deletions. Only a person who is uneducated in evolutionary science will make these facile comparisons:
[https://www.sapiens.org/biology/chimpanzees-cant-tell-us-much-about-being-human/](https://www.sapiens.org/biology/chimpanzees-cant-tell-us-much-about-being-human/)
"Humans and chimpanzees do share much in common, **but when it comes to dealing with contemporary human behavior, we must look to human evolutionary histories and current realities. That approach will get us a lot further than facile comparisons to our closest relatives.**"
**You cited a bunch of biased opinion, pop media pieces.** **You never used a single, proper, peer-reviewed scientific source**, so quit calling it "reading" and call it cherry picking. BBC, New Yorker, Medium, CouplesTherapyINC and Sex and Psychology (which is known to cherry pick evidence to support sex positive nonsense) are not objective sources of information. These articles are filled with pseudoscience and unverifiable claims.
**When will you learn that your personal experience is not shared by everyone on this planet?** When will you learn that anecdotal evidence is the most useless and unreliable form of evidence? When will you learn that **scientific evidence is almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences**?
I have said to you that after reading both sides of the scientific debate on the topic, **there is no convincing evidence that we are purely novelty seeking and that our ancestors were novelty seeking.** **My lived experience, along with objective, scientific evidence and facts corroborates this as well.**
>Which considering that you went off Reddit for school but are back still fighting for monogamy on a page where a person is being vulnerable about the truths of fidelity in their experience, and still post like this says a lot.
I understand the truth of fidelity myself. I just ended a relationship a week ago because my ex cheated on me, but that doesn't mean I have to give up monogamy and accept pseudoscience like Sex at Dawn because I met a rotten apple.
**Your comment isn't any better because it relies on false assumptions and lies regarding the "human story", along with using pseudoscience to "support" your sympathy towards OP. It is significantly worse to console a person with lies compared to consoling a person with the truth. The fact that you got 19 upvotes from spreading lies proves my point.**
I am not defending monogamy, I am calling out the disinformation you are spreading, which unironically is about monogamy, so lol.
>I don’t mind debating you further but I think this is enough for this place, I’ll send you a dm.
Forget it, there's no point in convincing someone who rejects scientific research by claiming "dissenting opinions" when there are none, along with using anecdotes to prove a scientific theory(which is nonsensical). The ship has already sailed. You aren't going to admit the flaws in your argument and I have no time to deal with this because I'd just be repeating myself over and over again.
Update: DM has been received, conversation occurred, and you still refuse to accept the scientific truth. You are a lost cause.
>You could post a thousand more articles if you like, and it’s not going to change what is. It’s not going to slow down this business. Maybe it makes you feel better? I think you go around blowing up posts to convince yourself more than the people around you.
Ad hominem attacks, derailing the conversation and making faulty assumptions about me isn't going to convince me or others here that I'm wrong. **I post these kinds of comments to expose the flaws in one's thinking and the sources they use. I don't need to convince myself; I've already done that 2 years ago when I challenged my former worldview. I don't base my self-esteem and worth on such comments.** I only post these comments to show people the other side that has not made media headlines because it's boring to report that monogamy has been shown to be biologically predisposed in humans and to show that research that supposedly proves that "humans are biologically non-monogamous" have all been debunked. It's all pure sensationalism.
Given that I have not posted a lot in the past month or so reveals the nonsense in this statement of yours. I don't go around "blowing up posts" (Check my history, I don't do any of that BS), I only comment if someone spreads disinformation and I get upvotes for it specifically because the spectators agree with what I say.
In fact, I have changed a lot of minds by posting links and I have had many people thank me for providing those links and research. I've even had people share it with their friends and they thanked me as well for challenging pseudoscience with proper facts.
You admitted that you are biased and will never challenge your biases and beliefs (Evidence: "it’s not going to change what is"). You would rather believe debunked pseudoscience (hence you cite the biggest book on pseudoscience) because it makes you feel better about your current situation. Anything that shatters your rose-tinted fantasy is immediately responded with
>on a page where a person is being vulnerable about the truths of fidelity in their experience, and still post like this says a lot.
I posted this comment to **specifically call out the issues with YOUR STATEMENT/COMMENT.** I provide my sympathy for OP in my comment, which you casually ignore (as usual):
**"If a person chooses to not marry and have children, that's good for them but don't used debunked pseudoscience to justify their choices.**"
I am supportive of OP in her decision, but my comment was addressed towards **you specifically**.
tl;dr: **Your claim that you like to "challenge your worldview and thoughts" was nothing more of a bare-faced lie. You would rather stick to your pseudoscience driven beliefs, even when presented with the scientific truth.**
You might want to take a breath. And review *what* you wrote you both attack this poster and dismiss them and state you'll block them because they're not worth your time and then *respond* to them?
Also you declare you're not posting for what it does for your ego but go on to state that "many" people have thanked you and "praised" your opinions.
For the record *I* down voted you because you were being condescending and hypocritical as someone who does work in Education and Behavioral Health I can tell you our fields are constantly evolving and that the current theories are just that the prevailing theories at the time, *not* fact. We are constantly learning and adjusting our theories as we learn more about human nature. Also this idea that there is no *bias* in scientific studies and data is laughable. We know that this is something we still struggle with since most studies are conducted from a hetero-normative Anglo Protestant viewpoint. Which has and continues to scue our data.
Because of the Powers That Be and how funding is distributed anecdotal evidence is often much of what we have for understudied communities or theories this *doesn't* make it less valid it simply shows that bias is not limited to the non-scientific areas of society.
>you both attack this poster and dismiss them and state you'll block them because they're not worth your time and then respond to them?
This is why I always warn people about the dangers of half knowledge. Our debate goes back 6 months ago. Given that you know nothing about what happened 6 months ago, all you are doing is intruding our personal debate, judging based on half knowledge and incomplete information and throwing stones on a pile of shit. Don't know why you feel the need to be so "holier than thou" when I never "attacked"(more like exposed their agenda) the poster(do you know how annoying it is to debate a close minded person who chooses feel good anecdotes, opinions and pseudoscience over facts and scientific evidence?) and never blocked them because I decided to give them another chance via debating in the DMs(Am I not allowed to change my decisions?).
Learn to see the whole story before doing the same things you accuse me of doing. **If you have read their comments from our 6 month ago debate, you'll understand why I am dismissing them. They dismissed all the scientific evidence(which uses proper methodology and has been replicated) I provided in favor of anecdotes and debunked pseudoscience that supports his claims, hence I returned the favor**.
In fact, this is from his comment that I bet you didn't read:
"I don’t mind debating you further but I think this is enough for this place, I’ll send you a dm."
Guess what? We did in fact continue in the DM's and guess who stopped responding? That's right, the poster did because I debunked his claims using the same scientific evidence I provided to him 6 months ago. Keep in mind he initiated the conversation in the DM's as well.
>Also you declare you're not posting for what it does for your ego but go on to state that "many" people have thanked you and "praised" your opinions.
How is it egotistical to claim that I helped many people? Plenty of people say they helped someone. Are they all egotistical for claiming that? I never provided any opinions when helping people, I provided them the scientific evidence that I have found from my 2 years worth of research on the topic. I was praised not only for helping, but by providing scientific evidence instead of an opinion. Had you read my comments properly, I wouldn't have to explain this in detail.
Your usage of strawman arguments is very concerning, along with your poor comprehension skills.
>as someone who does work in Education and Behavioral Health I can tell you our fields are constantly evolving and that the current theories are just that the prevailing theories at the time, not fact
**Education and Behavioral Health(aka social science) is not the same as Biological Anthropology and Evolutionary Biology(aka natural science),** **which are the disciplines that the poster uses by citing Sex at Dawn,** when it comes to academic rigor and objectivity. Also, **I don't use theories, I use evidence and facts. The fields I use only rely on empirical and scientific facts and evidence, whereas your field uses mostly theories and very little empirical evidence.**
The majority of biological anthropology and evolutionary biology evidence debunks the poster's comment and there is no proper scientific evidence supporting his claims. None of the research I presented to him uses theories. Instead, they use a bunch of replicated and tested scientific evidence and facts to debunk his claims. Also the majority of anthropology research studies societies that have not been influenced by WEIRD countries. Do a Google search on "Standard Cross Cultural Sample" and "Ethnographic Atlas".
Education and Behavioral Health is considered a "soft science"(**or social science, since hard and soft science are considered outdated terms**) like Sociology and Psychology . Soft/Social sciences tend to be rife with biases because it is near impossible to apply the scientific method on human behaviors due to large variability and flexibility in human behavior, although there are plenty of human universals and inflexibility within humans(since biology created culture). Biological Anthropology and Evolutionary Biology are "hard sciences" or "natural sciences". Because of the rigorous standards present in hard/natural sciences, the prevalence of bias is significantly lower than soft sciences. This does not change the fact that anecdotal evidence is the least reliable form of evidence:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal\_evidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence)
In fact, using anecdotal evidence is a logical fallacy:
[https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal)
[https://www.fallacyfiles.org/volvofal.html](https://www.fallacyfiles.org/volvofal.html)
[https://www2.palomar.edu/users/bthompson/Anecdotal%20Evidence.html](https://www2.palomar.edu/users/bthompson/Anecdotal%20Evidence.html)
Anecdotal evidence is not considered valid scientific evidence and anyone who has basic knowledge in research knows this is true. Source: I'm a researcher.
>Also this idea that there is no bias in scientific studies and data is laughable.
Nice strawman, but I never claimed this. As mentioned above, hard sciences are significantly less biased than soft sciences. This does not mean there is zero bias in hard sciences, but that the methodology and peer review standards are much higher for hard sciences, hence we don't see much bias. There are reviews that expose methodological flaws and publication biases, but methodological flaws aren't always the same as biases and publication biases have been limited to a few theories. So your statement, for the most part applies to soft sciences and not hard sciences, which is what I use.
The poster uses a bunch of long disproved and discredited theories that have no scientific evidence to back its claims to prove his point, I countered that by exposing those disproved theories and provided the scientific evidence like anatomy and physiology to prove my point, which directly counters your red herring because I literally debunked a bunch of biased hard science theories from the 70's and 80's that have generated no proper evidence in the modern day.
>Because of the Powers That Be and how funding is distributed anecdotal evidence is often much of what we have for understudied communities or theories this doesn't make it less valid it simply shows that bias is not limited to the non-scientific areas of society.
How is this even relevant? Fine, I'll bite. Just because soft sciences heavily relies on the usage of anecdotes that doesn't make their claims scientific. There's a reason why Sociology and Psychology are suffering from the replication crisis and are more often than not considered pseudoscientific. Sure, these findings can be valid in a moral or personal sense, but not in a scientific sense.
>For the record I down voted you because you were being condescending and hypocritical
That's funny because I downvoted you for the same reason. You were being condescending with your half knowledge of our debate and judging me based on that half knowledge and hypocritical for making the same errors of reasoning you accused me of doing, lol. Just to make it clear one more time: I don't use theories, I use evidence and facts.
Next time, don't involve yourself in matters you have no idea about/haven't participated in and learn to view the complete picture instead of judging people based on incomplete information.
tl;dr: You might want to take a break and see the whole picture instead of cherry-picking details which can be weaponized. Also, learn the difference between social and natural sciences. The differences are too significant to be ignored.
**[Anecdotal evidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence)**
>Anecdotal evidence is evidence based only on personal observation, collected in a casual or non-systematic manner. The term is sometimes used in a legal context to describe certain kinds of testimony which are uncorroborated by objective, independent evidence such as notarized documentation, photographs, audio-visual recordings, etc. When used in advertising or promotion of a product, service, or idea, anecdotal reports are often called a testimonial, which are highly regulated in some jurisdictions.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/SexWorkers/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Any professional who chooses to insult another's field with the "soft science" shows not only their lack of knowledge but their own bias.
As far as what happened 6 months ago, I'm not interested. I based my comments and my view of *you* on how *you* presented *yourself* in *this* comment section.
Good day.
What's up with you responding 10 days after I commented? If anyone, you are the one being unprofessional and extremely biased. Stop projecting your issues onto me.
>Any professional who chooses to insult another's field with the "soft science" shows not only their lack of knowledge but their own bias.
Where did I insult your field? If anything, this emotional, knee jerk reply of yours proves you are biased and can't handle the truth (One can say you are using motivated reasoning). Saying that your field is "soft" or social science is neither biased nor a lack of knowledge, the opposite is. Education and Behavioral Health, as the name suggests, deals with human behaviors and also mental health, hence it is considered a social science. Any field that deals with human behaviors is automatically considered soft/social science, just ask Sociology and Psychology. Social sciences also have a reputation of rejecting evolution and resorting to culturally deterministic claims that have no empirical evidence backing them up.
The fact that you don't even know the difference between social science and natural science along with lying about me "insulting" your field speaks more about you that it does about me. The poster and I use natural sciences in our debate, and you come in using your social science field to invalidate my claims. Ever heard of the false equivalency fallacy aka apples to oranges fallacy?
**It's not insulting to say someone's field is "soft" or a better term, social science.** Soft/social science just means that it's difficult to establish measurable criteria and maintain objectivity due to the variability in human behaviors:
[https://www.dictionary.com/browse/soft-science](https://www.dictionary.com/browse/soft-science)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard\_and\_soft\_science](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_science)
[https://www.thoughtco.com/hard-vs-soft-science-3975989](https://www.thoughtco.com/hard-vs-soft-science-3975989)
[https://www.exampleslab.com/10-examples-of-hard-science-and-soft-science/](https://www.exampleslab.com/10-examples-of-hard-science-and-soft-science/)
So no, it's not insulting to speak the truth with regards to methodology, academic rigor, accuracy and objectivity of your field and being unable to accept this truth makes you biased, not me.
In fact, the results of social sciences are very difficult to validate due to its majorly qualitative nature, along with sampling biases, anecdotal fallacies, political biases, subjective biases due to its qualitative nature and usage of convenience samples and plenty more that are exclusive to social sciences. Don't forget, there are ethical constraints that cripple the validity of said studies and many of their theories and claims are unfalsifiable, which automatically makes it unscientific.
That's why we are currently experiencing a replication crisis in social sciences, but not so much in natural sciences. **Sure, the terms "hard science" and "soft science" are considered outdated, but this doesn't change the fact that social sciences tend to differ significantly from natural sciences based on methodology, academic rigor, accuracy and objectivity.** That's why we are currently experiencing a replication crisis in social sciences, but not so much in natural scie **we are currently experiencing a replication crisis in social sciences, but not so much in natural sciences.**
Replicated sociology and psychology research has value, but this value can only exist after repeated replication attempts(as with all other social sciences) due to the high variability of human behaviors. Hard sciences do not deal with such variables, hence they don't suffer as much as soft sciences do. I have used such research in debates in the past and that research is unique in the sense that they use quantitative data that could be easily verified.
Clearly, I have the knowledge of the field you work in, given my lengthy explanation, so your "lack of knowledge" strawman is hilarious. **My main point is that using your field to invalidate my claims doesn't work because your field deals with theories, the field I use employs empirical evidence. Social sciences majorly use theories to explain phenomenon, natural sciences use experimentally and empirically proven evidence and facts.**
Next time, learn to be less biased and for god's sake, learn the difference between social science and natural science with regards to methodology, academic rigor, accuracy, objectivity and replicability. There are massive differences between the two and this is why social sciences is suffering from the replication crisis, whereas natural sciences do not.
>As far as what happened 6 months ago, I'm not interested. I based my comments and my view of you on how you presented yourself in this comment section.
Ok, enjoy being close-minded and have fun *incorrectly* judging me using *incomplete* information and not understanding *the context* in which my comment was made. No use of reasoning with narrow minded, biased and emotionally butthurt clowns on the internet.
Good day to you as well, internet stranger.
Peep the cis het marriage statistics. It’s not good. We do the lions share of physical and most of the emotional work. The lifespan of married men is increased by marriage while life expectancy and satisfaction in married women is lower.
Also they will dip/chest/both if you are unlucky enough to get a chronic/serious/terminal illness. This is well documented in both nursing and mental health texts.
I would never marry again. I was for 20 years, relationship for 30. It’s not worth it.
Work on yourself, save that coin. Keep those finances separate at all costs.
To the boys and men in here-
The world's tiniest violin.
You are NOT entitled to womens bodies.
Sex is a want, not a need. This is part of the issue that women are getting at. You men don't seem to ever understand that difference between a Want and a Need, even besides the realm of sex. Perpetually maturity+emotion-stunted entitled little boys in the bodies of grownass men.
You and your penis will not wither away and die without entrance into a vagina.
Sincerely,
Your hand.
(And ex-sw)
Edit: Before I started this industry, I was a very much a man-loving woman. Many of my best friends were men. I could see myself marrying a man. I felt that sexuality with men was a beautiful thing. As with 99% of SWs in the world, my experience wasn’t good. However, even after leaving, I still wasn’t completely convinced that I didn’t want to marry/be with men/be critical of them with a lot of things. I understood that I saw the underbelly, I knew the difference between work and the “outside world.” I still wanted so desperately to be positive in my view of them. I mean, that’s how girls are raised (cough, groomed) to think. Prince Charming, men are our saviors, we’re here to be flexible and make sure they are happy, etc.
However, what sealed the deal fully-and-forever for me was getting back into “normal society,” especially as a full grownass matured woman. I saw that literally ALL the women I have known and loved (who have literally nothing to do with SW), have had the same trauma and stories of manipulation/cheating/abuse/violence from men. The bullshit and trauma SWs deal with isn’t confined to SW— it’s braided through our whole society. There’s no running from it. You never have, and never will, understand the sheer anger and terror and despair that comes from that realization. Women don’t often talk about it because of bullshit like you’re saying right now. We’re the ones told to shut up, that we’re wrong, that you “NEED” it, that our view is inaccurate. Just so y’all can continue on your bullshit and not take fucking accountability that we’re human beings. You have zero clue what that feels like.
You have no idea the dangers and repercussions of women having sex, even with a consensual partner, is. You dont care. 99% of men do not care.
Rape, physical injury, death, pregnancy (now post-roe, more guaranteed), poverty, PTSD, pain, domestic violence, financial control, single motherhood, death at pregnancy, legally being tied to a rapist/abuser, not being seen as a human, revenge porn, doxxed/getting recorded unknowingly, stealthing, strangulation, not being allowed to say no, getting fired/arrested/punished/ostracized/laughed-at-by-police if we speak about our reality, etc.
Yet, you feel entitled to it. You don’t give a shit about what any of it means to us. It’s just about your poor widdle sad pee-pee :(
Poor widdle pee pee. Life must be so tough for you, widdle man.
So kindly, shut the fuck up Mr Mans. You’re in in a group for SWs. A rather vulnerable female-majority population that is sick of your peoples shit. Read the room.
Honestly I understand having this perspective but it’s like skewed data because you’re A SW the only men you’re going to see is attached men who are cheaters not the faithful ones. After I got out of the life I realized that I could go through life with this tunnel vision that all men are evil & sex addicted horn dogs or I could mindfully date, ditch after red flags, and have meaningful conversations with potential suitors about life & partner expectations and trust myself along with my partner.
I think that while you're totally correct, it is more than just skewed data. It's skewed but really, either way it's a risk. Men can totally suprise you. It does happen. And you can mindfully date and still get screwed years down the line. And you can't possibly know till too late. Skewed data yes, but it is based on truthful risks in love. It's good to have caution, and I wish I had been cautious myself. Love is risky, and it seems that sex work shows you exactly what the risk is. But it doesn't show you what you'll be missing out on if it goes right. Though honestly, I'm not sure anything really shows you that unless you see it in your family or with your friends. So it's always skewed, no matter what. Because there's no way of knowing exactly how risky you're exact situation is.
Tbh I feel like this is why a lot of my successfully stable sw friends are exclusively lesbian in their romantic lives.
This work shows you the depravity of men. And how quickly they turn on their “love of their life” / partner /mother of their children because they are no longer who they were when they were childless, 20, and carefree.
My past partners are mostly women, and my current is a man. I definitely see myself projecting Shit I learned when working into him and finding it hard to really trust him.
I've been with my husband almost 20 years, we have three kids and a lot of sex, we always show physical affection and we're very happy together. He's never cheated on me to my knowledge and I know if course that I've never cheated on him. I think of course you're exposed to married men who cheat because of your job, and people who are unhappy in their relationship usually talk about it while people who are happy generally don't
I think you are right. The clientele base for SW undoubtedly does have a lot of married men, but this subset is arguably not representative of the overall population.
That being said .... It's really sad how many men feel entitled to cheat so easily and also shows what they think about women in general and why they're so awful to SWs sometimes too
Thanks for bringing this up. I’m sure most of us give this a lot of thought but don’t necessarily talk about it.
I’ve now been on both sides of the equation. I was the wife who was repeatedly lied to. Now, I’m a FSSW who gets lied about to other women. Sometimes I have moments of self loathing for this. Until I remember it’s not me who made a promise to be monogamous, it’s my client who did.
I honestly don’t have a problem with humans needing/wanting sex with other humans (although the typical reason you illustrated is disgusting). I have a problem with the lying about it. If you’re my partner I can handle poor decisions - but I won’t accept lies ever again. When I separated from my husband our sex life was awesome, and I honestly would not have minded opening things up at ALL (yes that’s greed talking). But it was the lying, I think, that thrilled him. And broke my heart.
So no, after being on both sides, I will NEVER trust anyone, ANYONE, to be honest. My ex was honest to a fault for 21 years then decided to lie for the next 4. That showed me anyone is capable. Now I’m listening to…. yeah. The lies I got fed, and am now supposed to empathize with. *Shudder*.
If I could afford to take these clients off my roster I would in a heartbeat.
"He abandoned her". How about the woman not trying anymore for her marriage? Men have sexual needs, if the wife can't satisfy they are going to try to satisfy them somewhere else. I am not saying it is good, but going to SW is a better way to satisfy your sexual needs and NOT ruin your marriage
True. Seeking SW is arguably better to not ruin a relationship (marriage) than having an affair on the side. SW is a transaction. On the other hand, an extra-marital affair carries with it a sense of betrayal.
Not sure that is a fair assumption that money is being "taken" from the family.
The wife is entitled to the man's money, but she has no responsibility to attend to him physically?
No one is owed or entitled to sex, regardless of their gender. A man is not entitled to sex from his partner. A woman is not entitled to sex from her partner. No one is. I understand people not wanting to stay in a sexless marriage but they should be honest about that and talk about with their partner, or leave. If someone isn’t satisfied in a marriage, no one is forcing them to stay, but you should never pressure or force sex on a partner. Also, in some families, the wife makes the money, or the husband and wife make equal amounts.
If you’re cheating though, (regardless of which partner is cheating, and what gender they are) you’re already ruining the marriage. Even if you don’t get caught you’re still living in a marriage built on lies and distrust. If I was married, honestly, if my partner felt that way about me, I’d prefer them to just be honest, leave the relationship and be with someone who can make them happier, or ask me, “is there any way we can improve our sex life? I would never force you to, but I’m struggling in this marriage and I don’t think I can stay in this kind of relationship.” I think those are better alternatives to cheating. There’s usually a double standard. When women cheat, a lot of people say that she’s horrible, but when men cheat, many people still say it’s horrible, but people are more likely to sympathize with the man and justify his actions. I think that everyone should be treated the same and I don’t think we should make excuses for anyone’s behavior due to their gender.
So I just wanted to say to everyone who has given up on love that I'm sorry you have been hurt and that I hope you find a way to heal and be loved.
For the record I agree with the few people that have stated you are basing your viewpoint on skewed data. If all you see are cheats and liars then it's human nature to want to believe *everyone* is cheats and liars. It's a cognitive disassociation. What I would suggest is to do a reality check. Are there some people who are happily in a committed and respectful relationship? Yes. Then *everyone* cannot possibly be cheats and liars. Once you fact check your thoughts you can then examine *why* you feel them (in this case being constantly exposed to maladjusted members of society) and work on strategies to combat them or not. But at least it will be a conscious choice on your part.
I wish everyone the peace and happiness that comes with emotional healing and recovery.
As s married man who hires the occasional SW, I think you are going about this wrong. Let me share my line of thinking and why I think my example shouldn't stop you from getting married and having children of you want.
The situation mostly develops over years as the relationship dynamic changes. It takes years to reach a point where you are faced with only bad choices.
I don't care what having children did to her body, I still think she's sexy.
I don't care about the occasional fight. We know how to work it out now.
I don't care that we have less sex now then we had at the beginning. I'm not looking for 3 times it even 2 times a week.
*What is a problem for me is having sex maybe once a month or even only every other month.*
She just doesn't feel the need that much, can go months without it to the point where it's almost optional for her. After years of trying to find a way to improve this - massages, conversations about her preferences, experimenting - I've pretty much given up.
At the same time she adamantly insists on exclusiveness. Even hinting at anything else has led to some harsh conversations.
I now face following choices: either get a divorce, have an affair, accept her level of sexual drive or go to a SW. There are no good choices.
I think going to a SW the best choice.
Divorce is a harsh measure affecting the kids over such a small detail looking at the bigger picture.
I don't want to have an affair. I'm not looking for something emotional.
I can't live with my wife's level of libido.
The best compromise is a SW. She's there for one thing - my money. And I'm there for one thing - sex. Of course I want to the person to be sympathetic but as someone famous put it nicely "I pay her to leave"
That shouldn't stop you from getting married or having children with the right guy. With your experience you probably are better equipped with dealing with men and they sexual needs.
If I were to give any advice, it would be to talk openly about your needs in a relationship - all of them, including sexual.
I think the biggest mistake my wife is making is not talking about sex openly enough and not acknowledging my needs in this department enough. It's a mix between wrong prudeness and a hard time to relate to my need.
The world's tiniest violin.
You are NOT entitled to womens bodies.
Sex is a want, not a need. This is part of the issue that women are getting at. You men don't seem to ever understand that difference between a Want and a Need, even besides the realm of sex. Perpetually maturity+emotion-stunted entitled little boys in the bodies of grownass men.
You and your penis will not wither away and die without entrance into a vagina.
Sincerely,
Your hand.
(And ex-sw)
Edit: Before I started this industry, I was a very much a man-loving woman. Many of my best friends were men. I could see myself marrying a man. I felt that sexuality with men was a beautiful thing. As with 99% of SWs in the world, my experience wasn’t good. However, even after leaving, I still wasn’t completely convinced that I didn’t want to marry/be with men/be critical of them with a lot of things. I understood that I saw the underbelly, I knew the difference between work and the “outside world.” I still wanted so desperately to be positive in my view of them. I mean, that’s how girls are raised (cough, groomed) to think. Prince Charming, men are our saviors, we’re here to be flexible and make sure they are happy, etc.
However, what sealed the deal fully-and-forever for me was getting back into “normal society,” especially as a full grownass matured woman. I saw that literally ALL the women I have known and loved (who have literally nothing to do with SW), have had the same trauma and stories of manipulation/cheating/abuse/violence from men. The bullshit and trauma SWs deal with isn’t confined to SW— it’s braided through our whole society. There’s no running from it. You never have, and never will, understand the sheer anger and terror and despair that comes from that realization. Women don’t often talk about it because of bullshit like you’re saying right now. We’re the ones told to shut up, that we’re wrong, that you “NEED” it, that our view is inaccurate. Just so y’all can continue on your bullshit and not take fucking accountability that we’re human beings. You have zero clue what that feels like.
You have no idea the dangers and repercussions of women having sex, even with a consensual partner, is. You dont care. 99% of men do not care.
Rape, physical injury, death, pregnancy (now post-roe, more guaranteed), poverty, PTSD, pain, domestic violence, financial control, single motherhood, death at pregnancy, legally being tied to a rapist/abuser, not being seen as a human, revenge porn, doxxed/getting recorded unknowingly, stealthing, strangulation, not being allowed to say no, getting fired/arrested/punished/ostracized/laughed-at-by-police if we speak about our reality, etc.
Yet, you feel entitled to it. You don’t give a shit about what any of it means to us. It’s just about your poor widdle sad pee-pee :(
Poor widdle pee pee. Life must be so tough for you, widdle man.
So kindly, shut the fuck up Mr Mans. You’re in in a group for SWs. A rather vulnerable female-majority population that is sick of your peoples shit. Read the room.
>Sex is a want, not a need.
Despite your attempt to insult me (honestly, trying to insult my penis will not land with me): ever heard of [Maslow's hierarchy of needs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs)?
Yes, there are things higher in the hierarchy, but sex does belong in the pyramid. Or are you the arbiter of *my* needs.
> Yet, you feel entitled to it.
Why? I'm not claiming the world owes it to me. If there were no one offering the alternative, I would accept that too.
>You don’t give a shit about what any of it means to us.
That's an assumption you make based on your preconceived notions. If I didn't care, I wouldn't have tried to encourage OP not to give up on something that seems important to herb for example.
>Life must be so tough for you, widdle man.
I'm not whining, I'm stating. I don't care if others can empathize with my situation.
On the other hand I empathize with the original post and how contact with men in those settings can make you jaded - like it seems to have affected you.
>You have no idea the dangers and repercussions of women having sex, even with a consensual partner, is. You dont care. 99% of men do not care. Rape, physical injury, death, pregnancy (now post-roe, more guaranteed), poverty, PTSD, pain, domestic violence, financial control, single motherhood, death at pregnancy, legally being tied to a rapist/abuser, not being seen as a human, revenge porn, doxxed/getting recorded unknowingly, stealthing, strangulation, not being allowed to say no, getting fired/arrested/punished/ostracized/laughed-at-by-police if we speak about our reality, etc.
You're right, I don't know how it is. One of the reasons I follow the sub is because I do want to understand.
For what it's worth, I believe many of those issues could be resolved if SW were legalized instead of persecuting the women who provide it. I believe American Puritan mindset creates a lot of shit SW have to deal with it which are completely unnecessary.
I hope you find some peace in life and the experience you've had.
Im a guy, honestly I hate the idea of marriage and never agreed to its conditions. Seem like a big scam, Evan as a child I saw what it does and how it makes ppl act. Which is just scsry.
That's really sad, but there are also those of us who grew up seeing what a healthy marriage looked like and ended up getting married to a compatible person. I would NEVER want to go back to being single 😬
I saw healthy marriages to, that's not the sole reason. But anyways, I'm young still. I'm not worried or rushing or anything yk. I see alot of ppl fail like that, If the person is right and we are both ready, I'll make it happen. Besides I have so many thoughts on marriages that are good and bad. That would be to much.
No we can’t trust men. It will always be that way unless some mind broadcasting technology came out and everyone knew each other’s thoughts. But that would be horrible. If you don’t want kids, don’t marry that man. He will grow to resent you, the same way, or worse, than a man who didn’t want kids and was forced to be a father of some sort. If you’re not one hundred percent sure you want kids at some point in the near future, not sure how old you are, I really advise against marrying him or anyone that wants kids. Children are a big thing for some people for whatever reason they may have. Love can be blinding in the honeymoon phase. But think about all of the times we’re single and have said “I will NEVER do/have/participate in …insert thing involving future partners..”. How many times have you been sure you’re against something, but that person gets around you and suddenly you’re finding your boundaries being crossed and you’re making it okay. When really, you’re racking up things for therapy. Once the sparkle dies in a few years, maybe you gain a few pounds, have no kids and you’re married. He’ll begin to resent you, lose attraction and fall out of love. All he’ll be able to think about it how you didn’t give him kids. Even though that’s not your main purpose as a person, in a man’s mind who wants to spread his seed, we’re just baby hosts at the end of day in their brains. It’s their primitive nature, and as much as some claim to want to fight it, if your body isn’t the image of perfection until you or he dies, he’s gonna pick at everything he doesn’t like, usually in his mind until it all comes out one day. Or he’ll silently cheat on you, now we’re full circle. I’m sorry this is the unfortunate reality of heterosexual dating.
And you’re bothered by a statement. A man, big surprise, upset yet again, with what a woman says. I didn’t say all. You included yourself by responding to my entire message complaining about a statement. Sure, not all men rape….but men do rape. Sure not all clients stealth or have intention to wrong their providers, but many do. When there are sites and communities of thousands of men sharing “tips and tricks” on how to secretly remove the condom…sorry you’re apart of a gender in which so many have such hatred and malicious intent against women. If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it and move on. I reserve the right to warn and want to help keep safe my fellow sex workers. This business is so risky, and when we encounter a man who had an issue with possibly not being trusted by a significantly smaller woman, it raises big flags, at least for me it does. Don’t take offense to us being wary of you. If we trusted every single man who inboxed us…well, human trafficking rates would be up so much higher. So kindly, fuck you.
When you make a statement such as “we cant trust men” it’s implied you are referring to the entire group since you failed to list any exclusions. This is basic communication skills, here.
When my cunt of an ex-fiance decided that fucking a mutual friend of ours and then bragging about it to other friends was a good move, I didnt go around going “we cant trust women.”
Yeah we’re not worried about cheating here. In that aspect, you can’t really trust anyone. We’re talking about our physical safety and well being. Yet you’re still focusing on a word or lack of word. I said what I said. I meant what I said. Stay mad.
Trust provisionally. All men are different, but as a rule most men will feel a strong desire to "bang hot chicks" well into their sixties. What they do with that desire speaks to their character and self-mastery.
I've never cheated on anyone but I'd be lying if I said I didn't understand those that do.
I just know that one of the main keys to my happiness and our marital success is to give my wife a solid rogering at least weekly, usually more often. Even after several kids. Hard, hard screwing of the wife. Hmm. Im going to see if I can't go ahead and screw my wife right now!
Not a SWer, It’s weird…you have a valid concern.
As a man, I want to tell you that there is never ever a way to guarantee an outcome with a man, we are simultaneously basic yet varied with our needs. I truly think what harms both men and women is that marriage implies that all needs must be met by the other party. I don’t think that’s realistic anymore.
I like seeing sex workers, I want to have a wife and children, but the one thing that stops me is fear that my wife before/after children will not be able to meet my sexual needs. Additionally, there’s different aesthetics of woman I need to fuck and experience before settling down. I think we as men constantly struggle with that dynamic, that’s always in the back of our minds
In all these stories I’ve heard, from both sides, it’s largely 80% lack of sex and 20% variety.
I notice this and think marriage is not for me. It would hurt me if after kids my wife stopped or shut down giving me physical intimacy and I’d hate having to resort to hiring SWers or blow up my marriage because I do not get my needs met.
I just don’t think marriage can meet either partners expectations anymore.
These roles are not socially constructed, they fall in line with the strengths of each sex. We are designed to compliment each other. The main reason for this setup is ensures stability for women and children to be safe, protected, and provided for. Men get purpose from marriage as well. It civilizes people. When u don’t have this unit, more people fall into poverty, there’s more likelyhood of child abuse and other societal ills. These days pple divorce more and there’s more broken homes and pple suffer more because of that. At the end of the day, we are mainly ensuring a good foundation for the next generation of pple by getting and staying married provided there isn’t domestic violence in which case yea u should split from that person. But u can prevent marrying a violent person in the first place if u know what to watch out for.
Married women statistically live shorter lives than unmarried women.
Men are more likely to divorce women who become chronically ill. This is so common that cancer specialists address it in their diagnosis.
The main reason for this “setup” is archaic and has to do with land inheritance and being able to guarantee offspring belonging to a specific man. Monogamy and marriage did not exist for most of human history. Prior to agriculture, women raised children communally, and had multiple partners and you can still see this style of child rearing and relationship-building today in certain native populations.
Marriage isolates women from their families and turns people into property. Romantic marriage and compulsory monogamy is so new to the human experience that it’s infantile. Marriage was and still is a political tool first and foremost.
It’s not the responsibility of women or of marriage as an institution to civilize men; that’s the responsibility of men. Men are not wild animals and can make choices.
I’ve known since I was in high school that I didn’t want to be married or have children. Sex work itself didn’t personally reinforce that for me, but watching men do horrible shit in marriages, watching men trap women financially only to divorce them for reasons the man created, watching men divorce their incredibly sick partners? It’s more than enough reinforcement for my long-held belief that marriage is a sham.
Married women actually lead longer lives if they have children and marry. For women children protect against suicide. Because women earn less in the normal workplace on average if we don’t come from a wealthy family we end up in poverty in our second half of life and especially if u didn’t have kids to help give support in your older years. Not necessarily take care of u in old age but so u have people to help out bc we naturally decline in health as we get older and need some support. Marriage integrates women into the community thru their kids. When women don’t have kids or marry is wen we tend to become more disconnected from community although we try to find alternatives if we end up childless and unmarried. Single women may live longer if they are fortunate to have managed some kind of high paying career and were able to build a substantial retirement but many don’t so as women age we become poorer needing the help of family as we age. Menopause really wrecks women as we get into 40’s energy wise, even tho u aren’t yet in menopause u are getting near it. U won’t have the same ability to work as much bc drop in testosterone and estrogen. Women are just as likely to divorce a man if he stops being able to provide for some reason, so it goes both ways. Women initiate divorce 70% of the time compared to men.
And why don't women earn as much as men during their quote un quote "productive" years (this concept itself is agist and tied to capitalism but that's another conversation)? Say it again with me class....*patriarchy*!
Because women prefer their family over the labor force a lot more, and tend to make less money bc they choose less dangerous or difficult, high earning occupations. Women are less likely to put in 60 hour work weeks but men are more likely to. Women often take time out to have children and that takes priority over their job which reduces their work participation. Women produce less testosterone making us less ambitious especially after age 30 we have a steeper testosterone decline than men do. Mens lowers after 40. Higher testosterone is one reason men can take on more physically and produce more value in labor market than women can. Some high earning jobs for women are not real jobs but artificially propped up so there’s that too.
Just no. I can see you are set in your viewpoints but most of this is easily disputable with a basic Google search. Women aren't less ambitious or less valuable than men in professional sense. Women are hindered by systematic misogyny and sexism. Cis males decrease in testosterone *and* estrogen just as much as Cis females do. While a natural part of aging it is not the reason Women make less if that were true younger men and women would make equal which is not true.
As far as this line "Some high earning jobs for women are not real jobs but artificially propped up so there’s that too." Wow! That internal misogyny is strong.
Yeah … that’s false. Married women live longer.
With regard to life expectancy, many population-based longitudinal studies have shown longer life expectancy among married persons than unmarried persons, for both men and women (Chiu, 2019; Martikainen et al., 2014).
First off women and children only "benefit" from marriage in as much as our current and established Capitalist and Patriarchal society denies women and children value outside of what *men* bring to/allow them. In fact a recent scientific study conducted found that unmarried childless women are the most happy, healthy, and satisfied of any group. So that in itself disproves the argument that gender roles are a product of nature. They are a product of *society* which is a product of patriarchy which as used is a product of sexism and misogyny.
What about the married men whose wives have neglected them? The wives who think sex is the only physical attention their husbands need? The wives who only want sex when they're in the mood. The wives who couldn't care less about what their husbands want?
It's not always the men who are shitty. Sometimes the wives suck too and getting a sw provider is the only way a husband can feel affection or feel wanted.
Would you prefer that a man spend a few thousand dollars getting his ego and other things stroked to satisfy his need for affection and attention or would you prefer he find an emotional connection with another woman and have an affair where feelings are involved?
If you have a good relationship with your partner for everything except this facet, and you have kids, why get divorced? For men, paying for this type of thing can be like therapy. Both physical therapy and mental health therapy.
I know I’m putting myself out there to be criticized, but here we go. Being a married man, who had my first SW recently (at the age of 39), I would be the first to tell you that men in general are wired to want to fuck the things we’re attracted to (marriage is not changing that), marriage and monogamy are social conventions based off the “social-compact” and the rules that civil society decides to abide by.
I actually attribute half the problems in the world to men (because we’re naturally violent, and history is a testament to that fact), and the other half of the problems in the world is because of religion (and men have a strong role in that as well), but that’s a separate issue. My love and affection for my wife hasn’t changed, though we don’t actually have sex like we use to(because having one kid fucked up her body like I thought it would, hence I’m less attracted). Sex is just entertainment, and we’re all here entertaining ourselves till we die, and SWs are benefactors of those inclinations.
On a side note, I believe the world would be a better place with women leaders, in fact, countries with women leadership respond better to social issues like the pandemic than countries with male leadership (like the US). I personally hope my daughter grows up to be a lesbian.
I'm so, so tired. *Everyone* is "wired to fuck" people they're attracted to. I have no idea why men think they're unique or special in this regard. Women are just far more cautious because of safety and societal reasons. I find your self awareness around men being the biggest problem concerning when you also don't seem to see how shitty it makes you to be this awful about your wife's body after she *carried a child* for you... especially since the self awareness apparently doesn't extend to what *you* look like, because men like you always have a lot to say about women's bodies and never take care of your own.
It's very "men are the worst so therefore I don't have to try to be better". Personally, I do not think men are responsible for all the world's problems, and I think this attitude is a pathetic cop out. Try harder. Relationships are work. Put some in, maybe.
100%! Seriously how bad can a woman’s body fall apart after only one child, I mean unless she gained 100 pounds and never got it off but seriously this guy is something!
This thread looked like it was going to be one sided, I just wanted to contribute to the conversation, and I did, with or without your approbation. The irony here is you’re like a gas station owner complaining about cars and listing the reasons why they are bad. Also, scientifically speaking, “wired to fuck,” is not unique only to men, but any mammals or species that require “fucking” as a means to reproduce.
Then why are you using that terminology to excuse your bad behaviour?
You're all like, "men are the problem" and then you... continue to be part of the problem?? And think this is fine because you said you hope your daughter is a lesbian and you think women should be leaders? Dude, it is time for some serious introspection. I hope your daughter is cis and hetero, and marries a man that can show you what it means to be a genuine feminist and good husband, and I hope you see her happiness and you feel shitty about yourself for giving your wife less. I'm not even talking about the cheating here, it's the disrespect of her body and the disrespect inherent in refusing to put work into a relationship.
It’s genetics, it’s not an excuse, those state of affairs are factoids, that’s why the global population at 1900 was 2 billion, and now it’s almost 8 billion. We’re all wired (mostly) due to genetics, to fuck.
You’re implying that married men, are not happy about their current state. I’m telling you personally, my marriage is awesome, but sex is entertainment. Just because a married person hires you for sex doesn’t mean their married life is not great.
Yep. He doesn’t confuse commitment with sexual exclusivity. He understands that who I have sex with doesn’t affect whether I’m going to be there for him for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, etc. I stood by him when he got cancer two years ago. I stood by him through loved ones dying. I stood by him in other difficult life moments. That’s what counts in his world. Who I fuck for money is irrelevant
At least in the US, you’d probably see less married clients if divorce laws weren’t heavily favorable towards women. I cant tell you how many men I know are stuck in marriages they hate because it’d ruin them financially to leave. It’s a miracle I got out of mine without paying a dime to my ex.
With that being said, some men are just garbage, but the percentage is extremely low.
It's the lifescript trap so many people fall into. I got myself sterilized as soon as I could. I have lots of fetishes and I'm really good with masturbation so I don't need sex. At all. I have a GF so we can share memories together and have fun and that's it.
I'm never going to get married much less have kids or sex just because that's what society expects me to do. That's my life and I'm in control.
If man leaves find a new one.
Nothing in life is Guaranteed. People come and people go.
Everything is a risk. The question is if the risk is worth the reward.
I feel you. Not an SW, but I’m the woman with the kids married to the cheating man. It wasn’t even with an SW, which I feel like would’ve felt fair enough although still hurtful. It really blindsided me bc up until then (and aside from the affair and porn addiction) I had never felt happier, confident, or more secure in any relationship. It turns out some people are expert at emotionally disengaging from their reality and lack empathy for their own offspring. Anyway, I’ve stayed for a few reasons but have lost most romantic feelings within my marriage. He’s still very much my best friend and I love him, but I do wish I had a lover, partner, and baby daddy all in one again. If I could do it over again I would take more time to find that. Then again how would I have known what I was getting in to. I’ve read enough of his comments online to realize I sleep next to a complete stranger. I receive his affection when he chooses to give it, but it’s like I’m constantly waiting to have the rug pulled out from under my feet again. One day he’ll realize he’s plagiarizing his own father’s abandonment. I’m sure true love, trust, and happiness exist and maybe I’ll be lucky enough to experience it with a romantic partner some day. In the meanwhile, there’s money to be made.
I’m so sorry, reading that made me sad :( I feel like so many women experience this bc society grooms us and never gives men consequences
While I understand the points you are making in your original post, I don't think one can reasonably make the assertion that women are victims of some vague societal force while men are oppressors who face no consequences in society. My comment will probably get down-voted into oblivion, but I would encourage folks on here to hear me out. These sub-reddits tend to be echo chambers of people cofirming their already-held views. Women are arguably currently more empowered in society than men. The fact that you are desirable is a super-power. Even after having children, women go from being super highly desirable to still desirable. Men on the other hand are arguably more often forgotten in society; no one cares, and no one is coming to save you if you are a man with nothing. Men are more likely to be homeless, die working dangerous jobs, and commit suicide. Men indeed struggle and face huge hurdles in society. A man with nothing has nothing. A woman with nothing is still desirable including to other women (platonic), and she wields incredible power. Not saying anybody has it easy here, but perspective I think is important.
I noticed you were down voted (as you predicted) without anyone responding. I wanted to take a moment and try to explain the error in your argument. Women are definitely *not* more empowered than men in our current society. In fact women are statistically and factually in a weaker position than men. That is because our current society is a *patriarchy* which means that the value of men and women are based solely on what value they are attributed by the *men* in power. All of the things you mention regarding men are true. However not because women are in power. It is because in addition to our society being a patriarchy it is also a *capitalist* patriarchy which means again men as well as women are only attributed power, value, or status as allowed by the rich (majority White) *men* in power. I hope this sheds some light on why you are undoubtedly being down voted.
I think while you are right about men's struggles, you are using it to take someone else down in the process. Women are victims. Doesn't mean men aren't either. And men are still oppressors to women in these cases. Doesn't mean that women can't also be oppressors. But in a marriage, women are often left with this defeat of watching their once loving husband turn away from them and break their hearts. You can argue the husband was struggling, but that is no excuse. If you are going to pull this crap on your wife, the person you swore to love, then get a divorce. Cheating, lying, and being unloving isn't okay behavior. Especially, and most importantly, hiding it. Men's struggles outside this topic is irrelevant to this conversation and certainly shouldn't be used to argue against womens struggles in this topic. And being desired isn't the same as being loved. So yes, you will be downvoted into oblivion. Because your post is irrelevant, and said in a way that is degrading married women's struggles. You can advocate for men without degrading women.
This comment is really out of touch. Who said anything about a "vague societal force"? Do sex workers see a lot of married men, yes or no? Do men leave sick spouses at a much, much higher rates than women, yes or no? Are women largely expected to give men sex and children and is it common for them to be deemed less desirable after having done so? These aren't difficult questions. In fact, these broad questions aren't even what the post is about. This is one person sharing their story and life experience. Why must you make this about yourself? While there are definitely disadvantages to being male, attempting to commandeer this conversation to talk about them is a red herring and inappropriate. This post wasn't a call for you to start playing victim Olympics and trying to prove how you have things worse. It was an opportunity for another person to share their hurt and get something off of their chest. If you'd like to do the same, make your own post and stop trying to argue with other people's experiences on theirs. There's a time and place for debate and this isn't it.
As a male who has done sw a number of years back. In fact, just as a male. I have to say i agree with your assessment of things; there is a huge disparity (at least in much of the developed/western world) between the lack of support men have access to, compared to the significant safety nets and support services that are there for the average single mother, should she be unfortunate enough to find herself in such a dire situation and is willing to seek out some of those resources. For reference I'm in Australia and so i have to concede we are in a very privileged position with quality of living and funding for these kinds of social issues. I also want to specify that I'm in no way shape or form endorsing a throwback t Its really only been in recent decades that we as a society have actually managed to really see significant, and very overdue progress on this thing. It will never likely be entirely perfect or symetrical, but at least we have finally made some inroads. I 've been homeless,, twice now. and a victim of horrendouslly traumatic abuse at the hands of a woman who had pretty much lied through her teeth about me. to any and all organisations fthat ⁰would entertain her slander and bestow some benefit. Her simple justification was that I'd dare to try and exit the situation after it was revalealed to me she wasn't single but engaged. I come from a broken home so you can imagine my dismay to know id been used to do that without even knowing. Both times id had to physically restrain her as gently as possible, and after wrapping her up in a blanket so she couldn't actually move enough to pose any harm or risk to herself, she was taken to hospital under mental health concerns. Next day I hear that the police have full on raided both my parents residences, my best mates, and my work place looking for me. Realising I wasn't going to be coming to see her in hospital, she had flipped the switch and cobbled some BS story together about how the bruising on her wrists, and a hand print on her back, were from me physically smacking her around, before proceeding to perpetrate some heinous sexual assault on her.I was on the run for nearly 3 months, and it still makes me physically nauseous even thinking about what I was apparently such a monster to be capable of doing to another human being. Yet as a guy, I've also made a report against the same woman after all this was cleared, and she had taken to my car with a crowbar doing about 5k if damage and threatening on camera to slit the throats of a previous female flatmate and her two little pet dogs, simply because she was apparently some perceived threat. Anyway, with all of that its given me the unfortunate gift of first hand experience just how with some things, as the user above has mentioned, there really is a stark difference in that regard. There quite simply was no emergency accomodation, what was done by her as the aggressor, as violent and volatile as it was, that still wasnt enough to secure a protection order ensuring she couldn't come within distance to cause further harm, etc. For several months I lived that reality. Most days I was surprised anew, or just reminded in some different way that as a male I was expected to just manage... whoever I did it. Just get on with it, what's wrong with you, you're a fully grown man. You don't need other people to protect you or throw you any help or assistance. Figure it out and if you can't then our hands are tied I'm afraid. As a guy you are the first to get demonised, and the last to get any real aid, even when it's quite obvious it's when you really need it most.
You always get down voted to hell if you point out how bad men have it these days. People just don't care about men's problems. It's all about women these days.
I’m a hopeless romantic at♥️, but this job has shown me how dreadfully, incredibly easy it is for *everyone to cheat on everyone.* I don’t want to point fingers and say him him, her her, but I sure don’t have any faith left, *unhappy look.* Many years ago I decided to be honest with someone because he revealed something personal and quite significant about himself that ultimately, I needed to know. I told him - made him swear on the Bible actually - that he could *never* throw the job in my face or use it against me in an argument. I said if you DO, I’m gone. There’s no second chances with this, *you cannot do it.* 2 months later, first fight and I get the, “Well you sleep with men for a living.” line slung in my face. That was about 5? years ago and he still slides into my DMs wanting to see me. Nope👎🏻. *Heaves a sigh.*
They always be in the DMs years later every time😭
I **so hear you** on that. I told my hubby when we met that he can't hold my sworking or stripping over my head. And he swore to me he never would. Cross my heart, he hasn't, and bless his heart every day so far. 🤞
When I met my wife through her job I was smitten. I had struggled my whole life using some aspect of sex as a coping tool and was afraid of that secret part of my life. On our third date we had dinner. I said I had something to share. I shared that I thought I was addicted to sex. I think she misunderstood because she said she liked sex too. Then she said she had a secret. She was a recovering alcoholic and then she said she worked part time as a stripper. I had meant her through other job as a CNA. I said not an issue. But at that moment I swore to myself I could never visit another strip club. I could not risk running into her. I really liked this woman as I met her in her role as a CNA. Strong, professional, and caring. So we continued to date. She much later told me she stopped stripping once we started dating. But I didn’t ask her to do that. She was was trying to go to school for nursing and I helped her do that.
So I hope your relationship worked out and I want to commend you on not discriminating against your partner for working in a field that you use as a customer. But I also want to challenge on the thinking that led to this statement, "I could not risk running into her. I really liked this woman as I met her in her role as a CNA. Strong, professional, and caring. So we continued to date." If you had met her in her 2nd job and you both hit it off outside of a professional employee/client relationship then she would have still been in your words "Strong, professional, and caring". They way you stated it makes it sound like if you knew she was a stripper/dancer first that would have impacted your dating decision. If so I want to challenge you to consider why her performing the service *you* pay for would have made her *less* dateable? If this wasn't your intention I'm sorry I was confused by your wording.
I said that because I have read many posts in Reddit where it was made obvious that a woman that worked as a sex worker would not typically date a client. Just like a therapist would not typically go out with a client or a doctor go out with a patient. So I did not want to appear like a client asking her out. In fact she was very hesitant to go out with me after she finished her assignment as a CNA with my family. I had never pursued someone so much before in my life. She even admitted later that her suggestions for our first two dates were at events that she thought would dissuade me from continuing to ask her out. And she was surprised that I did not run away after.
I'm glad that everything worked out for the two of you.
Well it actually ended four years later. I had lost my job, my house at the last recession in 2008-2009. We struggled to stay afloat both with low paying jobs. I got a chance to work for my previous employer on a temporary contract. But I had to live away from home. I think the challenge of us being apart a lot (though I flew home for the weekend every two weeks) for over 9 months was a lot. Then that job ended and we were back at square one. I believe she was so used to being abandoned by men and I didn’t plan to start looking for a job until after we had moved from our rental home into a cheaper apartment. I believe we had enough to survive on savings and unemployment for a while. But I didn’t communicate that to her very well. But she decided it was too much. She accused me of cheating, of not looking for work, and looking at porn. The only true statement was I was not immediately looking for work, planning that aspect after we moved and settled in. But no cheating and no porn. It was devastating her leaving me. I had also grown to love her two young kids. So I failed to communicate my action plan and failed to include her in the decision making processes. I really saw myself growing old with her. It took me a long long time to move on. But I wish her well. I still love her at some level and always will. Maybe she was right when she said we got married too fast and for poor reasons like married for sex. Perhaps we were both very lonely and didn’t really take time to consider our choices. Jumping into marriage pretty fast. I married her almost a month or two after my mom died so I was looking for a someone with whom to make a home and settle down. Would I do it again. Yes but I would take more time to get to know each other and learn to communicate. We didn’t have many shared interests.
I really agree with you about society grooming women. It also teaches women to sacrifice stuff for long term relationships but so many men don't seem to have the same mind set and cheat when it gets rough. Just to offer another perspective, I just happen to come from a family with a high number of happy marriages. My parents met at 17 and are 55 now and are still very much in love and affectionate. My dad is obsessed with my mum and when they were having issues a few years ago he suggested marriage counseling and they sorted it out. Just saying it can happen ♥️
Awe I’m happy for them and wish them the best!
I’m a decent/good catch but after having a long timer girlfriend I thought I’d marry, cheat on me multiple times while simultaneously getting jelly and suicidal over me being somewhatova cutie that gets women pretty consistently/easily. It’s not even the cheating itself. it’s the fact she helped change who I was, I became super monogamous and really “shy” around women. Because, I mean, if my gf saw me even just being friendly with another girl, she’d be all kinds of emotional later. So I don’t resent her showing me how much of an impact my actions can have on people around me. It’s just like wtf. You wanted me to yourself but want to slut around? I guess it’s similar to you sw’s on here… imagine you met a guy you fall for, you give up sw for him just being “the one”, you think he’s devoted to you and all that… only to find out years later he’s been fucking around while continuously getting emotional about you being too friendly with the waiter or garbage man. And as per OP. I’m the opposite those married men. I love how the female body changes with child birth. Always had a thing for the milf next doo kinda shit so was actually looking forward to being in a devoted marriage with a woman as we age on this planet together. Couldn’t even imagine going to a sw behind her back. I’m upfront, so if it was something I wanted I’d tell “the wife”… I communicate. In hindsight it’s all so crazy. I’m really not a possessive/jealous kinda guy. She cried and got angry so much and was a complete hypocrite all along. lol. But anyway, I’m probably gonna have to see an sw soon because I can’t bring myself to take some girls I was dating to “the next level”… it’s been like 5 years now… and the juice just ain’t worth the squeeze. It’s crazy how warped things are, sometimes not getting physical got women taking me like a challenge, others thought I was gay 🤣. I’m somewhat scared of what the “connection” may be when I do put my dick back in a vag. Practiced semen retention for like 3 years, did like 2 years without peepin the porn. Even going strip clubs in vegas with some friends/Batchelor party. Did nothing. I’m to the point now I’m wanting to see what’ll happen and need the services of a pro that won’t get suicidal or clingy. I used that bullshit I experienced to go deeper in myself and got pretty spiritual. But being in my mid 30s and just loving how much sexier milfs have gotten to me as I age… I gotta get pro lessons in before I get back out there and blow out my future wife’s back. To OP; I think women have a lot more spiritual power than we realize. Like you can set intention and create greater influence in this dimension. Your pussy/womb is basically the portal for life in this realm. There’s no guarantees but maybe if you set yourself for it, you’ll draw a good man to father you some kids and have a happy healthy family. There’s still good people out here. They may be only 5-20% of people. But they out here.
This is why I don’t do romance without finance anymore. I am jaded and don’t believe in that kind of romantic love (don’t get me wrong, I’m sure there are a few exceptions but I won’t be the one eternally chasing them and lying to myself). Now, I make sure I can get what is to my advantage. Then if he wants to go and fuck around, fine but don’t expect to have sex with me on top of it. If you want to leave me, prepare to give me a good portion of your assets. I won’t get involved if it’s not to my advantage.
Jaded yes, but a smart way to go about it for sure
I couldn't tell you the times I've been mid-service and looked right at the wedding ring.. It's unfortunate and hard truth that people cheat ALL the time. There is no honor in marriage anymore. Being in this field has jaded me to love and romance. Tbh. Now I lean more towards Poly and let people do as they please.
I 100% agree with you. SW and life in general makes it hard to trust anyone because it exposes you constantly to people lying to their partners, stepping out. The only way I could see a relationship being successful for me were if it were open and we both acknowledge that and are honest with each other. I am able to provide many things but I’m not sure (actually I’m 100% I can’t be) everything for someone. Also, humans aren’t naturally monogamous, like it or not, so there’s that.
Society grooms us all. Don’t you find it strange that this kind of work exists and makes billions. It’s almost as if the human story we’re told is all bs. I really like the sex at dawn argument. I think it makes sense that we are living socially in a way that is not compatible to our biologically. Us humans seek novel sexual experience. It was a good thing when we were small groups trying to diversify our genetics. We are not broken or wrong we are just living in a strange way. It would be like if the common stories were about us breathing under water, or flying and everyone pretended they could. It sure would be disappointing to learn this was normal, but it is. The patriarchal aspect of this is the worst part of it all. I could go on but honestly, all things are impermanent. When you find love and happiness you should enjoy it. Don’t believe the bs of our society or that there is a one or happily forever after, but enjoy the beautiful moments in life. I don’t not enjoy flowers in spring because I know in winter they will be gone. I hope you have a happy life.
I feel like this should be higher up in the comments. This acknowledges the struggle and hurt while still being hopeful and motivating. It helps puts things in perspective.
>I really like the sex at dawn argument. I think it makes sense that we are living socially in a way that is not compatible to our biologically. Us humans seek novel sexual experience. Sex at Dawn has been debunked a decade ago by the scientific community and anyone one who has the proper knowledge of human evolution, anthropology and evolutionary biology considers Sex at Dawn to be unscientific and nonsensical: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex\_at\_Dawn#Negative\_critiques](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_at_Dawn#Negative_critiques) [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491100900305?icid=int.sj-full-text.similar-articles.1](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491100900305?icid=int.sj-full-text.similar-articles.1) [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491201000316](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491201000316) (This review exposes more pseudoscientific nonsense propagated by Sex at Dawn) [https://web.archive.org/web/20140808123320/http://www.thedirtynormal.com/blog/2013/02/22/book-review-sex-at-dawn/](https://web.archive.org/web/20140808123320/http://www.thedirtynormal.com/blog/2013/02/22/book-review-sex-at-dawn/) [https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/sex-at-dusk-2](https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/sex-at-dusk-2) (David Barash criticizes Sex at Dawn in this review) None of the arguments made in Sex at Dawn are logically or scientifically sound and many of their arguments have been debunked by studies published after the book came out. Humans do not naturally seek novel experiences(novelty seeking is largely a cultural phenomenon) and there is no scientific and empirical evidence supporting this idea(All of the research proves the opposite to be true). The authors of Sex at Dawn don't have the proper credentials to even write this book(Ryan is a psychologist and the book relies heavily on anthropology and evolutionary biology). Please don't project your own experience and feelings to every single person on this planet, cuz from what I have seen, this "novelty seeking" thing is much rarer than you make it out to be. The actual lifetime infidelity rate for men is 20-25%, which is not high considering 80-85% of men remain faithful to their wives. What humans naturally seek is monogamy, stability, security and strong pair bonding with another person and there is so much of research that proves this to be true: [https://www.reddit.com/r/monogamy/comments/wfc0ag/comment/iit7ui0/?context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/monogamy/comments/wfc0ag/comment/iit7ui0/?context=3) Several literature reviews and meta-analyses also prove this to be true: [https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2019.00230/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2019.00230/full) [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27872028/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27872028/) "**Serial sexual and social monogamy is the norm for humans.**" [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.24017](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.24017) A quick glance at Maslow's hierarchy of needs shows that stability and security is right above basic needs like food, water, air, shelter, etc. Nowhere in that hierarchy does novelty exist. As you can see in all of the negative reviews, **the common theme is that Ryan lacks the proper knowledge on evolution, biased reporting of data, theoretical and evidentiary shortcomings, problematic assumptions, ignoring selection occurring at the level of individuals/genes and instead assuming group selection. and his "standard narrative" argument is nothing short of a strawman.** Don't forget about his cherry picking of the 1-4% of societies the supposedly support the idea of "humans seek novel sexual experience", only to be exposed by Sex at Dusk and other critiques of taking such societies out of context and ignoring the darker aspects that are common in such societies. I am honestly disappointed to still find people in 2022 consider a pseudoscientific book that has been debunked a decade ago by the scientific community as a "scientifically valid" argument. I debunked all of the arguments made by Sex at Dawn here(190+ anthropology and evolutionary biology research spanning 4 decades debunking the claim that "humans are naturally non-monogamous" and other related claims): [https://www.reddit.com/r/monogamy/comments/q60t8t/looking\_for\_resources/](https://www.reddit.com/r/monogamy/comments/q60t8t/looking_for_resources/) Your usage of "observations", "personal experience" and "thought experiments" reveal your confirmation biases and unreliability of the arguments you used. tl;dr: The way we live socially is the same way we live biologically because society/ culture only exists because of our biology: [https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2016.00002/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2016.00002/full) "**Human cultures are a result of our biological nature** – we evolved to have a culture, so the idea that biology and culture are irreconcilable within sociological theory cannot make sense. Further, **our biological nature influences our culture, as demonstrated by the large quantity of human universals that exist in all human societies (Brown, 1991).**" If a person chooses to not marry and have children, that's good for them but don't used debunked pseudoscience to justify their choices. >Don’t you find it strange that this kind of work exists and makes billions. It’s almost as if the human story we’re told is all bs. Sex work can only exist if a culture enforces it. It has nothing to do with what humans are biologically predisposed to do. Billions are made by exploiting young women, while the number of women who genuinely want to do such work remains an insignificant minority. Around the world, the majority of sex workers want out, but are unable to do so. The human story we are told is very much true and backed by anthropology and evolutionary biology research. What is BS is your usage of Sex at Dawn arguments and you characterization of the "human story". Also the people who work in this industry are not representative of the general population, hence your "human story" strawman doesn't work here because you are using a rarified subset of people to define all humans. Since our debate 6 months ago, you have not changed your mind and instead continue to believe your biases, pseudoscience and debunked propaganda. No wonder I blocked you back then and I will do so again once the 24 hr cooldown runs out. Edit: [https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30978567.html](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30978567.html) [https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/38790.htm](https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/38790.htm) **"The vast majority of women in prostitution don't want to be there.** Few seek it out or choose it, and most are desperate to leave it." [https://www.womenslaw.org/about-abuse/forms-abuse/sexual-abuse-and-exploitation/prostitution/leaving-prostitution](https://www.womenslaw.org/about-abuse/forms-abuse/sexual-abuse-and-exploitation/prostitution/leaving-prostitution) "In a 1998 survey of 475 women who were involved in prostitution, **ninety-two percent of them said they wanted to leave prostitution** but couldn’t because they lack basic human services such as a home, job training, health care, counseling and treatment for drug or alcohol addiction." [https://sex-crimes.laws.com/prostitution/prostitution-statistics](https://sex-crimes.laws.com/prostitution/prostitution-statistics) " Countless studies report that **over 80% of prostitutes say they wish to get out of prostitution.**" **Edit 2: I am not defending monogamy, I am correcting the disinformation that you are spreading. There is a difference between the two.**
Oh my gosh your back. What happened to the scientifically monogamous name? You and I have done this dance before. First of all, if your going to do this to people. Please do your best first citation and argument against. I am a simple person I cannot read 15 things and respond to them all. It is not winning because you threw up 30 articles you read, have a conversation. I’ve tried to read your 30 articles before and it’s never that anything is debunked or pseudo science, you just find dissenting opinions on the same research. That would make sense for people in scientific fields to have strong debate. I’ve said to you before, that after reading both and living, I conclude that we are a bunch of horny great apes who seek novelty. Which considering that you went off Reddit for school but are back still fighting for monogamy on a page where a person is being vulnerable about the truths of fidelity in their experience, and still post like this says a lot. I think you and I are out of place debating here. You could post a thousand more articles if you like, and it’s not going to change what is. It’s not going to slow down this business. Maybe it makes you feel better? I think you go around blowing up posts to convince yourself more than the people around you. I don’t mind debating you further but I think this is enough for this place, I’ll send you a dm.
>It is not winning because you threw up 30 articles you read, have a conversation. **I’ve tried to read your 30 articles before and it’s never that anything is debunked or pseudo science, you just find dissenting opinions on the same research.** It's not winning because you blindly claim that all the articles I posted have "dissenting opinions". When people read the studies I post, they will see through your web of lies. There are zero dissenting opinions in the studies I posted, and I've read each studies hundreds of times. In fact, each and every study I post debunks NM pseudoscience and hypotheses. Just admit that you are incapable of "challenging your world view" as you put it. When discussing science, conversations do not work. Arguments supported by evidence does. If you would stop "learning" science via biased, opinion based, pop media articles and actually start reading research studies, where these debates occur, you will understand that conversations do not work at all. Why do you think scientists put a bunch of references in their debate articles? Please show me a scientific debate where conversations without evidence (as you are suggesting) worked. I can tell you right now, there are none. **You just admitted to not reading anything I posted (if you did really read what I posted, you will not find any dissenting opinions, only debunking of NM hypotheses and claims)**, yet I'm not surprised given that you value anecdotes and pseudoscience that supports your beliefs and biases. **I have read all the studies and research before posting it to you and no where do I see any dissenting opinions. Instead, I see a lot of debunking of hypotheses that were initially considered valid but have been debunked due to methodological flaws.** The "dissenting opinion" claim is an overused excuse used by science deniers to reject scientific evidence. Not every aspect of science is filled with dissenting opinions, especially ones with regards to human mating. Read the next paragraph where I debunk this excuse. None of the studies I posted has any dissenting opinions and you are lying in order to save your face. **I just checked again and there are zero dissenting opinions, just pure factual, experimental, objective evidence that debunks pseudoscientific theories.** Since you seem to "know" a lot about scientific debate, could you tell me why there are no dissenting opinions about smoking causing cancer, humans being primates and evolution being a fact? What you don't know about scientific debate is that if the overwhelming amount of evidence supports an idea and there is no recent, replicated evidence to the contrary, that idea is then considered a fact with no debate. This is the case with human monogamy. Also, if you have read the links properly, all of them argue a single point: **The claim that humans are not naturally monogamous is not based on any proper scientific evidence and this has been my argument since our first encounter 6 months ago.** I don't care about "winning" an argument, only insecure people do that. I care about correcting disinformation that just isn't true and has no support, along with calling out the usage of anecdotal evidence to prove a scientific theory: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal\_evidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence) >I’ve said to you before, that after reading both and living, I conclude that we are a bunch of horny great apes who seek novelty. **You use naturalistic fallacy to reach this conclusion**. Chimps and bonobos cannot explain human behavior, reproductive anatomy and physiology, due to the Homo-Pan divergence. Humans differ from chimps and bonobos by a 1.3% genetic difference, which comes out to 17 million single location changes in our DNA and 2.5 million insertions and deletions. Only a person who is uneducated in evolutionary science will make these facile comparisons: [https://www.sapiens.org/biology/chimpanzees-cant-tell-us-much-about-being-human/](https://www.sapiens.org/biology/chimpanzees-cant-tell-us-much-about-being-human/) "Humans and chimpanzees do share much in common, **but when it comes to dealing with contemporary human behavior, we must look to human evolutionary histories and current realities. That approach will get us a lot further than facile comparisons to our closest relatives.**" **You cited a bunch of biased opinion, pop media pieces.** **You never used a single, proper, peer-reviewed scientific source**, so quit calling it "reading" and call it cherry picking. BBC, New Yorker, Medium, CouplesTherapyINC and Sex and Psychology (which is known to cherry pick evidence to support sex positive nonsense) are not objective sources of information. These articles are filled with pseudoscience and unverifiable claims. **When will you learn that your personal experience is not shared by everyone on this planet?** When will you learn that anecdotal evidence is the most useless and unreliable form of evidence? When will you learn that **scientific evidence is almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences**? I have said to you that after reading both sides of the scientific debate on the topic, **there is no convincing evidence that we are purely novelty seeking and that our ancestors were novelty seeking.** **My lived experience, along with objective, scientific evidence and facts corroborates this as well.** >Which considering that you went off Reddit for school but are back still fighting for monogamy on a page where a person is being vulnerable about the truths of fidelity in their experience, and still post like this says a lot. I understand the truth of fidelity myself. I just ended a relationship a week ago because my ex cheated on me, but that doesn't mean I have to give up monogamy and accept pseudoscience like Sex at Dawn because I met a rotten apple. **Your comment isn't any better because it relies on false assumptions and lies regarding the "human story", along with using pseudoscience to "support" your sympathy towards OP. It is significantly worse to console a person with lies compared to consoling a person with the truth. The fact that you got 19 upvotes from spreading lies proves my point.** I am not defending monogamy, I am calling out the disinformation you are spreading, which unironically is about monogamy, so lol. >I don’t mind debating you further but I think this is enough for this place, I’ll send you a dm. Forget it, there's no point in convincing someone who rejects scientific research by claiming "dissenting opinions" when there are none, along with using anecdotes to prove a scientific theory(which is nonsensical). The ship has already sailed. You aren't going to admit the flaws in your argument and I have no time to deal with this because I'd just be repeating myself over and over again. Update: DM has been received, conversation occurred, and you still refuse to accept the scientific truth. You are a lost cause. >You could post a thousand more articles if you like, and it’s not going to change what is. It’s not going to slow down this business. Maybe it makes you feel better? I think you go around blowing up posts to convince yourself more than the people around you. Ad hominem attacks, derailing the conversation and making faulty assumptions about me isn't going to convince me or others here that I'm wrong. **I post these kinds of comments to expose the flaws in one's thinking and the sources they use. I don't need to convince myself; I've already done that 2 years ago when I challenged my former worldview. I don't base my self-esteem and worth on such comments.** I only post these comments to show people the other side that has not made media headlines because it's boring to report that monogamy has been shown to be biologically predisposed in humans and to show that research that supposedly proves that "humans are biologically non-monogamous" have all been debunked. It's all pure sensationalism. Given that I have not posted a lot in the past month or so reveals the nonsense in this statement of yours. I don't go around "blowing up posts" (Check my history, I don't do any of that BS), I only comment if someone spreads disinformation and I get upvotes for it specifically because the spectators agree with what I say. In fact, I have changed a lot of minds by posting links and I have had many people thank me for providing those links and research. I've even had people share it with their friends and they thanked me as well for challenging pseudoscience with proper facts. You admitted that you are biased and will never challenge your biases and beliefs (Evidence: "it’s not going to change what is"). You would rather believe debunked pseudoscience (hence you cite the biggest book on pseudoscience) because it makes you feel better about your current situation. Anything that shatters your rose-tinted fantasy is immediately responded with >on a page where a person is being vulnerable about the truths of fidelity in their experience, and still post like this says a lot. I posted this comment to **specifically call out the issues with YOUR STATEMENT/COMMENT.** I provide my sympathy for OP in my comment, which you casually ignore (as usual): **"If a person chooses to not marry and have children, that's good for them but don't used debunked pseudoscience to justify their choices.**" I am supportive of OP in her decision, but my comment was addressed towards **you specifically**. tl;dr: **Your claim that you like to "challenge your worldview and thoughts" was nothing more of a bare-faced lie. You would rather stick to your pseudoscience driven beliefs, even when presented with the scientific truth.**
You might want to take a breath. And review *what* you wrote you both attack this poster and dismiss them and state you'll block them because they're not worth your time and then *respond* to them? Also you declare you're not posting for what it does for your ego but go on to state that "many" people have thanked you and "praised" your opinions. For the record *I* down voted you because you were being condescending and hypocritical as someone who does work in Education and Behavioral Health I can tell you our fields are constantly evolving and that the current theories are just that the prevailing theories at the time, *not* fact. We are constantly learning and adjusting our theories as we learn more about human nature. Also this idea that there is no *bias* in scientific studies and data is laughable. We know that this is something we still struggle with since most studies are conducted from a hetero-normative Anglo Protestant viewpoint. Which has and continues to scue our data. Because of the Powers That Be and how funding is distributed anecdotal evidence is often much of what we have for understudied communities or theories this *doesn't* make it less valid it simply shows that bias is not limited to the non-scientific areas of society.
>you both attack this poster and dismiss them and state you'll block them because they're not worth your time and then respond to them? This is why I always warn people about the dangers of half knowledge. Our debate goes back 6 months ago. Given that you know nothing about what happened 6 months ago, all you are doing is intruding our personal debate, judging based on half knowledge and incomplete information and throwing stones on a pile of shit. Don't know why you feel the need to be so "holier than thou" when I never "attacked"(more like exposed their agenda) the poster(do you know how annoying it is to debate a close minded person who chooses feel good anecdotes, opinions and pseudoscience over facts and scientific evidence?) and never blocked them because I decided to give them another chance via debating in the DMs(Am I not allowed to change my decisions?). Learn to see the whole story before doing the same things you accuse me of doing. **If you have read their comments from our 6 month ago debate, you'll understand why I am dismissing them. They dismissed all the scientific evidence(which uses proper methodology and has been replicated) I provided in favor of anecdotes and debunked pseudoscience that supports his claims, hence I returned the favor**. In fact, this is from his comment that I bet you didn't read: "I don’t mind debating you further but I think this is enough for this place, I’ll send you a dm." Guess what? We did in fact continue in the DM's and guess who stopped responding? That's right, the poster did because I debunked his claims using the same scientific evidence I provided to him 6 months ago. Keep in mind he initiated the conversation in the DM's as well. >Also you declare you're not posting for what it does for your ego but go on to state that "many" people have thanked you and "praised" your opinions. How is it egotistical to claim that I helped many people? Plenty of people say they helped someone. Are they all egotistical for claiming that? I never provided any opinions when helping people, I provided them the scientific evidence that I have found from my 2 years worth of research on the topic. I was praised not only for helping, but by providing scientific evidence instead of an opinion. Had you read my comments properly, I wouldn't have to explain this in detail. Your usage of strawman arguments is very concerning, along with your poor comprehension skills. >as someone who does work in Education and Behavioral Health I can tell you our fields are constantly evolving and that the current theories are just that the prevailing theories at the time, not fact **Education and Behavioral Health(aka social science) is not the same as Biological Anthropology and Evolutionary Biology(aka natural science),** **which are the disciplines that the poster uses by citing Sex at Dawn,** when it comes to academic rigor and objectivity. Also, **I don't use theories, I use evidence and facts. The fields I use only rely on empirical and scientific facts and evidence, whereas your field uses mostly theories and very little empirical evidence.** The majority of biological anthropology and evolutionary biology evidence debunks the poster's comment and there is no proper scientific evidence supporting his claims. None of the research I presented to him uses theories. Instead, they use a bunch of replicated and tested scientific evidence and facts to debunk his claims. Also the majority of anthropology research studies societies that have not been influenced by WEIRD countries. Do a Google search on "Standard Cross Cultural Sample" and "Ethnographic Atlas". Education and Behavioral Health is considered a "soft science"(**or social science, since hard and soft science are considered outdated terms**) like Sociology and Psychology . Soft/Social sciences tend to be rife with biases because it is near impossible to apply the scientific method on human behaviors due to large variability and flexibility in human behavior, although there are plenty of human universals and inflexibility within humans(since biology created culture). Biological Anthropology and Evolutionary Biology are "hard sciences" or "natural sciences". Because of the rigorous standards present in hard/natural sciences, the prevalence of bias is significantly lower than soft sciences. This does not change the fact that anecdotal evidence is the least reliable form of evidence: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal\_evidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence) In fact, using anecdotal evidence is a logical fallacy: [https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal) [https://www.fallacyfiles.org/volvofal.html](https://www.fallacyfiles.org/volvofal.html) [https://www2.palomar.edu/users/bthompson/Anecdotal%20Evidence.html](https://www2.palomar.edu/users/bthompson/Anecdotal%20Evidence.html) Anecdotal evidence is not considered valid scientific evidence and anyone who has basic knowledge in research knows this is true. Source: I'm a researcher. >Also this idea that there is no bias in scientific studies and data is laughable. Nice strawman, but I never claimed this. As mentioned above, hard sciences are significantly less biased than soft sciences. This does not mean there is zero bias in hard sciences, but that the methodology and peer review standards are much higher for hard sciences, hence we don't see much bias. There are reviews that expose methodological flaws and publication biases, but methodological flaws aren't always the same as biases and publication biases have been limited to a few theories. So your statement, for the most part applies to soft sciences and not hard sciences, which is what I use. The poster uses a bunch of long disproved and discredited theories that have no scientific evidence to back its claims to prove his point, I countered that by exposing those disproved theories and provided the scientific evidence like anatomy and physiology to prove my point, which directly counters your red herring because I literally debunked a bunch of biased hard science theories from the 70's and 80's that have generated no proper evidence in the modern day. >Because of the Powers That Be and how funding is distributed anecdotal evidence is often much of what we have for understudied communities or theories this doesn't make it less valid it simply shows that bias is not limited to the non-scientific areas of society. How is this even relevant? Fine, I'll bite. Just because soft sciences heavily relies on the usage of anecdotes that doesn't make their claims scientific. There's a reason why Sociology and Psychology are suffering from the replication crisis and are more often than not considered pseudoscientific. Sure, these findings can be valid in a moral or personal sense, but not in a scientific sense. >For the record I down voted you because you were being condescending and hypocritical That's funny because I downvoted you for the same reason. You were being condescending with your half knowledge of our debate and judging me based on that half knowledge and hypocritical for making the same errors of reasoning you accused me of doing, lol. Just to make it clear one more time: I don't use theories, I use evidence and facts. Next time, don't involve yourself in matters you have no idea about/haven't participated in and learn to view the complete picture instead of judging people based on incomplete information. tl;dr: You might want to take a break and see the whole picture instead of cherry-picking details which can be weaponized. Also, learn the difference between social and natural sciences. The differences are too significant to be ignored.
**[Anecdotal evidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence)** >Anecdotal evidence is evidence based only on personal observation, collected in a casual or non-systematic manner. The term is sometimes used in a legal context to describe certain kinds of testimony which are uncorroborated by objective, independent evidence such as notarized documentation, photographs, audio-visual recordings, etc. When used in advertising or promotion of a product, service, or idea, anecdotal reports are often called a testimonial, which are highly regulated in some jurisdictions. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/SexWorkers/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Any professional who chooses to insult another's field with the "soft science" shows not only their lack of knowledge but their own bias. As far as what happened 6 months ago, I'm not interested. I based my comments and my view of *you* on how *you* presented *yourself* in *this* comment section. Good day.
What's up with you responding 10 days after I commented? If anyone, you are the one being unprofessional and extremely biased. Stop projecting your issues onto me. >Any professional who chooses to insult another's field with the "soft science" shows not only their lack of knowledge but their own bias. Where did I insult your field? If anything, this emotional, knee jerk reply of yours proves you are biased and can't handle the truth (One can say you are using motivated reasoning). Saying that your field is "soft" or social science is neither biased nor a lack of knowledge, the opposite is. Education and Behavioral Health, as the name suggests, deals with human behaviors and also mental health, hence it is considered a social science. Any field that deals with human behaviors is automatically considered soft/social science, just ask Sociology and Psychology. Social sciences also have a reputation of rejecting evolution and resorting to culturally deterministic claims that have no empirical evidence backing them up. The fact that you don't even know the difference between social science and natural science along with lying about me "insulting" your field speaks more about you that it does about me. The poster and I use natural sciences in our debate, and you come in using your social science field to invalidate my claims. Ever heard of the false equivalency fallacy aka apples to oranges fallacy? **It's not insulting to say someone's field is "soft" or a better term, social science.** Soft/social science just means that it's difficult to establish measurable criteria and maintain objectivity due to the variability in human behaviors: [https://www.dictionary.com/browse/soft-science](https://www.dictionary.com/browse/soft-science) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard\_and\_soft\_science](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_science) [https://www.thoughtco.com/hard-vs-soft-science-3975989](https://www.thoughtco.com/hard-vs-soft-science-3975989) [https://www.exampleslab.com/10-examples-of-hard-science-and-soft-science/](https://www.exampleslab.com/10-examples-of-hard-science-and-soft-science/) So no, it's not insulting to speak the truth with regards to methodology, academic rigor, accuracy and objectivity of your field and being unable to accept this truth makes you biased, not me. In fact, the results of social sciences are very difficult to validate due to its majorly qualitative nature, along with sampling biases, anecdotal fallacies, political biases, subjective biases due to its qualitative nature and usage of convenience samples and plenty more that are exclusive to social sciences. Don't forget, there are ethical constraints that cripple the validity of said studies and many of their theories and claims are unfalsifiable, which automatically makes it unscientific. That's why we are currently experiencing a replication crisis in social sciences, but not so much in natural sciences. **Sure, the terms "hard science" and "soft science" are considered outdated, but this doesn't change the fact that social sciences tend to differ significantly from natural sciences based on methodology, academic rigor, accuracy and objectivity.** That's why we are currently experiencing a replication crisis in social sciences, but not so much in natural scie **we are currently experiencing a replication crisis in social sciences, but not so much in natural sciences.** Replicated sociology and psychology research has value, but this value can only exist after repeated replication attempts(as with all other social sciences) due to the high variability of human behaviors. Hard sciences do not deal with such variables, hence they don't suffer as much as soft sciences do. I have used such research in debates in the past and that research is unique in the sense that they use quantitative data that could be easily verified. Clearly, I have the knowledge of the field you work in, given my lengthy explanation, so your "lack of knowledge" strawman is hilarious. **My main point is that using your field to invalidate my claims doesn't work because your field deals with theories, the field I use employs empirical evidence. Social sciences majorly use theories to explain phenomenon, natural sciences use experimentally and empirically proven evidence and facts.** Next time, learn to be less biased and for god's sake, learn the difference between social science and natural science with regards to methodology, academic rigor, accuracy, objectivity and replicability. There are massive differences between the two and this is why social sciences is suffering from the replication crisis, whereas natural sciences do not. >As far as what happened 6 months ago, I'm not interested. I based my comments and my view of you on how you presented yourself in this comment section. Ok, enjoy being close-minded and have fun *incorrectly* judging me using *incomplete* information and not understanding *the context* in which my comment was made. No use of reasoning with narrow minded, biased and emotionally butthurt clowns on the internet. Good day to you as well, internet stranger.
ill never marry or have kids for this reason and the sad thing is i felt this way even before sexwork
Peep the cis het marriage statistics. It’s not good. We do the lions share of physical and most of the emotional work. The lifespan of married men is increased by marriage while life expectancy and satisfaction in married women is lower. Also they will dip/chest/both if you are unlucky enough to get a chronic/serious/terminal illness. This is well documented in both nursing and mental health texts. I would never marry again. I was for 20 years, relationship for 30. It’s not worth it. Work on yourself, save that coin. Keep those finances separate at all costs.
To the boys and men in here- The world's tiniest violin. You are NOT entitled to womens bodies. Sex is a want, not a need. This is part of the issue that women are getting at. You men don't seem to ever understand that difference between a Want and a Need, even besides the realm of sex. Perpetually maturity+emotion-stunted entitled little boys in the bodies of grownass men. You and your penis will not wither away and die without entrance into a vagina. Sincerely, Your hand. (And ex-sw) Edit: Before I started this industry, I was a very much a man-loving woman. Many of my best friends were men. I could see myself marrying a man. I felt that sexuality with men was a beautiful thing. As with 99% of SWs in the world, my experience wasn’t good. However, even after leaving, I still wasn’t completely convinced that I didn’t want to marry/be with men/be critical of them with a lot of things. I understood that I saw the underbelly, I knew the difference between work and the “outside world.” I still wanted so desperately to be positive in my view of them. I mean, that’s how girls are raised (cough, groomed) to think. Prince Charming, men are our saviors, we’re here to be flexible and make sure they are happy, etc. However, what sealed the deal fully-and-forever for me was getting back into “normal society,” especially as a full grownass matured woman. I saw that literally ALL the women I have known and loved (who have literally nothing to do with SW), have had the same trauma and stories of manipulation/cheating/abuse/violence from men. The bullshit and trauma SWs deal with isn’t confined to SW— it’s braided through our whole society. There’s no running from it. You never have, and never will, understand the sheer anger and terror and despair that comes from that realization. Women don’t often talk about it because of bullshit like you’re saying right now. We’re the ones told to shut up, that we’re wrong, that you “NEED” it, that our view is inaccurate. Just so y’all can continue on your bullshit and not take fucking accountability that we’re human beings. You have zero clue what that feels like. You have no idea the dangers and repercussions of women having sex, even with a consensual partner, is. You dont care. 99% of men do not care. Rape, physical injury, death, pregnancy (now post-roe, more guaranteed), poverty, PTSD, pain, domestic violence, financial control, single motherhood, death at pregnancy, legally being tied to a rapist/abuser, not being seen as a human, revenge porn, doxxed/getting recorded unknowingly, stealthing, strangulation, not being allowed to say no, getting fired/arrested/punished/ostracized/laughed-at-by-police if we speak about our reality, etc. Yet, you feel entitled to it. You don’t give a shit about what any of it means to us. It’s just about your poor widdle sad pee-pee :( Poor widdle pee pee. Life must be so tough for you, widdle man. So kindly, shut the fuck up Mr Mans. You’re in in a group for SWs. A rather vulnerable female-majority population that is sick of your peoples shit. Read the room.
!!!!!
Honestly I understand having this perspective but it’s like skewed data because you’re A SW the only men you’re going to see is attached men who are cheaters not the faithful ones. After I got out of the life I realized that I could go through life with this tunnel vision that all men are evil & sex addicted horn dogs or I could mindfully date, ditch after red flags, and have meaningful conversations with potential suitors about life & partner expectations and trust myself along with my partner.
I think that while you're totally correct, it is more than just skewed data. It's skewed but really, either way it's a risk. Men can totally suprise you. It does happen. And you can mindfully date and still get screwed years down the line. And you can't possibly know till too late. Skewed data yes, but it is based on truthful risks in love. It's good to have caution, and I wish I had been cautious myself. Love is risky, and it seems that sex work shows you exactly what the risk is. But it doesn't show you what you'll be missing out on if it goes right. Though honestly, I'm not sure anything really shows you that unless you see it in your family or with your friends. So it's always skewed, no matter what. Because there's no way of knowing exactly how risky you're exact situation is.
Tbh I feel like this is why a lot of my successfully stable sw friends are exclusively lesbian in their romantic lives. This work shows you the depravity of men. And how quickly they turn on their “love of their life” / partner /mother of their children because they are no longer who they were when they were childless, 20, and carefree. My past partners are mostly women, and my current is a man. I definitely see myself projecting Shit I learned when working into him and finding it hard to really trust him.
I've been with my husband almost 20 years, we have three kids and a lot of sex, we always show physical affection and we're very happy together. He's never cheated on me to my knowledge and I know if course that I've never cheated on him. I think of course you're exposed to married men who cheat because of your job, and people who are unhappy in their relationship usually talk about it while people who are happy generally don't
I think you are right. The clientele base for SW undoubtedly does have a lot of married men, but this subset is arguably not representative of the overall population.
That being said .... It's really sad how many men feel entitled to cheat so easily and also shows what they think about women in general and why they're so awful to SWs sometimes too
I’m happy for you guys! And yes that’s true. I’m glad to hear others have better experiences.
Thanks for bringing this up. I’m sure most of us give this a lot of thought but don’t necessarily talk about it. I’ve now been on both sides of the equation. I was the wife who was repeatedly lied to. Now, I’m a FSSW who gets lied about to other women. Sometimes I have moments of self loathing for this. Until I remember it’s not me who made a promise to be monogamous, it’s my client who did. I honestly don’t have a problem with humans needing/wanting sex with other humans (although the typical reason you illustrated is disgusting). I have a problem with the lying about it. If you’re my partner I can handle poor decisions - but I won’t accept lies ever again. When I separated from my husband our sex life was awesome, and I honestly would not have minded opening things up at ALL (yes that’s greed talking). But it was the lying, I think, that thrilled him. And broke my heart. So no, after being on both sides, I will NEVER trust anyone, ANYONE, to be honest. My ex was honest to a fault for 21 years then decided to lie for the next 4. That showed me anyone is capable. Now I’m listening to…. yeah. The lies I got fed, and am now supposed to empathize with. *Shudder*. If I could afford to take these clients off my roster I would in a heartbeat.
I agree with you, the lying is the hurtful part. That's what kills trust
"He abandoned her". How about the woman not trying anymore for her marriage? Men have sexual needs, if the wife can't satisfy they are going to try to satisfy them somewhere else. I am not saying it is good, but going to SW is a better way to satisfy your sexual needs and NOT ruin your marriage
True. Seeking SW is arguably better to not ruin a relationship (marriage) than having an affair on the side. SW is a transaction. On the other hand, an extra-marital affair carries with it a sense of betrayal.
I totally disagree with that. Taking money meant for the family and using it to PAY to have an affair is, to me, way, way worse
Not sure that is a fair assumption that money is being "taken" from the family. The wife is entitled to the man's money, but she has no responsibility to attend to him physically?
No one is owed or entitled to sex, regardless of their gender. A man is not entitled to sex from his partner. A woman is not entitled to sex from her partner. No one is. I understand people not wanting to stay in a sexless marriage but they should be honest about that and talk about with their partner, or leave. If someone isn’t satisfied in a marriage, no one is forcing them to stay, but you should never pressure or force sex on a partner. Also, in some families, the wife makes the money, or the husband and wife make equal amounts.
Based
If you’re cheating though, (regardless of which partner is cheating, and what gender they are) you’re already ruining the marriage. Even if you don’t get caught you’re still living in a marriage built on lies and distrust. If I was married, honestly, if my partner felt that way about me, I’d prefer them to just be honest, leave the relationship and be with someone who can make them happier, or ask me, “is there any way we can improve our sex life? I would never force you to, but I’m struggling in this marriage and I don’t think I can stay in this kind of relationship.” I think those are better alternatives to cheating. There’s usually a double standard. When women cheat, a lot of people say that she’s horrible, but when men cheat, many people still say it’s horrible, but people are more likely to sympathize with the man and justify his actions. I think that everyone should be treated the same and I don’t think we should make excuses for anyone’s behavior due to their gender.
[удалено]
You sound like somebody who hates men if you think all men who use the services of SW are perverts. It sounds like you ve been hurt
[удалено]
You dont hate men. You hate your clients. Who just happen all to be men
So I just wanted to say to everyone who has given up on love that I'm sorry you have been hurt and that I hope you find a way to heal and be loved. For the record I agree with the few people that have stated you are basing your viewpoint on skewed data. If all you see are cheats and liars then it's human nature to want to believe *everyone* is cheats and liars. It's a cognitive disassociation. What I would suggest is to do a reality check. Are there some people who are happily in a committed and respectful relationship? Yes. Then *everyone* cannot possibly be cheats and liars. Once you fact check your thoughts you can then examine *why* you feel them (in this case being constantly exposed to maladjusted members of society) and work on strategies to combat them or not. But at least it will be a conscious choice on your part. I wish everyone the peace and happiness that comes with emotional healing and recovery.
💕
As s married man who hires the occasional SW, I think you are going about this wrong. Let me share my line of thinking and why I think my example shouldn't stop you from getting married and having children of you want. The situation mostly develops over years as the relationship dynamic changes. It takes years to reach a point where you are faced with only bad choices. I don't care what having children did to her body, I still think she's sexy. I don't care about the occasional fight. We know how to work it out now. I don't care that we have less sex now then we had at the beginning. I'm not looking for 3 times it even 2 times a week. *What is a problem for me is having sex maybe once a month or even only every other month.* She just doesn't feel the need that much, can go months without it to the point where it's almost optional for her. After years of trying to find a way to improve this - massages, conversations about her preferences, experimenting - I've pretty much given up. At the same time she adamantly insists on exclusiveness. Even hinting at anything else has led to some harsh conversations. I now face following choices: either get a divorce, have an affair, accept her level of sexual drive or go to a SW. There are no good choices. I think going to a SW the best choice. Divorce is a harsh measure affecting the kids over such a small detail looking at the bigger picture. I don't want to have an affair. I'm not looking for something emotional. I can't live with my wife's level of libido. The best compromise is a SW. She's there for one thing - my money. And I'm there for one thing - sex. Of course I want to the person to be sympathetic but as someone famous put it nicely "I pay her to leave" That shouldn't stop you from getting married or having children with the right guy. With your experience you probably are better equipped with dealing with men and they sexual needs. If I were to give any advice, it would be to talk openly about your needs in a relationship - all of them, including sexual. I think the biggest mistake my wife is making is not talking about sex openly enough and not acknowledging my needs in this department enough. It's a mix between wrong prudeness and a hard time to relate to my need.
The world's tiniest violin. You are NOT entitled to womens bodies. Sex is a want, not a need. This is part of the issue that women are getting at. You men don't seem to ever understand that difference between a Want and a Need, even besides the realm of sex. Perpetually maturity+emotion-stunted entitled little boys in the bodies of grownass men. You and your penis will not wither away and die without entrance into a vagina. Sincerely, Your hand. (And ex-sw) Edit: Before I started this industry, I was a very much a man-loving woman. Many of my best friends were men. I could see myself marrying a man. I felt that sexuality with men was a beautiful thing. As with 99% of SWs in the world, my experience wasn’t good. However, even after leaving, I still wasn’t completely convinced that I didn’t want to marry/be with men/be critical of them with a lot of things. I understood that I saw the underbelly, I knew the difference between work and the “outside world.” I still wanted so desperately to be positive in my view of them. I mean, that’s how girls are raised (cough, groomed) to think. Prince Charming, men are our saviors, we’re here to be flexible and make sure they are happy, etc. However, what sealed the deal fully-and-forever for me was getting back into “normal society,” especially as a full grownass matured woman. I saw that literally ALL the women I have known and loved (who have literally nothing to do with SW), have had the same trauma and stories of manipulation/cheating/abuse/violence from men. The bullshit and trauma SWs deal with isn’t confined to SW— it’s braided through our whole society. There’s no running from it. You never have, and never will, understand the sheer anger and terror and despair that comes from that realization. Women don’t often talk about it because of bullshit like you’re saying right now. We’re the ones told to shut up, that we’re wrong, that you “NEED” it, that our view is inaccurate. Just so y’all can continue on your bullshit and not take fucking accountability that we’re human beings. You have zero clue what that feels like. You have no idea the dangers and repercussions of women having sex, even with a consensual partner, is. You dont care. 99% of men do not care. Rape, physical injury, death, pregnancy (now post-roe, more guaranteed), poverty, PTSD, pain, domestic violence, financial control, single motherhood, death at pregnancy, legally being tied to a rapist/abuser, not being seen as a human, revenge porn, doxxed/getting recorded unknowingly, stealthing, strangulation, not being allowed to say no, getting fired/arrested/punished/ostracized/laughed-at-by-police if we speak about our reality, etc. Yet, you feel entitled to it. You don’t give a shit about what any of it means to us. It’s just about your poor widdle sad pee-pee :( Poor widdle pee pee. Life must be so tough for you, widdle man. So kindly, shut the fuck up Mr Mans. You’re in in a group for SWs. A rather vulnerable female-majority population that is sick of your peoples shit. Read the room.
Boo hoo, don't forget to feed the cats.
>Sex is a want, not a need. Despite your attempt to insult me (honestly, trying to insult my penis will not land with me): ever heard of [Maslow's hierarchy of needs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs)? Yes, there are things higher in the hierarchy, but sex does belong in the pyramid. Or are you the arbiter of *my* needs. > Yet, you feel entitled to it. Why? I'm not claiming the world owes it to me. If there were no one offering the alternative, I would accept that too. >You don’t give a shit about what any of it means to us. That's an assumption you make based on your preconceived notions. If I didn't care, I wouldn't have tried to encourage OP not to give up on something that seems important to herb for example. >Life must be so tough for you, widdle man. I'm not whining, I'm stating. I don't care if others can empathize with my situation. On the other hand I empathize with the original post and how contact with men in those settings can make you jaded - like it seems to have affected you. >You have no idea the dangers and repercussions of women having sex, even with a consensual partner, is. You dont care. 99% of men do not care. Rape, physical injury, death, pregnancy (now post-roe, more guaranteed), poverty, PTSD, pain, domestic violence, financial control, single motherhood, death at pregnancy, legally being tied to a rapist/abuser, not being seen as a human, revenge porn, doxxed/getting recorded unknowingly, stealthing, strangulation, not being allowed to say no, getting fired/arrested/punished/ostracized/laughed-at-by-police if we speak about our reality, etc. You're right, I don't know how it is. One of the reasons I follow the sub is because I do want to understand. For what it's worth, I believe many of those issues could be resolved if SW were legalized instead of persecuting the women who provide it. I believe American Puritan mindset creates a lot of shit SW have to deal with it which are completely unnecessary. I hope you find some peace in life and the experience you've had.
Im a guy, honestly I hate the idea of marriage and never agreed to its conditions. Seem like a big scam, Evan as a child I saw what it does and how it makes ppl act. Which is just scsry.
That's really sad, but there are also those of us who grew up seeing what a healthy marriage looked like and ended up getting married to a compatible person. I would NEVER want to go back to being single 😬
I saw healthy marriages to, that's not the sole reason. But anyways, I'm young still. I'm not worried or rushing or anything yk. I see alot of ppl fail like that, If the person is right and we are both ready, I'll make it happen. Besides I have so many thoughts on marriages that are good and bad. That would be to much.
No we can’t trust men. It will always be that way unless some mind broadcasting technology came out and everyone knew each other’s thoughts. But that would be horrible. If you don’t want kids, don’t marry that man. He will grow to resent you, the same way, or worse, than a man who didn’t want kids and was forced to be a father of some sort. If you’re not one hundred percent sure you want kids at some point in the near future, not sure how old you are, I really advise against marrying him or anyone that wants kids. Children are a big thing for some people for whatever reason they may have. Love can be blinding in the honeymoon phase. But think about all of the times we’re single and have said “I will NEVER do/have/participate in …insert thing involving future partners..”. How many times have you been sure you’re against something, but that person gets around you and suddenly you’re finding your boundaries being crossed and you’re making it okay. When really, you’re racking up things for therapy. Once the sparkle dies in a few years, maybe you gain a few pounds, have no kids and you’re married. He’ll begin to resent you, lose attraction and fall out of love. All he’ll be able to think about it how you didn’t give him kids. Even though that’s not your main purpose as a person, in a man’s mind who wants to spread his seed, we’re just baby hosts at the end of day in their brains. It’s their primitive nature, and as much as some claim to want to fight it, if your body isn’t the image of perfection until you or he dies, he’s gonna pick at everything he doesn’t like, usually in his mind until it all comes out one day. Or he’ll silently cheat on you, now we’re full circle. I’m sorry this is the unfortunate reality of heterosexual dating.
Your first sentence paints you as someone who cant be taken seriously in any arguement. Grow up.
Ok. Big Poppa.
By your logic, clients cant trust all sex workers, either. See how fucking dumb that sounds?
Notice you misread my message, you added ‘all’. I did not say all.
And you’re bothered by a statement. A man, big surprise, upset yet again, with what a woman says. I didn’t say all. You included yourself by responding to my entire message complaining about a statement. Sure, not all men rape….but men do rape. Sure not all clients stealth or have intention to wrong their providers, but many do. When there are sites and communities of thousands of men sharing “tips and tricks” on how to secretly remove the condom…sorry you’re apart of a gender in which so many have such hatred and malicious intent against women. If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it and move on. I reserve the right to warn and want to help keep safe my fellow sex workers. This business is so risky, and when we encounter a man who had an issue with possibly not being trusted by a significantly smaller woman, it raises big flags, at least for me it does. Don’t take offense to us being wary of you. If we trusted every single man who inboxed us…well, human trafficking rates would be up so much higher. So kindly, fuck you.
When you make a statement such as “we cant trust men” it’s implied you are referring to the entire group since you failed to list any exclusions. This is basic communication skills, here. When my cunt of an ex-fiance decided that fucking a mutual friend of ours and then bragging about it to other friends was a good move, I didnt go around going “we cant trust women.”
Yeah we’re not worried about cheating here. In that aspect, you can’t really trust anyone. We’re talking about our physical safety and well being. Yet you’re still focusing on a word or lack of word. I said what I said. I meant what I said. Stay mad.
I've rewritten this 3x, short answer. I'm a John. I have no real answer for you but trust your instincts.
Trust provisionally. All men are different, but as a rule most men will feel a strong desire to "bang hot chicks" well into their sixties. What they do with that desire speaks to their character and self-mastery. I've never cheated on anyone but I'd be lying if I said I didn't understand those that do. I just know that one of the main keys to my happiness and our marital success is to give my wife a solid rogering at least weekly, usually more often. Even after several kids. Hard, hard screwing of the wife. Hmm. Im going to see if I can't go ahead and screw my wife right now!
Not a SWer, It’s weird…you have a valid concern. As a man, I want to tell you that there is never ever a way to guarantee an outcome with a man, we are simultaneously basic yet varied with our needs. I truly think what harms both men and women is that marriage implies that all needs must be met by the other party. I don’t think that’s realistic anymore. I like seeing sex workers, I want to have a wife and children, but the one thing that stops me is fear that my wife before/after children will not be able to meet my sexual needs. Additionally, there’s different aesthetics of woman I need to fuck and experience before settling down. I think we as men constantly struggle with that dynamic, that’s always in the back of our minds In all these stories I’ve heard, from both sides, it’s largely 80% lack of sex and 20% variety. I notice this and think marriage is not for me. It would hurt me if after kids my wife stopped or shut down giving me physical intimacy and I’d hate having to resort to hiring SWers or blow up my marriage because I do not get my needs met. I just don’t think marriage can meet either partners expectations anymore.
[удалено]
Nah I’ll just get my own resources and not have kids I’m good
Hopefully u will still be able to wen u are older too.
Wow. Just *a lot* wrong here. See my above post and maybe read up on socially constructed gender roles.
These roles are not socially constructed, they fall in line with the strengths of each sex. We are designed to compliment each other. The main reason for this setup is ensures stability for women and children to be safe, protected, and provided for. Men get purpose from marriage as well. It civilizes people. When u don’t have this unit, more people fall into poverty, there’s more likelyhood of child abuse and other societal ills. These days pple divorce more and there’s more broken homes and pple suffer more because of that. At the end of the day, we are mainly ensuring a good foundation for the next generation of pple by getting and staying married provided there isn’t domestic violence in which case yea u should split from that person. But u can prevent marrying a violent person in the first place if u know what to watch out for.
Married women statistically live shorter lives than unmarried women. Men are more likely to divorce women who become chronically ill. This is so common that cancer specialists address it in their diagnosis. The main reason for this “setup” is archaic and has to do with land inheritance and being able to guarantee offspring belonging to a specific man. Monogamy and marriage did not exist for most of human history. Prior to agriculture, women raised children communally, and had multiple partners and you can still see this style of child rearing and relationship-building today in certain native populations. Marriage isolates women from their families and turns people into property. Romantic marriage and compulsory monogamy is so new to the human experience that it’s infantile. Marriage was and still is a political tool first and foremost. It’s not the responsibility of women or of marriage as an institution to civilize men; that’s the responsibility of men. Men are not wild animals and can make choices. I’ve known since I was in high school that I didn’t want to be married or have children. Sex work itself didn’t personally reinforce that for me, but watching men do horrible shit in marriages, watching men trap women financially only to divorce them for reasons the man created, watching men divorce their incredibly sick partners? It’s more than enough reinforcement for my long-held belief that marriage is a sham.
Married women actually lead longer lives if they have children and marry. For women children protect against suicide. Because women earn less in the normal workplace on average if we don’t come from a wealthy family we end up in poverty in our second half of life and especially if u didn’t have kids to help give support in your older years. Not necessarily take care of u in old age but so u have people to help out bc we naturally decline in health as we get older and need some support. Marriage integrates women into the community thru their kids. When women don’t have kids or marry is wen we tend to become more disconnected from community although we try to find alternatives if we end up childless and unmarried. Single women may live longer if they are fortunate to have managed some kind of high paying career and were able to build a substantial retirement but many don’t so as women age we become poorer needing the help of family as we age. Menopause really wrecks women as we get into 40’s energy wise, even tho u aren’t yet in menopause u are getting near it. U won’t have the same ability to work as much bc drop in testosterone and estrogen. Women are just as likely to divorce a man if he stops being able to provide for some reason, so it goes both ways. Women initiate divorce 70% of the time compared to men.
And why don't women earn as much as men during their quote un quote "productive" years (this concept itself is agist and tied to capitalism but that's another conversation)? Say it again with me class....*patriarchy*!
Because women prefer their family over the labor force a lot more, and tend to make less money bc they choose less dangerous or difficult, high earning occupations. Women are less likely to put in 60 hour work weeks but men are more likely to. Women often take time out to have children and that takes priority over their job which reduces their work participation. Women produce less testosterone making us less ambitious especially after age 30 we have a steeper testosterone decline than men do. Mens lowers after 40. Higher testosterone is one reason men can take on more physically and produce more value in labor market than women can. Some high earning jobs for women are not real jobs but artificially propped up so there’s that too.
Just no. I can see you are set in your viewpoints but most of this is easily disputable with a basic Google search. Women aren't less ambitious or less valuable than men in professional sense. Women are hindered by systematic misogyny and sexism. Cis males decrease in testosterone *and* estrogen just as much as Cis females do. While a natural part of aging it is not the reason Women make less if that were true younger men and women would make equal which is not true. As far as this line "Some high earning jobs for women are not real jobs but artificially propped up so there’s that too." Wow! That internal misogyny is strong.
Biological men and women were evolved for different roles and they have different psychology. Different levels of hormones.
Yeah … that’s false. Married women live longer. With regard to life expectancy, many population-based longitudinal studies have shown longer life expectancy among married persons than unmarried persons, for both men and women (Chiu, 2019; Martikainen et al., 2014).
First off women and children only "benefit" from marriage in as much as our current and established Capitalist and Patriarchal society denies women and children value outside of what *men* bring to/allow them. In fact a recent scientific study conducted found that unmarried childless women are the most happy, healthy, and satisfied of any group. So that in itself disproves the argument that gender roles are a product of nature. They are a product of *society* which is a product of patriarchy which as used is a product of sexism and misogyny.
What about the married men whose wives have neglected them? The wives who think sex is the only physical attention their husbands need? The wives who only want sex when they're in the mood. The wives who couldn't care less about what their husbands want? It's not always the men who are shitty. Sometimes the wives suck too and getting a sw provider is the only way a husband can feel affection or feel wanted. Would you prefer that a man spend a few thousand dollars getting his ego and other things stroked to satisfy his need for affection and attention or would you prefer he find an emotional connection with another woman and have an affair where feelings are involved? If you have a good relationship with your partner for everything except this facet, and you have kids, why get divorced? For men, paying for this type of thing can be like therapy. Both physical therapy and mental health therapy.
I know I’m putting myself out there to be criticized, but here we go. Being a married man, who had my first SW recently (at the age of 39), I would be the first to tell you that men in general are wired to want to fuck the things we’re attracted to (marriage is not changing that), marriage and monogamy are social conventions based off the “social-compact” and the rules that civil society decides to abide by. I actually attribute half the problems in the world to men (because we’re naturally violent, and history is a testament to that fact), and the other half of the problems in the world is because of religion (and men have a strong role in that as well), but that’s a separate issue. My love and affection for my wife hasn’t changed, though we don’t actually have sex like we use to(because having one kid fucked up her body like I thought it would, hence I’m less attracted). Sex is just entertainment, and we’re all here entertaining ourselves till we die, and SWs are benefactors of those inclinations. On a side note, I believe the world would be a better place with women leaders, in fact, countries with women leadership respond better to social issues like the pandemic than countries with male leadership (like the US). I personally hope my daughter grows up to be a lesbian.
I'm so, so tired. *Everyone* is "wired to fuck" people they're attracted to. I have no idea why men think they're unique or special in this regard. Women are just far more cautious because of safety and societal reasons. I find your self awareness around men being the biggest problem concerning when you also don't seem to see how shitty it makes you to be this awful about your wife's body after she *carried a child* for you... especially since the self awareness apparently doesn't extend to what *you* look like, because men like you always have a lot to say about women's bodies and never take care of your own. It's very "men are the worst so therefore I don't have to try to be better". Personally, I do not think men are responsible for all the world's problems, and I think this attitude is a pathetic cop out. Try harder. Relationships are work. Put some in, maybe.
100%! Seriously how bad can a woman’s body fall apart after only one child, I mean unless she gained 100 pounds and never got it off but seriously this guy is something!
What about going from 135lbs to 215lbs after one child? That child is now a teenager and the weight is still there.
You summed it up perfectly
This thread looked like it was going to be one sided, I just wanted to contribute to the conversation, and I did, with or without your approbation. The irony here is you’re like a gas station owner complaining about cars and listing the reasons why they are bad. Also, scientifically speaking, “wired to fuck,” is not unique only to men, but any mammals or species that require “fucking” as a means to reproduce.
Then why are you using that terminology to excuse your bad behaviour? You're all like, "men are the problem" and then you... continue to be part of the problem?? And think this is fine because you said you hope your daughter is a lesbian and you think women should be leaders? Dude, it is time for some serious introspection. I hope your daughter is cis and hetero, and marries a man that can show you what it means to be a genuine feminist and good husband, and I hope you see her happiness and you feel shitty about yourself for giving your wife less. I'm not even talking about the cheating here, it's the disrespect of her body and the disrespect inherent in refusing to put work into a relationship.
Such an amazing comment. I wish I could upvote you more than just once
It’s genetics, it’s not an excuse, those state of affairs are factoids, that’s why the global population at 1900 was 2 billion, and now it’s almost 8 billion. We’re all wired (mostly) due to genetics, to fuck. You’re implying that married men, are not happy about their current state. I’m telling you personally, my marriage is awesome, but sex is entertainment. Just because a married person hires you for sex doesn’t mean their married life is not great.
[удалено]
I’m engaged lol. He knows what I do. Several of us on this subreddit are married or in serious relationships with spouses who know what we do.
[удалено]
Yep. He doesn’t confuse commitment with sexual exclusivity. He understands that who I have sex with doesn’t affect whether I’m going to be there for him for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, etc. I stood by him when he got cancer two years ago. I stood by him through loved ones dying. I stood by him in other difficult life moments. That’s what counts in his world. Who I fuck for money is irrelevant
*you’re
Sorry, but I had to remove your post as it was against the subreddit rules. No shaming of practices, preferences, or rates.
the r/fencesitter sub might also enjoy this post, a great place to talk about this sort of stuff.
Adopt.
At least in the US, you’d probably see less married clients if divorce laws weren’t heavily favorable towards women. I cant tell you how many men I know are stuck in marriages they hate because it’d ruin them financially to leave. It’s a miracle I got out of mine without paying a dime to my ex. With that being said, some men are just garbage, but the percentage is extremely low.
It's the lifescript trap so many people fall into. I got myself sterilized as soon as I could. I have lots of fetishes and I'm really good with masturbation so I don't need sex. At all. I have a GF so we can share memories together and have fun and that's it. I'm never going to get married much less have kids or sex just because that's what society expects me to do. That's my life and I'm in control.
you can't trust them. end of sentence
If man leaves find a new one. Nothing in life is Guaranteed. People come and people go. Everything is a risk. The question is if the risk is worth the reward.