Buying hookers is not going to lead to a relationship.
Neither will unemployment insurance lead to a job. Are we talking past each other, here?
What a sordid idea. The sexual history, short of health-related concerns or simple curiosity, is or should be a monumentally little interest to a current partner.
What planet are you from?
I get that a lot.
People want to know, just like they want to know what jobs you had, if you like dogs are cars and how you take your pizza.
Waiter, lawyer, no, in a facile way, can't go wrong with olives and peppers.
"should be monumentally little interest", why? It seems very important to you, getting proper access to sexual partners, why would it be important to a girlfriend/boyfriend to know what your sexual life included?
That's why I excepted curiosity. Sure, it's natural and good to be curious, so as to come to know the other person, but also it would be highly incourteous to judge someone based on past sexual exploits. The only negative inference I think might be proper to draw from someone who enjoyed the company of a prostitute, or even frequented them, would be if the jurisdiction he or she acted in had made the practice illegal, OR if he or she acted with unconcern as to origin of the prostitutes. I mean, yeah, if you're in connivance with a sex slaver, you're kind of a dick.
But in the absence of considerations such as those (and health), I don't see it as anything but a neutral and potentially interesting piece of a partner's past.
Kestra said:
I've been trying to follow the conversation here, but I think I must have missed a post where you explain how this is the fault of society? How do you think society must change?
Well, basically it boils down to this. When someone complains about how the economy has impacted their personal life, they are generally regarded with sympathetic ear, regardless of the personal political leanings of the listener. When someone complains about how the sexual market has impacted their personal life, there is generally far less sympathy and a notion that the wrongness is entirely inherent, and not even partly external.
Imagine that, instead of a 25 year old who's never had sex, despite dutifully trying to find a partnership, I described a 25 year old who's never held a job, despite dutifully filling out weekly job applications.
Is it right to be more apt to suspect something wrong with the society Case Two lives in, than the society of Case One?
In either event, and regardless of whose fault it is, I don't think the right question to ask is "Is this even a problem?" but rather "What can be done?"
That's a good starting point for how society should change.
And, yeah, it's not global warming or anything conventionally apocalyptic, but I expect for sufferers it might as well be.
As for concrete changes? Little tags that identify sexually available folks would be neat. (Preemption: they're called lower back tattoos. Ha ha.) "Would you like to have sex?" no longer being a verboten, or at least highly risky, question to an acquaintance.
Well, really, the only one I highly advocate is the second one. I think that would go a long way toward improving transparency, and would be the next best thing to telepathy.
teacake said:
Myasishchev please outline what your ideal society is as far as sex goes. I think you are being coy about it to some extent.
Summed up in one sentence: Complete sexual freedom moderated by complete sexual altruism.
Gobi said:
My girlfriend now was someone who always thought of herself as unattractive, unwanted and socially awkward as well, and I derive much pleasure from knowing that two people rejected by society have found happiness with one another. And I'd be lying if I said there wasn't at least a small component of "fuck society" in there somewhere.
Well, I do like the cut of your jib.