Reply #131: Well, that still doesn't address a few things [View All]

Do you not feel that people should EVER have impersonal sex?

I certainly got rather prickly in my response, but your first reply was more than just a tad haughty, so please don't play the injured party. Much as I've intimated that your views tend toward conservatism, your initial post passive-aggressively tars me as somehow stunted in the true emotional realm; nobody likes to be dismissed lightly, so tread lightly unless you can bear scrutiny yourself.

Your worldview doesn't allow anyone the chance to unemotional, mere enjoyment sex, and I think that just misses a lot. Some very good people just have moments in their life when they want sex without putting anyone else emotionally at risk. The important issue here is consensuality, which usually isn't the case in murder, and by definition isn't in rape.

I still stand by my assessment of your worldview: it brooks little difference.

Certainly, we must all try to remain aware of our personal limitations, both through experience and proclivity, we're all still fairly limited, and that almost demands electing to have services exist that we don't use. I've never gone to a prostitute, but I think they should be made available. Regardless, people are going to do it, and I'd like to keep the sex workers safe and healthy. I'd also like to collect taxes, instead of having criminals take the money. Let's also throw onto the pile the advantage of getting rid of pimps.

The bottom line is this: I'm advocating services of a mutually consensual nature that I wouldn't use and that fill a need. You do not recognize it as a valid need, and thus want to not make it available. Sex doesn't always have to be intrinsically tied with love; that's your opinion. If you don't have the desire for sex unless it's tied to deep emotional caring, that's fine, but don't demand everyone else to live by that standard. For the afore mentioned reasons, people often don't want the entanglement or to put others at emotional risk.

If these were easy questions, they'd have been long since answered, but since you started the conversation with a complete disagreement on moral and ethical grounds, my umbrage isn't totally unwarranted. That is, unless you don't feel that that opinion can be held by any decent person. Remember: you fired the first shot, so to take offense at a rejoinder lessens your right to victimhood.

Thank you for the time and effort, and your points are well taken. As I pointed out, we're shadowboxing with previous tussles here, as well as the topic at hand, and that bears recognition.

Is it ever "right" to have unemotional sex? If not for you, is it something that others shouldn't be allowed? What if they're incapable of finding a lover? What if they're too fragile to want to risk their own emotions or those of another? Is there no place for this?

Is wanting sheer whoopee sex something that shouldn't be allowed? Is it not a right of the individual to rent his/her body and services if he/she so pleases? Is this not something we want regulated, specifically for public health reasons?

You may well have your life in true emotional and spiritual balance, but that's just you. Others are different, and we owe it to society to see that reasonable activities are allowed.

I'm working today and under a deadline, so if I don't get back to you, that's the reason.