Aa
Negativity towards sex workers..Whats up with that?
What i dont understand is...why do people have this bad view towards the sex industry? I.E Strippers and sex workers.Even religious groups have that view, oh also on gay rights too. That i really dont understand.But lets look at two hypothedical situations.
1.Man has unprotected sex with woman. Woman is not a sex worker or stripper, however her std status is not known.
2. Man has unprotected sex with woman. However the woman is a sex worker. Her std status is not known as well.
So after looking at those two situations, the only differences are is that one of the women works in the sex industry while the other dosent. Whats similar is the man has put himself at RISK. Dosent matter who the women were, risk is a risk. Just because a woman is not a sex worker dosen't automactically mean, shes "Clean as a whistle" For the record, i really dont like using the word clean to describe someones std status. So people please, that is disrespectfull, please dont use that word. Now lets look at another hypothedical situation.
1.Man has protected sex with a woman who is not a sex worker.
2. man has protected sex with a woman who is a sex worker.
Now, do you still see any differences aside from the fact one of the women is a sex worker?
1.Man has unprotected sex with woman. Woman is not a sex worker or stripper, however her std status is not known.
2. Man has unprotected sex with woman. However the woman is a sex worker. Her std status is not known as well.
So after looking at those two situations, the only differences are is that one of the women works in the sex industry while the other dosent. Whats similar is the man has put himself at RISK. Dosent matter who the women were, risk is a risk. Just because a woman is not a sex worker dosen't automactically mean, shes "Clean as a whistle" For the record, i really dont like using the word clean to describe someones std status. So people please, that is disrespectfull, please dont use that word. Now lets look at another hypothedical situation.
1.Man has protected sex with a woman who is not a sex worker.
2. man has protected sex with a woman who is a sex worker.
Now, do you still see any differences aside from the fact one of the women is a sex worker?
Actually in respect to stds, you would be surprised about the numbers. Actually, when talking about HIV, the percentage of transmission among sex workers to johns is quit low. Now, im not proud of what i did in the past, but years ago, i went on a sex spree. i've had sex with well over 40 escorts, plus some women i met from the internet. However, each escort i was with, they supplied condoms and we used them from start to finish. out of all the women i was with, i've had unprotected sex with 5, and none of the 5 were sex workers. I got my first HIV and std test last year, and guess what? Negative all across the board. I wasnt convinced that i didnt have HIV so i got tested 4 more times and still negative. The health department said i didnt need more testing. I dont have anything peirod. So.... I have to disagree with your theroy on sex workers are high risk sex. I think it isnt who it is we have sex with is a risk, its HOW we have sex, as in safe measures. But hey, im living proof, no joke
I think alot of people are romanticizing the idea of a sex worker. Like anything there are certain levels of quality in the industry. I think what people are thinking of when they think of the "bad" sex worker is the streetwalking crackwhore. The types of women who are "forced" into it by their circumstances or literally forced into it. These are the types who don't use condoms regularly, potentially use IV drugs (another spreader of infections), and are potential carriers of STDs. That's the low end of the sex worker trade. That's the used car of the sex worker trade.
Of course there are the $10,000 / night escorts which are supposed to be safer and I suppose ARE safer to an extent. But to the extent that a man is dropping 10Gs on an escort he's also expecting to not have to deal with condoms at that point. So theoretically the higher class escorts will lower their risk of infection by attracting a higher class, more discerning clientelle. That's like the Roles Royce of sex workers.
But see, most men aren't driving the Roles. We're buying the used car. You pay for quality. And that $20 ** carries a lot more risk than the 10G escort. Most guys who are inclined to see a prostitute on any kind of regular basis or even once in a blue moon are more likely going to be shopping toward the bottom of the spectrum than the top.
What I'm getting at is that there are countries and countys that have a successful, legal sex industry but it doesn't eliminate the lower class of the sex trade industry. Even in places where prostitution is legal there are the "illegal" sex workers who carry a far greater risk of contracting an STD due to their situation.
When doctors ask if you've been with a sex worker or advise you to stay away from a sex worker what they're really referring to, more often than not, is these types of women and not the escort that caters to wealthy executives.
And if we're being honest... and let's do be honest there's a big difference between a person who has sex for a living and someone who doesn't in terms of how likely they are to contract an STD. Just doing the basic math should tell you that a sex worker has a greater chance of catching a disease during the course of her normal workday than a non-sex worker due to the fact that they have sex for a living. They might engage in 10, 20, 30 sex acts on a daily basis... compare that to a non-sex worker who is far likely to engage in 10, 20, 30 sex acts on a daily basis.
Break it down even further... Sexually Transmitted Diseases are... wait for it.. transmitted sexually! Ergo the more sex you have with more people the more likely you are to catch something from one of them eventually. That's just basic math. It's like playing russian roulette. The more times you pull the trigger the greater the odds are that eventually you're going to get to that loaded chamber.
Now that doesn't mean that all sex workers are walking STD dispensers nor does it mean that a non-sex worker is guaranteed to be clean either. But lets be honest here, there's a huge difference in the risk. There just absolutely is.
YES, anyone can be carrying an STD, YES you should always use protection, and YES there are non-sex workers, so-called "normal" people who become infected with STDs. YES it can happen to anyone...
But also....YES the incidence of STD is higher among IV drug users and illegal prostitutes. It just is. Anyone can have it, anyone can carry it, and anyone can transmit it but there are certain activities, certain behaviors, and certain practices that increase your risk and that should be taught and understood and acknowledged.
Bottom Line: You cannot CREATE a disease from nothing. Whomever you have sex with, professional or otherwise, has to have something to give you in the first place. You're not going to get an STD just by having sex with someone. They have to have it already to give it to you and/or vice versa.
All sexual activity carries an inherent risk but if you're smart and take precautions you can minimize the risk. As for the stigma on sex workers, again I think people look to the lower class side of things and not so much the higher end of the spectrum. That being said there's certainly a very visible, very prominent proportion of the sex trade that is less than glamours and is populated by its share of disturbed, troubled, substance addicts and I think we see that as the face of the industry as a whole. Perhaps more than we should.
For the record I'm actually not opposed to legalizing prostitution in the USA but don't think for a second that would eliminate the scuzzy part of the industry from continuing to do business as usual. Once you legalize it, tax it, add permits and restrictions.. the prices go up. And that $20 illegal ** will still be there.
Also, ask yourself this. Would you want your son, daughter, girlfriend, wife, or husband to be a sex worker? I don't know whether it's religion or a sense or morality or whatnot but for whatever reason we look at people in that industry as somehow less than the rest of us and ditto for those who frequent them as well.
But, any parent on here ask yourself and answer honestly: Would you be okay with your son or daugher being a prostitute? Or would you do everything in your power to stear them toward some other career path?
Of course there are the $10,000 / night escorts which are supposed to be safer and I suppose ARE safer to an extent. But to the extent that a man is dropping 10Gs on an escort he's also expecting to not have to deal with condoms at that point. So theoretically the higher class escorts will lower their risk of infection by attracting a higher class, more discerning clientelle. That's like the Roles Royce of sex workers.
But see, most men aren't driving the Roles. We're buying the used car. You pay for quality. And that $20 ** carries a lot more risk than the 10G escort. Most guys who are inclined to see a prostitute on any kind of regular basis or even once in a blue moon are more likely going to be shopping toward the bottom of the spectrum than the top.
What I'm getting at is that there are countries and countys that have a successful, legal sex industry but it doesn't eliminate the lower class of the sex trade industry. Even in places where prostitution is legal there are the "illegal" sex workers who carry a far greater risk of contracting an STD due to their situation.
When doctors ask if you've been with a sex worker or advise you to stay away from a sex worker what they're really referring to, more often than not, is these types of women and not the escort that caters to wealthy executives.
And if we're being honest... and let's do be honest there's a big difference between a person who has sex for a living and someone who doesn't in terms of how likely they are to contract an STD. Just doing the basic math should tell you that a sex worker has a greater chance of catching a disease during the course of her normal workday than a non-sex worker due to the fact that they have sex for a living. They might engage in 10, 20, 30 sex acts on a daily basis... compare that to a non-sex worker who is far likely to engage in 10, 20, 30 sex acts on a daily basis.
Break it down even further... Sexually Transmitted Diseases are... wait for it.. transmitted sexually! Ergo the more sex you have with more people the more likely you are to catch something from one of them eventually. That's just basic math. It's like playing russian roulette. The more times you pull the trigger the greater the odds are that eventually you're going to get to that loaded chamber.
Now that doesn't mean that all sex workers are walking STD dispensers nor does it mean that a non-sex worker is guaranteed to be clean either. But lets be honest here, there's a huge difference in the risk. There just absolutely is.
YES, anyone can be carrying an STD, YES you should always use protection, and YES there are non-sex workers, so-called "normal" people who become infected with STDs. YES it can happen to anyone...
But also....YES the incidence of STD is higher among IV drug users and illegal prostitutes. It just is. Anyone can have it, anyone can carry it, and anyone can transmit it but there are certain activities, certain behaviors, and certain practices that increase your risk and that should be taught and understood and acknowledged.
Bottom Line: You cannot CREATE a disease from nothing. Whomever you have sex with, professional or otherwise, has to have something to give you in the first place. You're not going to get an STD just by having sex with someone. They have to have it already to give it to you and/or vice versa.
All sexual activity carries an inherent risk but if you're smart and take precautions you can minimize the risk. As for the stigma on sex workers, again I think people look to the lower class side of things and not so much the higher end of the spectrum. That being said there's certainly a very visible, very prominent proportion of the sex trade that is less than glamours and is populated by its share of disturbed, troubled, substance addicts and I think we see that as the face of the industry as a whole. Perhaps more than we should.
For the record I'm actually not opposed to legalizing prostitution in the USA but don't think for a second that would eliminate the scuzzy part of the industry from continuing to do business as usual. Once you legalize it, tax it, add permits and restrictions.. the prices go up. And that $20 illegal ** will still be there.
Also, ask yourself this. Would you want your son, daughter, girlfriend, wife, or husband to be a sex worker? I don't know whether it's religion or a sense or morality or whatnot but for whatever reason we look at people in that industry as somehow less than the rest of us and ditto for those who frequent them as well.
But, any parent on here ask yourself and answer honestly: Would you be okay with your son or daugher being a prostitute? Or would you do everything in your power to stear them toward some other career path?
My friend you hit it on the money. I agree with your statement. Preceptions triumphs facts. The way some people may precieve something would blind their views on the facts. Listen, im from metro detroit, i dont live in detroit, but in a suburb. In the city of detroit, as you all may know, is the worst of the worst. Any type of crime you name is there. And its a murder capital. However, police agencies in metro detroit are more worried about prositution than violant crime. It amazes me! So a john paying a sex worker for sex is worse than murder??? What a screwed up system.
I also meant to say - masturbation is the best option, but sometimes people just need to be touched by another human being. I believe that lonliness and isolation are huge factors in the decision to seek out a sex-worker. Most people want a close, intimate relationship, and find that sex with someone who doesn't care anything about them is a truely unsatisfying experience.
I think the reason is that when you have sex with a sexworker, the entire intent is the sexual act itself. When you have sex with a non-sexworker, it is more socially acceptable as it implies some sort of "relationship". Of course the relationship does not always exist, but the idea is that whoever intigated the sexual act had to put forth some sort of effort to get the other person to agree to sex. I am sure that everyone knows that when a man/woman picks up a man/woman in a bar he/she will say anything, pretend interest, etc in order to achieve the goal, which is sex. I believe it is much more honest, when the goal is the sex act itself, and when there will not be any sort of follow up, dating, etc. to engage a sex-worker, rather than leading another person on and making them believe that there is some sort of future, no matter how short term, with a that person. The stigma of the sex trade is based on the fact that people have been taught to believe that sex is shameful and that they should be able to control those impulses, and they should. But human beings have a sex drive, and more people are hurt, emotionally, when they are led to believe that every time someone wants sex with them that it will lead to more than a one night stand. I do not believe in or support the sex industry, but I understand that is serves a purpose - no matter how empty and ultimately unfulfilling that purpose.
Yes, I hear what you're saying... hypocrisy and a double standard element to what you described does exist. Will it ever change? probably not!
Thank you butterfly! And whats funny is, doctors from around the world say,"oh stay away from sexworkers" But with people who are not sexworkers dr's will say "Oh i see no problem there, just be carefull" Is that the message they want to send? Its ok to have risky sex with people who dont work in that profession than vice versa? A regular person could have a history of partners. Lets say i meet a regular lady, and we have unprotected sex. So, i must not be at risk for anything because she isnt a sex worker, even though, i dont know her backround std wise...That just turns the world upside down! The medical proffession needs to get a clue.
It's the monetary component that makes the sex worker appear worse.
Is it fair to make that judgment? ... probably not!
Is it fair to make that judgment? ... probably not!
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the Sexual Health Community
Millions of people are diagnosed with STDs in the U.S. each year.
STDs can't be transmitted by casual contact, like hugging or touching.
Syphilis is an STD that is transmitted by oral, genital and anal sex.
Discharge often isn't normal, and could mean an infection or an STD.
STDs aren't transmitted through clothing. Fabric is a germ barrier.
Normal vaginal discharge varies in color, smell, texture and amount.
As for STDs, some sex workers insist on using condoms with their clients and I dare to say that some sex workers (and/or some of their clients) are even more careful and responsible in this than random men or women who meet and have sex for example on a Friday´s night disco.
I think that there is still some form of stigmatization of sex itself, still, somewhere deep many people see it as "dirty" or "immoral", something "bad" which could be justified only by some "higher" means, "higher" principles and in my opinion this antisexual/sexophobic attitude is responsible also for all the injustice and prejudices against sex workers and their clients.