/ratanon/ - Rationalists Anonymous

>>6916 (samefag)

I personally have an inkling of fear that legalizing prostitution might be bad for *me personally* because:

- I am reasonably attractive and unwilling to pay for sex.

- studies show women who really like sex are more likely to become sex workers.

- so I imagine that illegalizing prostitution would make women more likely to have sex for me for free, because what else are they going to do with their massive libidos?

- the prostitutes that operate illegally would be more expensive due to reduced competition, but I wouldn't care about this.

However, I value freedom more than this nebulous bad consequence.

I've never seen a reason to pay for pornography.

>>6917

I'm fine with legalization. Pretty much everything should be legal… Aesthetics and morals are a different tale though.

I mean, I could offer a starving person dog food in exchange for anal sex and it would be a fair capitalist offer, better than starving etc. Still makes me an asshole. The freedom to make those choices and not be prosecuted by the state is important but we should discourage that kind of shit, as a society, instead of almost celebrating how "rational" and sensical all of it is from a capitalist / mathematic perspective.

Whores should be encouraged to find a real job and stop abusing the irrational need for human companionship in such an ugly way.

Clients should be encouraged to have some fucking dignity, how can you even share a room with someone that's pretending to care about you for money?

And that's without taking in consideration all the times the prostitutes themselves are being exploited, though I think everybody agrees on that topic (Bad, needs to be stopped, is not "real prostitution" etc.)

Beautiful people in general are already too whore-like these days, question is do we push them to accept and almost formalize this reality, or do we push them to humility and human-centric pro-civilization values and behaviours?

TV stars, beauty queens and the like are included in "similar forms of degeneracy" btw.

>>6918

>the irrational need for human companionship

Now who's a beep boop?

>>6919

Hm. If anything I think that it being irrational makes it more important, "sacred" even. Quite the opposite from what you seem to be implying?

>>6917

You're a sexual crony capitalist m8.

>>6917

>thinks women will have sex with him for free

Trust me, you will end up paying for it one way or another.

>>6922

I have had sex with women without paying for anything of theirs. The only cost is my time.

Note: This is highly dependent on your and her relative attractiveness.

>>6918

>push them to humility and human-centric pro-civilization values and behaviours

What planet are you from where "human-centric values" doesn't include "like, way too much sex"? What century was it when civilisation didn't have whoresprostitution?

>>6923

>I have had sex with women without paying for anything of theirs. The only cost is my time.

Unless this was more than 9 months ago you can't know that yet.

>>6920

I know you're trolling him, but

>irrationality is sacred

apex mystic, gb2darkages pls

unless you're trying to imply that sacredness is irrational, in which case you're also wrong, but for a different reason

sacredness is a mindkilling system that creates a stable social climate around a thing (that which is sacred, in this case sex). it happens that the mindkilling in this case is a result of human biology, but that doesn't make it not mindkilling

>>6925

>Unless this was more than 9 months ago you can't know that yet.

You can just deny all responsibility.

>>6928

You can deny all you want, but you won't get out of paying child support.