Edited for off-topic.
If you do not care for a thread, simply bypass it,
let others enjoy the topic.

soufie
Site Admin

Toody, lemme see if i got this right.

Someone inferred, that you're a prostitute,
simply because you enjoy the company of
the opposite sex?

If that's the case...
They more than likely said it out of jealousy..
If male, probably because you prefer the company
of a male, other than them.

If female, probably because they can't find a male
willing to spend time with her.

Yanno? Tryna shoot a sista down.


Take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt.
And, let negativity roll off.

A woman who gives me a " buy one get one free" discount

@Rock

No one said that to me. It was just a question I had and posted.

Quick thought, like other Topics on this Site .




But I liked your Comments!

Yes solely for sex!

agreed

Prostitute is objective, not subjective. There's a clear definition of prostitute.

It might mean she's a really good prostitute.
...I mean based on the documentaries I'm seeing most prostitutes don't really "enjoys a Man's company and doing things together."
They tend to just want to get the money and get out, get their fix, pay their bills, get back to their boyfriend/husband before he gets home from work, whatever.

Sure, some do "enjoys a Man's company and doing things together," but still not generally longer than what he "paid" for.

So if the prostitute really "enjoys a Man's company and doing things together," especially beyond what he's paid her for, then he's getting a bargain!
And everyone loves a bargain! So she may be one of the "good" ones.


If it's solely for sex, then she doesn't necessarily "enjoys a Man's company and doing things together," anymore than enjoying company and doing things automatically mean sex.

They aren't really doing "things" together, and there's no guarantee she's enjoying anything, they are having sex.
And it seems the only reason she is having sex with him is due to him giving her...whatever he's giving her.

If he stopped giving her those things, and she didn't have sex with him anymore, and/or made sex conditional on him giving her those things, and/or determined there was no value in the why of what she was being given something, with her focus primarily on how it could be consumed or used for her own selfish needs, then that would live up to my personal definition of a "prostitute."



I am wondering if what you "really" meant to ask was something more like:
"Just because a woman enjoys a Man's company and doing things together doesn't mean she is a slut/whre!
What's your definition of a slut/whre?"
Where those terms are a more judgmental shortcut for the term "promiscuous" automatically associated with being less trustworthy, reliable, unclean, lesser.





There's a clear legal definition of prostitute for the sake of legal procedures and concerns.
You can have a subjective definition that doesn't adhere to the legal in order to help determine your own personal subjective response; emotions thoughts, beliefs, and behavior towards that label.

@Ciretom
Thanks for your comments , I like how You Break down a Thread to give it more meaning. I tend to agree with You in parts.
At least you put thought into your replies.
Like that handsome young man on Crimmal Minds show.

Also thanks for Your response on that objective and subjective. Comments.

Keep up the good work !!

A Woman who enjoys the finer things in life and enjoys the perks men provide, dinners, outings and getaways, even multiple men.

that's not prostitution, nope, not prostitution at all

Alright, a woman who sells her body is a prostitute. But if she is forced to do so, or is not able to keep the money, I would call her a victim of sex trafficking.

One particular exception to the "sex for money" definition, is professional porn actors. They have sex for pay, but it's not prostitution. By legal definition.

And it's very easy to set off the kind of guys that klc described early on, if you define prostitution as simply as exchanging sex or company of any kind, for wealth. Because, toody, yes, it is LEGALLY considered prostitution to accept ANY financially significant "favors" in exchange for sex.

I've seen a fair number of women in online sites like this one, saying in their profiles or in commentary, that they expect the GUY to pay the full cost of any dates they go on, from the start. That is NOT prostitution, but it sure does come close to the border, despite old-fashioned, male-dominant-society traditions favoring the women.

Bottom line, though, anyone who accuses a woman of being a prostitute, had better have a TON more evidence than "she wanted me to pay for stuff."

accidental double post.

I say full dinner and conversation, no sex.

I won't date a guy that keeps score, using paying for dates as a tool to manipulate having sex.

@GalaxyStarz

I agree with this

If a woman likes men to be her companions without asking for money, this is a normal relationship, he is just her male friend. If a woman asks for money when she accompanies with men, she is more likely to be indenfied to be a whore.

check your inbox