A recent report on the rise of soft prostitution for college aged women created a little stir. The mainstream is getting a glimpse of something our crowd saw several years ago and documented as a sign of decline. Even the label soft prostitution is meant to soothe the mainstream mind. One cannot be a little bit pregnant and one cannot be a little bit of a hooker. Accepting money for sex is pretty cut and dry. More women are turning to this for an alternative revenue stream.
How did this happen? How did we get here? Now before we accept the media numbers at face value, let us keep in mind, many of these women are not college students currently. It is likely that they dropped out or are stating they are students to tap into an alluring market of marks. Every man has heard the stripper story about ‘paying for her classes’ but the horror on the woman’s face when a friend asks ‘Oh I go there, what major are you’. Despite this, the number of women engaging in sex work is rising.
The table was set with the loosening of sexual norms and mores in post-’60s America. Prostitution has always existed as the oldest profession in humankind but prior to the divorce flood and premarital sex boom, men had to pay for sex outside of marriage and this was frowned upon. America needed a huge pool of women actively engaging in premarital sex to create the supply for this market.
An unspoken effect on all sex markets is the technology to make it easier. Without antibiotics, over the counter lubricants, legalized abortion and cheap the birth control pill, this would all be much more difficult. The downside risk would be much larger. Pornography itself said that the twin tech changes of over the counter lubricants and video tapes and then viagra and digital uploads to the Internet changed their industry forever. If it has that effect on the mechanized sex realm, then it affects us all in our daily sex decisions.
Education is an important component. It is a multi-pronged attack. First, there is the need for a bachelors’ degree for the good life. This gatekeeper charges quite a bit, and that debt is now non-dischargeable. Even if a woman attends just one or two years and fails to complete her degree, she is saddled with that debt. We also, as a society, pushed more and more women into the university system as we changed women’s focus from building families to being career minded. This even affects female heavy industries like education and nursing, which had cheap teachers’ college programs in every state or in nursing’s case, two year programs limiting the cost to become an RN. Gone.
The most dangerous piece of the education attack is an academia infused with sex positivism to the point where prostitution became sex work, and a noble endeavor. Their body, their choice. If one thinks that notch counts do not matter, it makes it a lot easier to rationalize six months sugaring. Young women enter into these markets already primed to believe that this is not just acceptable but good. The supposed justification against prostitution is that selling one’s body is a form of slavery, yet here we have women eagerly engaging into varying degrees of it for some spending money.
Exactly how much is earned is not known but the fees range from high end to the incredibly disgusting and tragic Patreon accounts accruing $12/month in total. We live in a system with steady inflation. Disregard official numbers, which are doctored. Never-ending inflation has people unable to live poor on the cheap anymore. Suddenly, a little sugaring can cover some of those urban living expenses.
This still does not finish the puzzle. The final key was not just the Internet setting up dating websites. Craigslist hookers have been around since its inception, well until the Craigslist Killer put a bucket of cold water on it. There needed to not just be a market like the Seeking Arrangement sites, but also an easy way for women to manage their johns and load pictures and videos quickly. These amateur hookers needed smartphones with great cameras.
Do not sleep on this factor. I discovered a friend was in couples counseling because his wife discovered his Sugar Baby. Most interesting thing he explained was how she steadily sent him pictures and videos to keep him coming back (Marketing 101). He spent a few hundred a month for guaranteed bangs after work, swinging by the nearby college campus. This is not the type of thing you expect to hear at a Christmas Party, but this is America.
This is America and the final piece to this all. We live in the corrupt late stages of the republic, which is really an empire and decaying at that. This soft prostitution puzzle all stays together because no one enforces a single law or has the will to say “this is wrong and must be stopped“. Seeking Arrangement makes a market, but this does not mean we cannot put the hammer to them with some twisted use of the Mann Act. The Mann Act could be applied to the johns. These women can be prosecuted for prostitution… if there was the will. There is none. This entire situation expresses an old saying I recall from a chat with an analyst about Iran’s weekend marriage phenomenon. “In a poor country, men pimp out young women. When young women eagerly pimp themselves out, the country is dead“.
9 Comments Add yours
Yep, that’s America for you. Land of greed and sex.
Somehow no one seems to have realized in our culture that poor people can be greedy too; in fact, they’re the worst offenders. Millions of poor immigrants looking for easy prosperity, millions of whores spreading their legs to get Gucci bags, and millions dead by the system that keeps them going.
There is a lot being said here, but where is the will? In fact, there is action demanding that whoring shouldn’t be punished. Quite the opposite of what’s g argued here.
In my view, you have forgotten the most important piece of the puzzle. Prostitution is the oldest profession, and you must ask why. Let us first imagine a down-to-earth young woman of substantial beauty and rational practicality. She understands that her beauty and her sex are incredibly valuable to men. She could certainly trade her sex and company for cold, hard cash. But there’s another option. Soft prostitution is like temp work, freelancing. You bounce between employers. Or you could sign a contract with an employer. You could even find an employer who considers you so valuable, he makes you a partner in his business; a lifetime share of his company, full benefits, all that. Imagine that you’re a temp, and someone makes you that offer. Who wouldn’t take that deal? But that deal is right there on the table. It’s called marriage. And a woman desirable enough to make a living off of her sex and beauty is almost certainly desirable enough to find someone to sign her to the lifelong contract. A woman who is not desirable enough to be a successful hooker is still desirable enough to be the wife of a less-accomplished man.
Perhaps you object to this cold economic framing. But this frame is forced by your discussion of the issue as caused, or enabled, by technology and social media. I am in fact dispensing with the mechanical frame of the issue, because in economic terms, there would be no prostitution. Prostitution is not the oldest profession because women needed to trade their sex for survival; women who became wives and mothers, in primitive times, received not just provision but protection. Marriage is the better deal, economically, in all cases, historically and today. Melania Trump, as a supermodel, could have made a very good living as a high-class prostitute. But she would not live in a tower of gold. You mention the hooker who makes $12 a month on Patreon. And she continues to be a hooker. Is she that desperate? The welfare state says no. Or is she still a camwhore because she’s having a blast? Well, there might be the rare case where a woman is captured as a slave and made into a prostitute, or during a wartime occupation when the kids need to eat and the enemy forces aren’t looking for wifey. But do either of those scenarios describe society today?
I think we can conclude that prostitution is irrational. So we are left with two options. The first, which you seem to believe from your article, is that women are tricked or suckered into prostitution by academia and the media. This deserves some consideration. If this thesis is true, if the Cathedral is successful at getting women to prostitute themselves, it should be successful in getting them to change their sexual behavior in other ways. For example, if it tells girls that frat houses are dens of rape, and frat boys abuse women, and that casual sex while drunk is a crime against women, it should be at least moderately successful in getting girls to stop attending frat parties, that frat boys would be undateable social anathema, shunned by liberal college-educated women who suspect them of rape. This is exactly what it tells girls, loud and clear, and yet frat houses are full of nubile young women, who would claim to be feminists if you asked them, loosening their inhibitions to this day. Maybe this is a bad example. Most young educated women will proclaim to the high heavens that women cannot consent to sex while intoxicated. Have they stopped hooking up drunk at bars and house parties? Has hookup culture lost its association with liquor and drugs, even a little bit? Okay, third time’s the charm. You see tons of interracial couples on TV. Interracial coupling is considered holy; it is almost undeniable that the media promotes interracial relationships, especially black male on white female, every chance it gets. If white women listened to the media, they’d be dating a lot of black guys. It’d be an extremely common pairing to see, and the more educated and “plugged in” a woman is, the closer to the Cathedral she is, the more likely she’d be to have a nonwhite boyfriend. But public race mixing, no matter where you are, big city or small town, is by far the exception and not the rule. And the US is 60% white. Not like it’s hard for white girls to find minorities to date.
So basically, I have given you three examples in which the Cathedral has failed to change human nature, failed to change the sexual behavior of women. I can’t believe, then, that it is successful in convincing them to whore themselves out. So we are left with my second option. If women don’t whore themselves out for rational economic gain, and don’t whore themselves out because they are tricked into acting against their natural desire by the media, what is left? Women act like whores, always and everywhere, because being a whore is fun. It is not rational, but women are by and large not rational and do not respond very well to incentives, neither economic or cultural, as I’ve just shown. Women like having flings with rich and powerful men. It is its own edification, and getting money in return is icing on the cake. Most of them, in fact, do it for free; the receipt of a token payment for the “sugar baby” does not categorically change the nature of this behavior. And the high-status men who pay their sugar babies would certainly rather have a young mistress for free. The money is a concession extracted from the man in a relatively small amount of cases, a gate fee for access to a truly liberated women. This sort of serial fling, money or no, is female liberation and female nature. Never have there been fewer restrictions placed on female sexuality, so we can look at revealed preference in its most bare and honest form. Liberation does not mean good.
And is it birth control’s fault? Nonsense. Lower-class women without the time-preference to use birth control act the exact same way, except with a string of their bastard kids in tow. Technology is an enabler, but women act this way without it. The welfare state arose in response to the bastardy problem, not the other way around. The Victorian era orphanage was created because a lot of single mothers were giving birth in the rain and leaving their bastards on the front stoops of churches, and single mothers were giving birth in gutters because a father exercising authority over his daughters became first low-status and then simply illegal.
We can go farther with this. The man who pays a beautiful college student for sex, if you gave him the option, would almost certainly want to marry a beautiful college-age girl. Though he would deny this in polite company, put a few beers in him as a friend and see what his opinion is. You will also find out from this discussion that he considers getting a 20 year old woman to marry him is “unrealistic”. Which it is, today. You don’t see it happen very often. But it is realistic for him to go online and throw a woman of the same age a few hundred dollars a month for sex. Yeah. Hmm, makes you do a big think, doesn’t it? Girls will have sex with these men for a comparative pittance, but not marry them for much greater reward?
Well, it looks like girls are getting what they want, and men are not getting what they want. I have a word for such a scenario. I call it female power. It’s the opposite of patriarchy, but I can’t call it matriarchy because these women generally aren’t having kids. Yeah, female power. That might be a bit tough for you to chew and swallow. But here’s the thing. I don’t really care who’s wearing the uniforms and toting the guns and riding the trash trucks. Still men, obviously. Where you had rule by a eunuch class, men with balls are still carrying the swords and digging the ditches. And the eunuch still rules. But now, these men are maintaining a society under which women get what they want and men do not get what they want. In other words, these men are acting against their interests; they are Janissaries of female power.
I do not see a possible compromise here. There are periods in history, such as Victorian England up to the sexual revolution, that resemble a compromise, halfway between male power and female power, but they are unstable by definition. The direction this instability slides towards is determined by state power. We have well-documented and uncontroversial evidence that the state sided with female power in instigating the sexual revolution, and the opposite occurred in early colonial Australia, when single women, who were behaving just like they do today, were quite literally put on an auction block by the colonial government and sold as wives. The choice between the ducking-stool and the sugar baby is a binary one.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You’ll think this is “feminist” or something, but the truth is, no, prostitution isn’t irrational when men that would be good marriage partners just aren’t around. And that includes a man that’s desirable enough you’re willing to spend all your time with him. In that case you’re better off, as a woman, having some variety, no attachment and more freedom.
Oh got it, that’s what you call “fun”. Well, not wanting to hate your life is rational. That’s hardly female power, considering a whore’s life rather mediocre, and most wouldn’t say it’s what they’d prefer ; they’re hardly getting what they want. Note that I’m not blaming men either.
The technology helps sure, not clear to me why college aged girls should need lube, which you cite *twice*. The bigger cause is the delayed effects of the 1960s, and the “sex work” propaganda you cite. College girls have been whores for a long time, if you’re a woman racking up a 10-40 notch count in 4 years, you’d have been understood to be a whore in any pre-1960s society. Some of these girls are simply realizing they can make a buck or spreading their legs for upper middle class salary men. And why the hell not? They’re getting banged by the lacrosse team, the basketball team, what’s the difference? What’s another notch when you got $80k in forthcoming student debt?
One more interesting aspect is the parallel with the post Soviet Union. Instead of the vodka and krokodil America has opiates and meth. Instead of rampant street prostitution, America has budding middle class, internet prostitution. When does the industrial looting start? Hopefully before the boomers die so they go to their graves knowing their country is gone.
Why would college girls need lube? Well, that depends on which hole they’re selling.
The Nation’s not dead.
But its men have work to do.
Not its government, not the Mann Act, not the Cops, not someone else; You.
You, or be silent.