The crossover between Polyamory, Swinging and Sex work

[Scott]

Wait a second there; why does having a traditional relationship on the side alter whether or not they're monogamous.

Typo on my part. I meant to say, if they DO have a traditional relationship and do sex work, they have more than one partner, while if they only do sex work, they potentially have a single partner, or they have several partner but no "serious" one.

Ok.

In the latter case, people might argue that it doesn't fall under polyamory, swinging or open relationships because none of the sexual relations fall under the common definition.

The thing is, being monogamous doesn't mean that you're serious with your partner. This applies with the partners of polyamorous people to some extent (at the very least, it applies to some people who identify as polyamorous; poly people may differ as to whether a casual sexual relationship would constitute a "real" relationship) and it applies even more (in my view) in the case of swingers, many of whom make it a point to not have serious relationships with anyone but their primary (I know that this isn't exclusively so, however).. and it seems that not -every- swinger has a primary. I have heard that some sex workers have posed as swingers for clients, perhaps so that clients could visit swing clubs, some of which have a policy that single men can't go.

I guess I got tangled up and started typing one sentence and finished with another one. My apologies.

Np, you may have noticed I edit a lot, it's to fix mistakes like this .

and there might be other options. I think with polyamory and swinging, the only two criteria that directly affect polyamory are the second and third (as in, how many partners, and is the relationship closed or open).

So I don't deny the overlap but I don't think it's relevant to polyamory or swinging as a whole, or to polyamory or swinging exclusively.

You start off with polyamory and swinging, then single it down to polyamory. Can you explain this a bit more?

Here, I rephrased my sentence and forgot to fix it. I meant for it to apply to both, the singling down was accidental and due to changing my sentence and accidentally leaving some of the old one behind.

Alright. Well, I'd like to say that I think that the overlap is very relevant. As I've said in the past, prostitution has been around a lot longer then the term "polyamory" and while I agree that most of the time, the relationship between a client and a sex worker isn't what most would call a polyamorous relationship, there can be exceptions. I think I'll finish off by requoting a section from former sex worker Maggie McNiel's article Not for Everybody:

**********************
One of the central goals of this blog is to help people realize that prostitution is [a] completely natural female behavior; it actually predates marriage in human development and similar behaviors appear even in non-primate species. Most women will not hesitate to use their “erotic capital” (as Catherine Hakim calls it) to get ahead, and many have no qualms about openly using sex for material gain. About 10% of all women have directly taken money for sex at least once, and about 1% have actually worked as prostitutes at some time in their lives. As George Bataille put it, “Not every woman is a prostitute, but prostitution is the natural apotheosis of the feminine attitude”; in other words, full-time professional prostitution occupies one end of a whole spectrum of female behaviors on which it is impossible to draw a line separating the whore from the non-whore.
**********************

I personally strongly dislike the term "whore". I'm not even comfortable with "slut". I know that some women have decided to try to retake the word slut, but I haven't seen much an effort to do so with whore.. like sex at dawn, I prefer the word promiscuous, mainly because of the definition it used to have; essentially, pro mixing. Variety is the spice of life type thing. I'm for it, and there's also no denying that in today's society, most people can't live without having money to buy things they need, so I think it's understandable why some may find that the best way of acquiring it is by exchanging certain services for it.

 

[km34]

**********************
One of the central goals of this blog is to help people realize that prostitution is [a] completely natural female behavior; it actually predates marriage in human development and similar behaviors appear even in non-primate species. Most women will not hesitate to use their “erotic capital” (as Catherine Hakim calls it) to get ahead, and many have no qualms about openly using sex for material gain. About 10% of all women have directly taken money for sex at least once, and about 1% have actually worked as prostitutes at some time in their lives. As George Bataille put it, “Not every woman is a prostitute, but prostitution is the natural apotheosis of the feminine attitude”; in other words, full-time professional prostitution occupies one end of a whole spectrum of female behaviors on which it is impossible to draw a line separating the whore from the non-whore.
**********************

I've pretty much stopped reading this thread, but this caught my attention... Why is prostitution only a completely natural FEMALE behavior? Aren't men also inclined to using their "sex appeal" to get ahead, if in a position to do so? I know far more men than women who would eagerly take money for sex acts, but since woman aren't generally inclined to pay for it, haven't had the opportunity.

I think I've decided to deem this thread sexist.

 

[Scott]

I think I'll finish off by requoting a section from former sex worker Maggie McNiel's article Not for Everybody:

**********************
One of the central goals of this blog is to help people realize that prostitution is [a] completely natural female behavior; it actually predates marriage in human development and similar behaviors appear even in non-primate species. Most women will not hesitate to use their “erotic capital” (as Catherine Hakim calls it) to get ahead, and many have no qualms about openly using sex for material gain. About 10% of all women have directly taken money for sex at least once, and about 1% have actually worked as prostitutes at some time in their lives. As George Bataille put it, “Not every woman is a prostitute, but prostitution is the natural apotheosis of the feminine attitude”; in other words, full-time professional prostitution occupies one end of a whole spectrum of female behaviors on which it is impossible to draw a line separating the whore from the non-whore.
**********************

I personally strongly dislike the term "whore". I'm not even comfortable with "slut". I know that some women have decided to try to retake the word slut, but I haven't seen much an effort to do so with whore.. like sex at dawn, I prefer the word promiscuous, mainly because of the definition it used to have; essentially, pro mixing. Variety is the spice of life type thing. I'm for it, and there's also no denying that in today's society, most people can't live without having money to buy things they need, so I think it's understandable why some may find that the best way of acquiring it is by exchanging certain services for it.

I've pretty much stopped reading this thread, but this caught my attention... Why is prostitution only a completely natural FEMALE behavior?

Who said that? Maggie was speaking about women, not men. That being said, I do think that females use it more then men. I think men use other methods more, but I'm the first to admit that I don't have any hard data on this. I did find the following article in Forbes though:
Women Who Ask Do Get Ahead, But Men Don't Have To

I found this part in the article to be interesting:
"gendered language still prevails, with words like “aggressive” or “bold” baked into job descriptions to describe ideal candidates. These are words more often associated with men—and this explains why women are viewed as an imperfect fit for many top jobs."

I think that's a pretty clear indication of what men use to succeed; aggression, boldness; these are things associated with warfare. I definitely think that we're living in a culture that has war like aspects to it. Whether it's the U.S. and allies invasions of various countries, or the eat or be eaten corporate culture, I think this is something that men tend to do better then women. What might this aggressive behaviour cause men to do? One thing, apparently is lying (I have some anecdotal evidence that this is true, but I'll let the following article speak for itself):
Men Exaggerate Their Achievements To Get Ahead. Should Women Start Stretching The Truth?

The women writing the article doesn't like the idea of lying to get ahead. I heartily agree. If you think about it, lying is another trait that is common in warfare; if people are going to harm each other, deception is certainly a tool that is used. This goes for both employers and employees. Ultimately, ofcourse, this aggressive pattern isn't sustainable; to give one example, there's only so much land that can be destroyed before we run out of land.

Aren't men also inclined to using their "sex appeal" to get ahead, if in a position to do so? I know far more men than women who would eagerly take money for sex acts, but since woman aren't generally inclined to pay for it, haven't had the opportunity.

Exactly. A market requires both supply -and- demand.

I think I've decided to deem this thread sexist.

If you've read what I just had to say, hopefully you'll change your mind on that.

 

[nycindie]

Please, people, the only way this thread can die is if you stop posting to it!

 

[Scott]

Please, people, the only way this thread can die is if you stop posting to it!

I believe this is your very first post in this thread. Why do you have such a keen interest in seeing this thread die?

 

[km34]

Exactly. A market requires both supply -and- demand.

If you've read what I just had to say, hopefully you'll change your mind on that.

Nope. Male prostitutes still exist, men doing sex acts with other men for trade v. money is also something that tends to be ignored although it exists. How can you discuss how sex work, or whatever you want to refer to it as, overlaps other lifestyles/activities without counting for ALL sex workers? Your arguments have been focused on the few prostitutes you've met who have agreed (or claimed to agree) with your viewpoints.

@nycindie - I had resisted the urge, but just wanted to point out to dear Scott that he is guilty of ignoring a subpopulation of sex workers just like he claims WE (the poly community, I suppose) have been doing to the prostitutes (and their johns) that he is supposedly arguing for.

 

[Scott]

Aren't men also inclined to using their "sex appeal" to get ahead, if in a position to do so? I know far more men than women who would eagerly take money for sex acts, but since woman aren't generally inclined to pay for it, haven't had the opportunity.

Exactly. A market requires both supply -and- demand.

I think I've decided to deem this thread sexist.

If you've read what I just had to say, hopefully you'll change your mind on that.

Nope. Male prostitutes still exist, men doing sex acts with other men for trade v. money is also something that tends to be ignored although it exists.

I never said otherwise. I simply agreed with your statement that "woman aren't generally inclined to pay for it", which is why I brought up supply and demand.

How can you discuss how sex work, or whatever you want to refer to it as, overlaps other lifestyles/activities without counting for ALL sex workers?

What gave you the impression that I didn't want to count all sex workers?

Your arguments have been focused on the few prostitutes you've met who have agreed (or claimed to agree) with your viewpoints.

I agree that I haven't met many sex workers. That being said, it's one thing to say that I don't have much anecdotal evidence to support my views. It's quite another to say that the sex workers I've heard from don't have much anecdotal evidence. Did you disagree with Maggie Mcniel's article Not for Everybody?

@nycindie - I had resisted the urge, but just wanted to point out to dear Scott that he is guilty of ignoring a subpopulation of sex workers just like he claims WE (the poly community, I suppose) have been doing to the prostitutes (and their johns) that he is supposedly arguing for.

Well I'm glad you did km. I came here with an idea, the idea that there is some crossover between polyamory, swinging and sex work. I haven't written a book about it though; ideas can be expanded on and you helped with this, so thanks.

 

[Scott]

This morning, I tweeted Maggie, telling her about my thread here and if she had any advice as to how to proceed. She brought up a post of hers concerning her work with couples:
http://t.co/t7BRLuSi

As well as a post on swinging (or wife swapping, as she likes to call it) in general, and its connection to sex work:
http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2010/11/20/wife-swapping/

She also mentioned that she believes about 10% of sex worker adults are male, although she didn't cite a study for this. She -did- bring up an article that cited a study that found that around 45% of underage prostitutes in England were male:
http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2011/11/15/water-seeks-its-own-level/

 

[newrelations]

In my experience, prostitution is not always limited to a quick one hour affair without emotional entanglements. It can be more than that and truly qualify as polyamorous behavior.

It's interesting you are writing from Toronto. Toronto is quite liberal for this sort of thing. One can find many escorts which are very normal, sometimes highly educated women who simply like sex.

My wife was an escort in Toronto when I met her. She was an absolutely stunning Asian lady, very elegant, tall, slim, long hair, chatty. I fell in love, recommended her to my colleagues and eventually ended up marrying her.

We decided not to publicize our wedding among my friends because, as much as Toronto is very liberal, this would have seemed like stretching our luck. So we moved out.

Still, my wife finds prostitution as very enjoyable. She has several lovers, mostly married men from out of town, and keeps them company when they are in town. They pay her for her time.

I don't find anything wrong with that. To make it work, I committed to be monogamous or else she would feel insecure. I have no problem with being monogamous and on her side. Her promiscuous affairs are sufficient stimulus for our sexual life to the point that I am uninterested in developing extra marital relationships.

This went on for 13 years now and we are just fine. Our marriage lasted longer than most after all.

 

[Scott]

In my experience, prostitution is not always limited to a quick one hour affair without emotional entanglements. It can be more than that and truly qualify as polyamorous behavior.

I agree. But most importantly, I think we need to remember that prostitutes are -people-. The whole reason that this thread came into being is because I met a woman who identified as both a sex worker -and- polyamorous. For reasons that now appear rather obvious to me (the vitriol directed my way for even suggesting that prostitution and polyamory could have crossover being an excellent example), she was rather cautious about letting many people in the polyamorous community regarding her sex work, and it may be that this caution on her part may have led to us going our separate ways, but it led me to think, and write, about my belief that there is some crossover between these forms of non monogamous relationships.

It's interesting you are writing from Toronto.

Actually, I haven't lived in Toronto for a year now; I'm -near- Toronto, laugh . That being said, I have lived there (and in its suburbs) for most of my life.

Toronto is quite liberal for this sort of thing. One can find many escorts which are very normal, sometimes highly educated women who simply like sex.

I'm not sure it's that simple. I think it's more that people need money to survive, and a fair amount of women have decided that the best way to acquire atleast part of it is through sex work.

My wife was an escort in Toronto when I met her. She was an absolutely stunning Asian lady, very elegant, tall, slim, long hair, chatty. I fell in love, recommended her to my colleagues and eventually ended up marrying her.

That's so sweet

We decided not to publicize our wedding among my friends because, as much as Toronto is very liberal, this would have seemed like stretching our luck. So we moved out.

Point well taken. Perhaps you'd rather not say (and if so, I understand), but when you say London, do you mean London, Ontario, or London, England?

Still, my wife finds prostitution as very enjoyable. She has several lovers, mostly married men from out of town, and keeps them company when they are in town. They pay her for her time.

Wow, interesting.

I don't find anything wrong with that. To make it work, I committed to be monogamous or else she would feel insecure. I have no problem with being monogamous and on her side.

I couldn't do that, laugh . I haven't had that many lovers to be honest; I've had sex with 3 women in my entire life. But the idea of committing to being with only one person... I once told a woman that I could commit to this for a year, but no longer. I could certainly -tell- them if I became attracted to another woman, but that's rather different.

Her promiscuous affairs are sufficient stimulus for our sexual life to the point that I am uninterested in developing extra marital relationships.

This went on for 13 years now and we are just fine. Our marriage lasted longer than most after all.

That's an awesome story nr- thanks for sharing

 

[nycindie]

Now, Scott, don't go telling fibs. You weren't getting a hard time for saying that there was "cross-over." You were given a hard time because you were positing that prostitution is a form of polyamory. I'm not about to reiterate the argument, but had to say this just to set the record straight.

 

[kdt26417]

Hey Scott,

Just recognized your name/avatar/thread from PolyPercs and had to at least stop by and say hi. I took your poll; I agree there's probably some crossover in principle, but I wouldn't make any commitments about how *much* crossover I think there is. I know the originally-cited study shows some evidence of sex-work crossover.

I'll also say that in the about-four years that I've spent on poly forums (mostly Ppercs, but anyway), I've observed quite a few cases where swingers were transitioning into poly, or where already-poly persons are swingers also. So I'd estimate there's considerable crossover between swing and poly.

Anyway, hi, always nice to see a familiar face.

Regards,
Kevin.

 

[Scott]

Now, Scott, don't go telling fibs. You weren't getting a hard time for saying that there was "cross-over." You were given a hard time because you were positing that prostitution is a form of polyamory.

I think the difference is rather thin; a crossover implies that the definitions of the terms aren't clear cut; perhaps I should have said that I believed there was some overlap between polyamory and prostitution?

I'm not about to reiterate the argument, but had to say this just to set the record straight.

I'm glad you chipped in, anyway. Words can divide people but they can also moderate things. Here's to hoping that second aspect of them wins through here.

 

[Scott]

Hey Scott,

Just recognized your name/avatar/thread from PolyPercs and had to at least stop by and say hi.

Thanks . I had noted your arrival here with some interest but had decided to not say anything for a while, as I didn't want you to be mired in any of the controversy surrounding me .

I took your poll; I agree there's probably some crossover in principle, but I wouldn't make any commitments about how *much* crossover I think there is.

Understood.

I know the originally-cited study shows some evidence of sex-work crossover.

I'll also say that in the about-four years that I've spent on poly forums (mostly Ppercs, but anyway), I've observed quite a few cases where swingers were transitioning into poly, or where already-poly persons are swingers also. So I'd estimate there's considerable crossover between swing and poly.

It would seem that you haven't seen much crossover between polyamory and sex work, and I would say that I've also not seen as much of this; this is why polyamory is furthest away from sex work in my thread title. I do believe there is a bit more crossover between swinging and sex work then polyamory and sex work, but I have no hard data on that; it just seems to fit, as I think that sex work and swinging are more associated with physical pleasure versus emotional ones, whereas I think that polyamory is more about the emotions then the physical side of things.

Anyway, hi, always nice to see a familiar face.

For sure . Thanks for chipping in. I think you were a real life saver over at PPercs for me; I think that people (including myself at times) can get very emotionally involved in a particular position and it's nice to have someone who just tries to analyze the whole thing objectively.

 

[kdt26417]

Why, thank you, sir. I've had my moments where I got emotionally involved in a discussion, but I usually try to be objective, as much as possible. (I do better in a forum-like internet setting because I have more time to think, versus say a chat room or live conversation. I don't always think so well on my feet.)

Yeah, I've heard many arguments back and forth about the merits/nature of sex work. Perhaps it's no coincidence that discussions about pornography tend to take on the same contraversial tone (i.e., how consensual is it, really). I think I'd have to be more "involved" somehow in the sex work (or porn) industry myself before I'd be quick to volunteer any "hard" conclusions about it. I use a lot of "estimate-," "some-," "most-," and "seldom-" -like statements in those realms, and not many "I-know-," "everybody-knows-," "never-," and "always-" -type statements. One has to make room for a great variety of unique individual situations, I think. I sure don't consider myself to be an expert in these fields.

Anyway, I've been known to attract a little contraversy of my own at times, so we have that in common. D'oh well! Price of being overly philosophical, I guess? I couldn't tell ya.

 

[Scott]

Why, thank you, sir. I've had my moments where I got emotionally involved in a discussion, but I usually try to be objective, as much as possible. (I do better in a forum-like internet setting because I have more time to think, versus say a chat room or live conversation. I don't always think so well on my feet.)

Same

Yeah, I've heard many arguments back and forth about the merits/nature of sex work. Perhaps it's no coincidence that discussions about pornography tend to take on the same controversial tone (i.e., how consensual is it, really).

Yeah, in one conversation I was in, the subject started with pornography but ended with sex work .

I think I'd have to be more "involved" somehow in the sex work (or porn) industry myself before I'd be quick to volunteer any "hard" conclusions about it. I use a lot of "estimate-," "some-," "most-," and "seldom-" -like statements in those realms, and not many "I-know-," "everybody-knows-," "never-," and "always-" -type statements. One has to make room for a great variety of unique individual situations, I think. I sure don't consider myself to be an expert in these fields.

Agreed. This is why I'm happy I was able to find people who had studied the issue more or who were even sex workers in the past. And ofcourse people like newrelations, who is -married- to woman who engages in sex work is just icing on the cake

Anyway, I've been known to attract a little controversy of my own at times, so we have that in common. D'oh well! Price of being overly philosophical, I guess? I couldn't tell ya.

Could be, heh . I try to be as polite as possible, but when you step into hot topics, it may still not be enough to avoid getting burned -.-

 

[kdt26417]

Yeah, the kitchen can get pretty hot ...

Re:

"And of course people like newrelations, who is *married* to woman who engages in sex work is just icing on the cake ..."

That was quite an amazing story, wasn't it.

Regards,
KDT.

 

[Scott]

And ofcourse people like newrelations, who is -married- to woman who engages in sex work is just icing on the cake

That was quite an amazing story, wasn't it.

Aye. I understand why most people who want emotional connections shun sex work. I would probably not even be exploring all of this if I hadn't met this woman who did sex work and identified as polyamorous, but ever since then I started thinking that polyamory, swinging and sex work are just variants on the same non monogamous theme. I think it could definitely be said that sex work seems to fit in more with a monogamous culture, where people want to have relationships not permitted by monogamy and sex workers are good at keeping secrets; the sex worker (let's call her "A") said that most clients were cheating on someone. I definitely think this isn't good, and I personally would never want to be part of this, but then allegedly monogamous people (or closeted polies/swingers if you want to see it that way) do a lot of things in order to "fit in" to the mainstream culture that I wouldn't do.

 

[kdt26417]

People are gradually learning to hear about, tolerate, and consider alternate sexuality and relationship forms, but it's still largely a world with a narrow definition of "good relationship" (monogamy being just one part of that definition), so sometimes people have inclinations/desires that don't "fit in," and wind up contorting themselves or their lives to "make it fit." Cheating would be one example; the secrecy is an alternative way to make the "superflous" relationship fit inside the mold. Essentially sweeping it under the rug to "make the house look clean."

Who knows how it would (hopefully someday will) look if society had a much more tolerant/open view/definition of (potentially) good/healthy relationships. I wouldn't even want to speculate; it's too complicated of a question. There would probably be a lot less secrecy, though. Not only less cheating, but less situations where people had to be "in the closet" about their lifestyle. It's too bad we don't live in that kind of world, but it's good that things seem to be slowly moving in that direction.

 

[Scott]

People are gradually learning to hear about, tolerate, and consider alternate sexuality and relationship forms, but it's still largely a world with a narrow definition of "good relationship" (monogamy being just one part of that definition), so sometimes people have inclinations/desires that don't "fit in," and wind up contorting themselves or their lives to "make it fit." Cheating would be one example; the secrecy is an alternative way to make the "superflous" relationship fit inside the mold. Essentially sweeping it under the rug to "make the house look clean."

Who knows how it would (hopefully someday will) look if society had a much more tolerant/open view/definition of (potentially) good/healthy relationships. I wouldn't even want to speculate; it's too complicated of a question. There would probably be a lot less secrecy, though. Not only less cheating, but less situations where people had to be "in the closet" about their lifestyle. It's too bad we don't live in that kind of world, but it's good that things seem to be slowly moving in that direction.

Well said