well.. yeah.. granted.. but the way it was worded kinda tried to make it seem like they were escorts for hire... obviously, they're having sex for money.. but it's a bit different...
It was worded in a rather.. um.. hysterical(?) verbage...
Printable View
well.. yeah.. granted.. but the way it was worded kinda tried to make it seem like they were escorts for hire... obviously, they're having sex for money.. but it's a bit different...
It was worded in a rather.. um.. hysterical(?) verbage...
By that logic all us producers are pimps. strange
Quote:
Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude
Aren't you? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirt
Quote:
Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude
No. I'm not a pimp.
pimp
n : someone who procures customers for whores (in England they call a pimp a ponce) [syn: procurer, panderer, pander, pandar, fancy man, ponce] v : arrange for sexual partners for others [syn: pander, procure]
All these labels and objectification of people isn't really productive. The Bush administration does it to make Gay people seem non human or "evil" etc. etc. Do we really need to be labeling ourselves and the people we work with?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirt
Squirt, I was kidding. That's what smiley faces are for. Besides, forum discussions are for sharing ideas. And I was sharing mine.
And yeah, in a very roundabout way, those of us who are in the sex-for-money trade are variations on prostitutes and pimps. Big deal. I don't see any shame in that. To me, it's all good. In fact, it's VERY good. ;)