An Escort is a Prostitute

pros·ti·tute

NOUN:

1. One who solicits and accepts payment for sex acts.
   
2. One who sells one's abilities, talent, or name for an unworthy purpose.
   

What was that again? Because I don't see the dictionary saying its bad or good...

Respecting definitions? I am.


American Heritage Dictionary

Good morning sunshine, When you call someone with a definition, you'll do better considering ALL the meanings, not just the one that's more confortable to cry for your individualism while trying to kep a weak facade of decency. Otherwise you're just being plainly rude.
And by the way, as far as i know no one is selling sex in SL, i don't know of a service in wich someone physically comes to your home and has sex with you.
If you want to broaden the meaning of "sex" that much then i'm afraid you're calling prostitutes everyone taht works in the field, from red light film makers to erotica novelists. Wich is quite out of place, exactly like calling someone a prostitute in SL.

I use one definition.

One who solicits and accepts payment for sex acts.
Suck it up, because its not being rude. Telling someone to consider other definitions and how to run their lives is the rude act.

Unfortunately i'm afraid that you're the one that has to suck up the fact that your desperate cry for attention is just plain rudeness

There is no cry for attention, and people asking me to use a word in place of the one that defines what they do is the rudeness.

Oh your stubborn advocating the use a word that's not used in an environment in place of a commonplace term, that by the way sounds much less offensive and derogatory to most (dictionary included), definately looks like a (quite rude) cry for attention.
No one is "asking" you anything by the way. You're the one advocating an unused option.

I hear whore and prostitute, not escort, in rl. I don't change that out for sl. The dictionary definition is not derogatory, only your perception is.

One who solicits and accepts payment for sex acts.

I don't see it saying its morally or ethically evil.

But it is a real comparison. Do you honestly believe there aren't women and men both that will have sex with someone because they are rich, have nice toys, and give nice gifts? There are lots and lots of folks like that. I'm not accusing you of doing it, or anyone in particular, but it does happen, and probably all too often. And one is considered legal and the other isn't.

You forget your own quotes just a few posts after? "unworthy" sounds fairly derogatory in my eyes, what about yours?

Again, when you use a term on someone, you better consider ALL the meanings it has, otherwise you might consider silence, wich is as well a good choice.

Nothing in that SECONDARY definition mentions sex for money.

I stand by my definition and leave youre rude ass here alone.

Sure. But using it in general terms is what ticked me off. How about using the "gold digger" as an example rather than... any woman taken out on a nice date, lol? Or a woman who recieves a gift from a man she eventually has sex with? Very different things.

Maybe you have to be a woman to get this, to be on a date when a guy buys you a meal and acts like that is a downpayment on some pussy, I don't know. Or be lumped in with women who bleed guys for shit before they have sex, not that they are any better than the men who use that as some sort of coercement.

I guess this was just a miscommunication, heh.

Lol, look at what altar the preaching comes from...

Well..I guess my original post may have not beeen clear enough. I wasn't accusing all women, or men, of this behavior, and I know there are many women with standards and self-respect. I don't think I ever said all women, or even most women, but if I did, I apologize.

But, again, it happens. It happens in small towns, large cities, probably almost every country. If even heard other women, and other men, cheer the one doing the "gold-digging" on and saying how lucky they are to have snagged a rich catch.

How many times have you run across a lovely and nice girl attaached to a guy that is an obvious jerk, but who has a nice car, nic clothes, and spends a considerable amount of money on her? I know I've seen it many times in my life. In one way, it may be an issue of security, or an issue of enjoying the ride, but either way, the jerk, if poor and unable to provide the "fringe benifits", would simply not have that woman.

So it is prostitution in a way. Just for material goods rather than the cash to buy the goods.

Elinea Richard: Regarding your problem with people advertising for dancers, there is one club that advertises for dancers and clearly states they do not hire strippers or escorts. If you're still in need of a job, they list in the classifieds.

I'm proud to be a dancer, but couldn't do a escort services.

But each and everyone in it's own way.

Escort and prostitute is the same thing in SL. In real lfe, escorts don't provide sexual "services" afaik.

Sure they do. They just don't say so up front. They say that you're just paying them for their time and that "anything that happens between two consenting adults" is just coincidence. Wink.

And those all-night massage parlors? They're for more than shiatzu.

Wow I just killed an hour of my life on this thread...

Escorts are escorts and prostitutes are prostitutes. A pal of mine is an escort. If anything happens on the side, it's because there was chemistry... So she says. Who am I to judge.

If I go out on a date and spend money and time getting to know a women... is she a prostitute, or an escort? If we hook up, or not?! Since most Western women follow this dating model can we assume they are all escorts and whores?

What a load of dingo's kidneys....

=B-)

I question why there is this obsession to impose labels on people who may not want to have those labels imposed on them. To what good purpose does it serve?

I can think of no good purpose, but I can think of one bad purpose. The purpose is to degrade. Imposing labels on others, especially labels with bad connotations, is in my mind a form of bigotry.

As for me, I am quite happy to use the label that the label holder desires. It harms me at no level, and it shows respect towards the other.

Jesus Christ; why in god's name is this thread still going on?

Marla-san speaks words of wisdom.

Any Pie going in this thread? make mine a big piece

Peace

This and all other threads will be closed very soon.

I see no reason to use the label another desires, if there is a better one. It harms me at no level and shows respect towards my own mind, which I must respect or lose who I am, and to the historical definitions. To do less is not being true to myself.

When I say 'prostitute' it is not in a degrading manner, nor is it bigotry, merely me saying 'they sell sex.' Any other connotation is placed upon by themselves.

"Prostitute" doesn't carry a bad connotation to me. I'd rather it be legal and regulated.

"Escort" is the same as "prostitute" but with better marketing.

Sure, the escort doesn't *have* to have sex with the client. But in doing so, she guarantees that the client will never call back again (especially if it's a first time client; a more-established one might indeed only want to talk) and risks negative feedback on boards that review and recommend escorts.

It's not bigotry. It's just the way it is. And really, if we're talking about judging, the kind of judge that wears a black robe isn't inclined to see much difference between the two.

Actually, the whole thing fascinates me. If you really want to know more about the ins and outs (sorry!) of the business, check out a board like this one

It's called necroposting.