506
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] chaosppe@lemmy.world 107 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're not dating anyone if you're paying them, you're just a client.

[-] stebo02@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago

still better than nothing I guess...

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 28 points 1 year ago

I don't know it sounds even sadder to be paying

Paying for sex, not sad, a little strange for me personally but not sad.

Paying for affection/love, now that IS sad.

[-] CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago

If you can't get sex from being a cool person and you have to pay for it, that's sad. If you're addicted to sex and pay for it because you need sex is even sadder.

People who pay for sex are not universally "not cool people" who can't get it other ways. In my work with various at risk populations, from what I hear from sex workers, plenty of people pay for sex. Funny charismatic, rich, doesn't matter, they're just as likely to be Johns.

[-] stebo02@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

You're right, only COOL people have the sex😎

[-] CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Well, traditionally, someone has to like you before they decide they want to fuck you

[-] Fredthefishlord 5 points 1 year ago

Traditional was so, so much worse than that

[-] CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

That's generally how it's been done in America for hundreds of years. I think peasants in Europe did it like that even further back too. So how long until it can be considered "tradition"?

[-] andxz@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

You don't read much in the way of history, do you?

[-] CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Rich families married for power, peasants married for love. That's pretty much how it's always been. Lmao do you think people who worked on a lords farm was also worrying about who their daughter could marry to get a leg up? That's ridiculous

[-] andxz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

From the University of Nottingham:

People from land-owning families did not normally marry for love. Instead, most such marriages were arranged by their parents or guardians.

Arranged marriages remain an important part of the culture of many societies in the world today, for the same implicit reasons that probably motivated medieval English people: for the creation of stable family units based on respect and duty, in which love can grow; and to protect and increase the family’s wealth and status by association with another family of equal or higher repute.

Peasant women who did not own any land were not exempt from some kind of control over their marriage, as many manorial lords demanded payment of a sum of money called a ‘merchet’

https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/manuscriptsandspecialcollections/learning/medievalwomen/theme5/marriagearrangements.aspx

There are plenty of examples, both rich and poor, if you scroll down.

this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
506 points (100.0% liked)

Greentext

4600 readers
1548 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS