tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:00 am
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 10:40 am
tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:55 am
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:27 am
frmanfan wrote: ↑Thu Feb 28, 2019 6:07 pm
Looking at the bigger picture here, not like all you old grandmas fretting over political correctness and the #MeToo stuff, (and not to downplay the sex trafficking, that is a despicable issue) I hope when I get to 77 years old that I still can enjoy the simple things in life.
That's a nice hope; the grandpas and 'old grandmas' hope so, too. May we all be still be enjoying "the simple things in life".
Though hopefully with someone who actually likes you not just your money, someone who hasn't been forced into it.
If you gotta pay for it...just sayin.
What a sanctimonious crock. The man is single (due to his wife's death) and 77 years old... he doesn't want to be "liked," he wants sex. Good for him...
My problem with Kraft is his lack of discretion with patronizing such a dump. He can certainly afford more exclusive/confidential service.
Is there some weird, self-destructive psychology going on with Kraft?
Really, "sanctimonious"?
I certainly don't have any issue with "sex" or what frmanfan more euphemistically called "the simple things in life".
I'm all for it!
It's interesting that you know for a certainty that Kraft "doesn't want to be "liked,"" much less loved. I don't. But I do agree that wasn't what he was looking for at this establishment.
But it wasn't
just for "sex" either.
Again, how hard is it to imagine that Kraft could attract one or multiple women who "liked" him enough to have sex with him? Totally of their free will?
But instead he's choosing to pay for sex, knowing full well that there's a high likelihood that the illegal business he's paying has abused the woman, potentially sex trafficked the woman.
Um, that's basically what I said. What, are you studying at the A Fan School of Debate?
If that's not easy enough for you, let me further suggest that this stuff is about power not sex.
Since we're speculating... it's perhaps much simpler than that...he may not want the hassle of a full-time relationship at this point in his life...just the sex. 
Especially in a situation like this in which the john has plenty of opportunity for alternative ways to have sex be part of their life.
This is a choice to exercise power over another human being.
meh 
If we can't say that
this choice is wrong, I don't know where you could possibly draw the line.
Listen, maybe you (or anyone reading this) frequented such establishments and are now alarmed by the notion that there's actually something despicable about it. Maybe you'd never understood the issue fully. That's ok, just reconsider your choices going forward.
OK dad, and make sure you stop that jaywalking, or else... 
Hey, you picked the fight with "sanctimonious".
You called the business a "dump", you didn't make at all clear that this issue isn't just that you don't like the peeling wallpaper, but that it had a high likelihood for abuse and sex trafficking. Obviously so. But if that's what you meant by "dump", fine.
Except that you then compare going to an establishment like this with "jay walking". Kinda undercuts the notion that you actually 'get' why it's wrong, the abuse and degradation of other human beings.
I don't care for a moment whether he wants the "hassle" of a full time relationship. Try part time or one night stands, if you'd like. The guy isn't a total toad, right?
Listen, the better argument, if you really want to make one, would be that a guy with his profile needs to be worried about accusations of abuse, sexual assault, or simple patrimony. A woman who actually has freedom is a threat to make such claims. A prostitute may be seen as less risky to make such claims...especially someone from Guatemala, Thailand, Albania, etc, likely to be controlled by the business.
Of course, this logic falls apart as well. Especially morally.
Bottomline, get to know someone you like and who likes you. Treat her well. Enjoy yourselves. Pretty simple formula.
