Not sure how being rational qualifies as white knighting but you know best eh Daff? :sarcastic:Pathetic. Find a definition that has nothing to do with the context of the thread to try and make a tenuous defense.
Nobody here is talking about reputation, and if we were I'd be happy to discuss hypocritical social mores, historical views of prostitution in other cultures etc - but its utterly irrelevant to the thread.
I'm not making any claims about "all" escorts Daff, this thread is and I absolutely refute that claim. Only a moron would claim to know the psychology of all escorts. I've personally met some who were not fucked up (at least no more than most people) which is enough for me to not agree with this ridiculous generalisation.
And to be clear I have met a few that were definitely fucked up like PsychoSummer89 but those have been a small minority.
No question there are some fucked up WG's just like there are some fucked up mysoginistic abusive punters.
I am just disagreeing with the generalisation not saying all WG's are something they are not.If someone falls into postitution because they are psychologically damaged and you knowingly fuck them then yes, it is abuse. I say you can't know if they are damaged. The claim that they are ALL damaged however means you can't say you didn't know doesn't it?
So by all means continue to argue that you knowingly take advantage of those that are prostituting themselves because they are damaged.
"Find a definition"? It happened to be the first result that I got when I googled "damaged goods definition" (other than Urban Dictionary). Trying it now and Google itself gives me a definition: "a person who is regarded as inadequate or impaired in some way".
Just because you haven read the thread in a certain manner doesn't mean that you are able to tell the rest of us what context the thread has taken. Or how we should take it.
My first post, as an example, says that the prossie being jizzed on by half the town is one way in which she is damaged goods.
The fucking OP's reference (in his first post) to how she is "damaged" is by saying, "One of those reasons is to remember she is fucking hundreds of men a month and is just a sperm receptacle!"
Seems to me that it's you who is picking and choosing
You claim that fucking a prossie who is fucked up is tantamount to sexual and/or psychological abuse. You also claim that you have met some who you don't believe are fucked up (and, of course, you can be 100% sure of that) and have met others who are definitely fucked up and don't question the fact that some others are fucked up, perhaps without outwardly expressing it.
I call that burying your head in the sand. Like other fluffies you create a fantasy world to justify your actions.
You are undoubtedly worse. You claim that those who fuck fucked up prossies are inflicting sexual/psychological abuse. This is an opinion few of us would agree with, but it's your opinion nonetheless. You then knowingly fuck fucked up prossies. You justify it to yourself by believing you've met one or two who are not fucked up, therefore some exist, and you couldn't possibly know if girl x is damaged or not, so what's the harm in fucking her?
You know there are psychologically damaged girls whoreing themselves and you believe fucking them is tantamount to sexual/psychological abuse, but you fuck them anyway. Tut tut