PhD Science student by day, US$600/hr "escort" by night

... that if women had more professional opportunities, they would no longer "have to turn to selling themselves to provide form their children (who of course had all been abandoned by their EVIL FATHERS)".

Guess that is not entirely true, is it? While I agree entirely with the idea of equality of opportunity for women to enter any profession they can truly and fairly qualify for, I simply wish to point out that by doing so it has merely broadened the many ways they already had to make money to include realms that the "olden days" feminists were dead set against.

If I were a feminist who was in her 20s back in 1960, with that mind-set and those goals, you know, I'd be terribly disappointed right about now. But as Styx so aptly sung it on Paradise Theatre, "Nothing ever goes as planned." I mean really, why should matters like this be any different from anything else?

How big is the market for straight male escorts? Not much i would think, yet feminists see prostitution as a sign of female oppression - in this case it was just another way to get through one's PHD and if she were an equally attractive male she might not have gotten said PHD.

----------------------
Rise, Rebel, Resist.

If I operated a science facility I'd never hire her. To do ethical, high-quality research a person has to respect themselves. Whores don't.

-ax

Maybe I am just an old-fashioned moralist, but I am surprised that there is no judgement about her being a prostitute anywhere in the article. Perhaps expressing any judgement would be politically incorrect because after all she was able to use prostitution in order to open up a new career in medical science? Is it now forbidden to express any negative judgement of a woman? Or are we endlessly attempting to be apologists for women who do bad things? Are we now trying to put a happy face on these at-least-in-prior-times immoral acts, saying "ah well... if it supported her with her PhD, then it must be OK"?

She picked a high paying career, that she deemed easy and enjoyable. She stayed with it until she finished her education and something better came along. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with that.

Along the way she happened to bring pleasure to thousands of men who were trapped with angry harridans, were too beta to get a decent looking women by themselves, or; simply didn't want to deal with the bullshit, and viewed parting with a few hundreds as a cheaper way to get a woman in bed then putting up with a privilege princesses crap.

Say what you want but "free sex" is very rare for men. I've only been able to get it; and, see others get it when you run across a drunk bitch at a bar or club during closing time. You either pay with time, or; money and usually you pay with both. Imagine what a game changer it would be if prostitution was decriminalized in the United States as it is in many 1st world nations. Woman would no longer be able to control men with sex if the average guy could just head downtown and, sleep with a good looking 18 year old for $45. It would be a total game changer.

Not to mention that she agrees with the MRA point of view. Here's a quote from one of her latest blog posts:

If you're reading my blog, then you know I'm a long time, dyed-in-the-wool A-number-1 Fan Of Men. If anything, being a sex worker made me more sympathetic, instead of less so, to their struggles and their lives. And as a result it amazes me just how casually, and how widespread, the assumption is that men have things easy.

Go on, open a Sunday supplement today. How many pages in before you encounter some polly filler by a female columnist implying men in general (or her man in particular) doesn't pull his weight at home, while she majestically juggles family, work, and the burden of having a vagina which has the audacity to bleed once a month? How many pages before you encounter some self-flagellating male columnist admitting to same?

Let me state for the record that if being a man was easy, hookers wouldn't exist. Fact.

Have you seen The Wrestler? Have you seen Hurt Locker? Those were two examples, in the last year alone, of me thinking damn... I am so glad I wasn't born a man.

Bottom line, it takes a particular kind of self-consciously middle-class gynecentric view of the world to imagine that the only physical danger men face is in a war zone. As someone who has lived in more than a few dodgy neighbourhoods - because sponging off my parents was categorically Not An Option - and been privy to the secrets and fears of my male friends, I do not think they have it easier than we of the XX-type. Different, yes. Easy, no.

There are elements of male life that, as a woman, I am exempt from. For the most part this is reciprocal: in most situations they will never have a fear of rape. But I almost never enter a room worried about who is sizing me up for fisticuffs. When my ex, the Boy, was attacked and sent to hospital with multiple skull fractures by six strangers who jumped out of a car onto him and his brother... I was not thinking, 'well, at least he had it so much easier because he was male!' The last time T came back from Brum with a bloodied lip and a torn shirt, it occurred to me yet again that there are plenty of situations that read as 'Danger!' to men in which I would get a free pass. Because I'm a girl.

And let us not forget that the sort of men who exercise violent dominance over women do not only do that to women.

But then, it must be beastly difficult to see that from the point of view of a B.A. in Women's Studies surfing broadband in your parents' spare room. Very difficult indeed.

We would all be better of if there were more women like her around.

...on her blog post. Yes, she sounds like a smart woman, (too bad she didn't go into the social sciences!) and my mate Porky Domesticus will be doing a post on her post. As for those wishing to pass moral judgment on hookers, hooking is a victimless crime,like wearing red socks with a black suit.
----------------------
Rise, Rebel, Resist.

The hooker is taking advantage of the man, she is taking his money. She is taking advantage of him in that men have a biologically-innate propensity to have multiple female partners to effectively spread their genes in the gene pool. See Moxon.

Besides, just because something is victimless doesn't make it okay. And, by stating that she shouldn't be allowed to work as a scientist for a respectable lab, I was making a factual observation based on common sense, not 'passing judgment'. Do you really think female coworkers would be comfortable around her - or for that matter the male ones, if there is such a thing as 'objectification'?

I think if we were talking about a male prostitute or a gigolo, especially if he was going to be a company manager or something, you guys wouldn't be whistling the same tune - in fact some of you would be crapping all over the guy. This is all another example of how we tend to 'big up' women and excuse their behavior.

-ax