# Prostitutes and Felons



## JCD

There is a thread in CWI and a prior thread in, I believe Men's Clubhouse, which asked men if they would marry a pornstar/escort and, if married to one who hid her past, would they as a man divorce her if they found out about her past later.

This is a fair hypothetical question, though it always seems to devolve into 'the number question'.

I thought I'd ask a slightly different hypothetical for the ladies regarding 'embarrassing revelations':

Would you remain in a relationship if the man admitted he was a felon in a non violent crime? In a violent crime but was a one off?

Would you remain in a relationship if a man admitted he once solicited the services of a prostitute or escort? Would it matter if it was a very expensive escort? Would it matter if it was a period where he was recovering from a failed relationship?

In either case, would you listen to the reasons, or is it an automatic deal breaker?

If married, would you remain with a man if his sordid past came up (either case)? Assume a regular marriage, not one for the angels nor a weak and shaky marriage where you are already seeking an exit strategy.


----------



## over20

Interesting question. If married and my husband confessed to have been with an escort or prostitute, while it would be painful to hear about, I would work through it and def stay in my marriage. It would not matter how much he spent.

If we were dating, It would depend on how serious we were and if I felt he truly loved me... IDK, I have been out of the dating game for 27 years...LOL.

The crime issue, if I was already married, again I would be hurt and probably need wise counsel (from a professional) to get through it but I would want to work it out..after all when I took my vows I pledged them for life, through good times and bad.



The biggest issue would be did he lie? OR why couldn't he feel close enough to me to be open about his past.


----------



## JCD

For the sake of argument, I am assuming the same level of lying as a former porn star, i.e. one of omission. Something in his/her past that they didn't bring up.


----------



## over20

I think it would be a sign of growth that they wanted to finally confess?? OR maybe their spouse had grown and they were able to finally share with them.:scratchhead:


For example, I know in my own marriage, my husband could NOT have told me certain things in the early days, for example his kinkiest fantasies...I would have thought him a perv...after about 10 yrs. into our marriage I really started "growing up" and he was able to share more and more with me.... I do regret that I was like that.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

JCD said:


> I thought I'd ask a slightly different hypothetical for the ladies regarding 'embarrassing revelations':
> 
> Would you remain in a relationship if the man admitted he was a felon in a non violent crime? In a violent crime but was a one off?
> 
> Would you remain in a relationship if a man admitted he once solicited the services of a prostitute or escort? Would it matter if it was a very expensive escort? Would it matter if it was a period where he was recovering from a failed relationship?
> 
> *In either case, would you listen to the reasons, or is it an automatic deal breaker?*
> 
> If married, would you remain with a man if his sordid past came up (either case)? Assume a regular marriage, not one for the angels nor a weak and shaky marriage where you are already seeking an exit strategy.


I care about someone's history in all respects... because it has a way of shaping who they are, their views, a lifestyle lived...it shows what was of value to them (at one time)...which can affect their choices... also detour their dreams... but IT CAN also teach us very hard lessons...that could change us for the better...because of it's regrets...

If I knew ahead of time , heard through the grape vine that a man had a record (violent crime, any time in prison, even jail)...I'd run in the other direction......

I'd have to have someone convince me that such a person is a redeemed soul, has learned from his mistakes with years living as an honorable citizen/ man / friend/ employee .. and was some sort of mentor to others to not go that path.. this I would respect.. I believe people can change, I just don't believe it is THE NORM..

But in meeting anyone.. I'd be more than happy to sit & listen to the whole sordid story -trying to withhold judgement, the more honest they were -especially with the bad, the shame. the more I would probably trust them to continue to be honest.. (also sharing what they have learned from it, how it changed them)...

I greatly appreciate Open people...it's those who are too vague or secretive that I don't find trustworthy at all...

If this came out later... which would = they LIED to me, purposely withheld information (as I would seek to learn everything about a lovers Past in the dating stage).... I'd be furious and the trust would have a stake through it's heart..

Again, I'd listen , but there would be a huge fall out -for anything to come out later -with me.. I'd also feel like a complete fool for such a thing to happen... (at least on the crimes front)....I'd be more angry over this... those are BIG things..

The other.. seeing an escort or something ..it's much smaller scale... not thinking right after a break up for example.. I could understand this.. so long as he's been faithful in marriage... and is free of STD's...we'd get past it...

But he'd have to fess up..I'd want to hear the whole story... why he did it...how often, how much he spent, what this did for him... what he learned from it.. hard to hear.. but it was a part of his past.. and as his wife, Mother of his children....I feel I have a RIGHT to know...


----------



## Holland

I know plenty of sordid stuff about my partners past, given we met at middle age, post divorce then it is not such a shock. Escorts after failed relationship was not a deal breaker, I was more surprised that such a hansom man would pay for sex but there you go.
Lots of other stuff about his past sex life but nothing that has bothered me. strip clubs, very young to lose virginity blah blah.

My number and sordid experiences would probably out weigh his anyway so who am I to freak out by past, consentual sexual exploits. However if he confessed to being a past escort or porn star I would lose all respect for him which would equate to losing sexual interest.

A crime would be a different issue, if it were a minor thing then again I would have a reaction more based on intrigue and surprise.
If it was a major crime that involved harming another person, murder, rape, anything to do with harming children then it would be a deal breaker. 

Personally I think all this stuff should well and truly be discussed before marriage, I would be deeply upset to find out something major after marriage.


----------



## DoF

The only thing that should always be shared about the past is Porn Star/nudes and STD.

I would prefer to not know or hear about other details of past relationship.......it only does damage, especially if you love someone. 

Keep the past to yourself ladies.....


----------



## JustTired

JCD said:


> There is a thread in CWI and a prior thread in, I believe Men's Clubhouse, which asked men if they would marry a pornstar/escort and, if married to one who hid her past, would they as a man divorce her if they found out about her past later.
> 
> This is a fair hypothetical question, though it always seems to devolve into 'the number question'.
> 
> I thought I'd ask a slightly different hypothetical for the ladies regarding 'embarrassing revelations':
> 
> Would you remain in a relationship if the man admitted he was a felon in a non violent crime? *I would stay in the relationship if he is now a productive member of society & did not get into anymore trouble. If he got arrested again (for anything at this point) I would walk away from the relationship*In a violent crime but was a one off? *Violent crimes are a deal breaker off the bat.*
> 
> Would you remain in a relationship if a man admitted he once solicited the services of a prostitute or escort? Would it matter if it was a very expensive escort? Would it matter if it was a period where he was recovering from a failed relationship? *If he did that BEFORE we got together & I feel assured it is not an addiction of his, I would remain in the relationship. If he admitted he has cheated on past lovers with prostitutes/escorts, I would be inclined to leave the relationship. I would be afraid he would do that to me too. *
> 
> In either case, would you listen to the reasons, or is it an automatic deal breaker? *I would listen first and then make a decision.*
> 
> If married, would you remain with a man if his sordid past came up (either case)? Assume a regular marriage, not one for the angels nor a weak and shaky marriage where you are already seeking an exit strategy. *I would remain in the marriage as long history does not repeat itself.*


----------



## clipclop2

Regretfully I remain married to a man who cheated and used a prostitute. No amount of money paid lessens the sting knowing how low he can sink.


----------



## Anonymous07

A convicted felon/jail time would be a deal breaker for me. I don't see any reasoning that would make it "okay". 

If I found out he used an escort, it would hurt deeply, but I think I could get over it eventually.


----------



## clipclop2

Escort.

PROSTITUTE.

call it what it is. Don't dress it up.

A ***** for money.


----------



## clipclop2

Sex with prostitutes is not a relationship. The past sexual behavior of people comes back to bite more often than you would think. We do not live in discrete points in time where the past is unrelated to the future.


----------



## samyeagar

So what we seem to be seeing is the past is SELECTIVELY the past.


----------



## JCD

samyeagar said:


> So what we seem to be seeing is the past is SELECTIVELY the past.


That is a trifle negative. It seems that sexually, most women seem a trifle more forgiving then men (though, as always, talk is cheap...both for the 'dump' and 'forgive' crowd).

Criminally...mixed bag but that's okay too. We all have our limits. Most women, once in a marriage, seem to want to find a way to work it out...at least with the small number of posters here. BUT...that was your last Get Out of Jail Free card in the relationship.

Men seem to be much more unrelentingly unforgiving if that other thread is to be believed.


----------



## clipclop2

Funny too since they seem to have little trouble defending porn. The women are just objects. Only they are not objects. They are daughters and sisters and mothers. How men live with their way of thinking I cannot understand. I really cannot.

I don't know that wome are more forgiving. Maybe resigned? Accepting of imperfection?

I haven't forgiven. I wish I could figure out how.


----------



## treyvion

committed4ever said:


> If I was already married, I would not leave for any of those revelations, even if I had to find out through someone else. However, I would probably need help to overcome it, I think.
> 
> I did know that my H had been very promiscuous before we met (no prostitutes or escorts though). The only thing that bothered me about this was I did not want to be another notch on his bedpost. So it was about 2 months before he attempted sex and about 3 more months before I gave in (I was a virgin).
> 
> Jail or juvie time before marriage would have been a dealbreaker.


If he went to jail for unpaid tickets. IE: he was working but couldn't come up with the additional funds, would this too be a deal breaker?


----------



## treyvion

clipclop2 said:


> Funny too since they seem to have little trouble defending porn. The women are just objects. Only they are not objects. They are daughters and sisters and mothers. How men live with their way of thinking I cannot understand. I really cannot.
> 
> I don't know that wome are more forgiving. Maybe resigned? Accepting of imperfection?
> 
> I haven't forgiven. I wish I could figure out how.


Those women agree to the terms and agree to be degraded for money. I feel no pity, that was their decision in this democratic society.


----------



## Holland

samyeagar said:


> So what we seem to be seeing is the past is SELECTIVELY the past.


What's the problem with that? We are talking about different issues that happened in the past, it is the issue that people are being selective about and all power to them.


----------



## over20

treyvion said:


> If he went to jail for unpaid tickets. IE: he was working but couldn't come up with the additional funds, would this too be a deal breaker?


:iagree:


That is what I understood in the OP's original question. A NON violent crime committed.


----------



## JCD

treyvion said:


> Those women agree to the terms and agree to be degraded for money. I feel no pity, that was their decision in this democratic society.


Um...I am all about the consequences of choices. I am. However, I have heard some of the stories of these women in the industry. That girl who was in an MBA program...not much sympathy.

Some woman with an out of wedlock kid with a deadbeat sperm donor who doesn't have a high school diploma and needs to pay rent tomorrow or she's on the street? That is a different kettle of fish.

And here is one of the big problems with this choice: much like a criminal record, the stigma of being a prostitute or a porn star lingers in the same way as pedophile or rapist does on a man. The difference is a matter of scale, not of kind.

Sorry to thread jack. I am just trying to avoid a 'one size fits all' paradigm on how people get to that point in life.


----------



## JCD

clipclop2 said:


> Funny too since they seem to have little trouble defending porn. The women are just objects. Only they are not objects. They are daughters and sisters and mothers. How men live with their way of thinking I cannot understand. I really cannot.
> 
> I don't know that wome are more forgiving. Maybe resigned? Accepting of imperfection?
> 
> I haven't forgiven. I wish I could figure out how.


I look at porn occasionally. I have daughters. I have a wife. I can assure you, none of them are 'objects' in my eyes. 

I know a lot of lovely women. Even sex workers. I don't treat them like objects either.

Anyone treated as a nameless replaceable 'icon' in a film is 'objectified' including the storm troopers mown down, the man in the porn film whose face is seldom seen, or the people killed by a falling building. The role of the woman in porn isn't very different.

At least I'd argue it over a beer.

But that isn't what this thread is about, mm-kay?


----------



## samyeagar

Holland said:


> What's the problem with that? We are talking about different issues that happened in the past, it is the issue that people are being selective about and all power to them.


I don't see a problem with it all, but I find it interesting that people are often berated when they select something someone else wouldn't select.


----------



## Thundarr

Felony convictions vary depending on the crime, the circumstances, the judge, and if the lawyer is decent or not, and the jury. How can all felons be treated the same when a small percent aren't even guilty? Paying someone for sex on the other hand is what it is. It's pretty easy to figure out and decide what to think about it.

That being said, it's puzzling to me that felons seemingly can never be redeemed yet guys to sleep with prostitutes can. I've never been convicted of a felony and I've never been with a prostitute or call girl either so I don't have a baggage-dog in the discussion. For that matter, I'm not even trying to convince anyone that they're wrong or whatever. It's just puzzling .


----------



## 2ntnuf

What if he was a prostitute who became a felon by stealing money from large corporations and has it stashed off shore? He's done his time and yet still has the money. The statute of limitations is up and he can keep all of it.


----------



## lenzi

Lila said:


> As far as escorts, I wouldn't even bat an eye.


This is a rather shortsighted way of thinking. 

A guy who has been with a hooker has got some serious issues.

They don't simply evaporate over time.


----------



## Holland

lenzi said:


> This is a rather shortsighted way of thinking.
> 
> A guy who has been with a hooker has got some serious issues.
> 
> They don't simply evaporate over time.


Now there is a massive generalisation.

My partner told me of his past going to strip clubs and paying for sex. Can't say it thrills me but in context it is not an issue for me. It was HIS past not mine, it was his situation. We have discussed it and just how empty it felt for him but was a means to an end.
His marriage had ended, it was a very difficult marriage to a woman with some serious issues. He did not want a relationship in the foreseeable future but is a man that enjoys sex so he got it.
He is not a ONS sort of guy, funny thing is that I have had more than my fair share of ONS in the past and when my marriage ended I went to town having fun. I didn't pay for sex, it was easy to find and I have no issue with casual sex.
So who is better or worse in this situation? FWIW I don't care what anyone really thinks.

And you are wrong about the issues not evaporating over time. He is a man that craves love and affection, he is loyal and loving. His situation was what it was, his life is different now.


----------



## JCD

lenzi said:


> This is a rather shortsighted way of thinking.
> 
> A guy who has been with a hooker has got some serious issues.
> 
> They don't simply evaporate over time.


Hmm.

Please clarify these issues as you see them. Differentiate between a pro, a one night stand and a booty call.

I am curious. In some ways I agree with you. But just like I don't call a man who has a single drink an alcoholic, I wouldn't call a man who spends A night with a pro a wh0remonger.


----------



## over20

lenzi said:


> This is a rather shortsighted way of thinking.
> 
> A guy who has been with a hooker has got some serious issues.
> 
> They don't simply evaporate over time.


Then there must be a significant amount of males with serious issues.:scratchhead:


I respectfully disagree with you Lenzi


----------



## clipclop2

He is not a ONS kind of guy? Did you just write that? You are rationalizing what he did to the nines.


----------



## clipclop2

So you guys defending the use of hookers would marry one or are you just ok with using them?


----------



## JCD

clipclop2 said:


> So you guys defending the use of hookers would marry one or are you just ok with using them?


No. This thread was started to ask what is a deal breaker for you as a woman.

Let's clarify. I am a boyfriend of yours.

a) you find out that I dated 'Stephanie' and by 'date' I mean, had several ONS. 'Stephanie' seldom met a man she didn't like and by 'like' I mean 'date' and by 'date' I mean...well, we know what that means.

b) you find out that I hired a pro for a sexual servicing.

Which is more egregious? Why?

BTW, last week, I 'used' a mechanic, a plumber and a data entry professional. I gave them money and they took some of their time to do something for me. Not every transaction in that world involves some pimp beating a woman into submission. Some of it (one might say most of it) is voluntary. I won't say they aren't forced by necessity to 'work'...but then again, so am I. I just chose a better career path.


----------



## clipclop2

they are both egregious. It is not s either or.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## lenzi

Lila said:


> Why would you think that?


If a guy has to pay for sex, rather than getting it from a woman who actually wants to be with him.. there are problems there.



over20 said:


> Then there must be a significant amount of males with serious issues.:scratchhead


Of course there are.


----------



## lenzi

Lila said:


> I disagree. There are many reasons why men seek escorts for sex, most are logical. Some can't get it any other way (I feel sorry for those people).


Any guy who can't get sex from a woman volunatrily have got serious issues.



Lila said:


> Some want to experience certain acts that they would never get to experience otherwise.


What will a hooker do that other women won't? If you're talking about extreme fetishes such as "water sports" and "fecal play" well I'm going to maintain that anyone into that sort of thing..has serious issues.



Lila said:


> And some (I would venture to guess a larger portion than the rest) are paying for sex without the hassle or commitments.


It's easy to get sex without hassle or commitments. 



Lila said:


> Does a man who seeks sex with an escort have more issues than a man who uses manipulation and lies to get women to have sex with him?Does a man who seeks sex with an escort have more issues than a man who strings a woman along with promises of a long-term commitment, simply for sex?


They all have issues. It's just a matter of degree.


----------



## Anonymous07

JCD said:


> No. This thread was started to ask what is a deal breaker for you as a woman.
> 
> Let's clarify. I am a boyfriend of yours.
> 
> a) you find out that I dated 'Stephanie' and by 'date' I mean, had several ONS. 'Stephanie' seldom met a man she didn't like and by 'like' I mean 'date' and by 'date' I mean...well, we know what that means.
> 
> b) you find out that I hired a pro for a sexual servicing.
> 
> Which is more egregious? Why?
> 
> BTW, last week, I 'used' a mechanic, a plumber and a data entry professional. I gave them money and they took some of their time to do something for me. Not every transaction in that world involves some pimp beating a woman into submission. Some of it (one might say most of it) is voluntary. I won't say they aren't forced by necessity to 'work'...but then again, so am I. I just chose a better career path.


If we are talking about dating, I would leave in both scenarios. 

To me, sex is something special and I waited to have sex myself, so if he were to have such different values as to sleep around(ONS) or use a hooker, I couldn't be with him. Our values wouldn't match and I would be very unhappy.


----------



## JCD

clipclop2 said:


> they are both egregious. It is not s either or.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Okay. Looking at Stephanie: is it that she likes sex or that I like sexual which is the problem? Do you expect your partner to have had no recreational sex (i.e. sex without commitment)? Assuming no STDs, is Stephanie too promiscuous for comfort? What makes Being with Stephanie egregious?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Nynaeve

JCD said:


> Would you remain in a relationship if the man admitted he was a felon in a non violent crime?


If I was in a relationship but not married to him, it would largely depend on how long ago he committed the felony. It wouldn't be an automatic deal breaker but it would be a big red flag.

If it was my husband yes, I'd stay with him, but I'd be pissed. I have a gun. As a felon, he should have told me so that I could have gotten rid of the gun. He'd be taking a huge risk of going to jail for owning a gun. And then he'd lose his job and endanger - or at least highly inconvenience - me and our children.

Sidenote: There's no way this could happen. If my husband were a felon, I'd already know about it because of 1) custody battles with his x-wife, 2) I've seen him vote, and 3) background checks for his career.



> In a violent crime but was a one off?


It would seriously depend on the circumstances but I'd most likely stay with my husband. If he had ever hit his x-wife or kid, then maybe not. If I wasn't married, this might be a deal breaker for me.



> Would you remain in a relationship if a man admitted he once solicited the services of a prostitute or escort?


If not married: absolutely not. That would be a deal breaker for me.

My husband...Probably would stay with him, but I'd be pretty hurt and embarrassed.



> Would it matter if it was a very expensive escort? Would it matter if it was a period where he was recovering from a failed relationship?


No to both.



> In either case, would you listen to the reasons, or is it an automatic deal breaker?


I would expect a full and detailed explanation.


----------



## 2ntnuf

"It's easy to get sex without hassle or commitments."

I've never found this to be true when I wanted the woman. It was only true with the women I didn't want, and very few of those.


----------



## lifeisbetterthanalternat

I think that past felonies are a matter that should be fully disclosed as they would could have major impacts on ones future and as others have indicated are can be indicative of future behavior. 

The nature of being a porn star is similar in that it could be something that could surface publically and therefore also begs for full disclosure before a relationship becomes serious. 

I would be deeply hurt if i found out either one was hidden before marriage. To me it tells me someone someone's charicter to hide such a thing. 

I think that being with a hooker/escort (as clip clop says all the same) full disclosure would seem in order if the partner asks for past sexual history. While someone has the right to "keep the past the past" I don't think that trumps a man/women's sincere inquiry about ones past sexual history. If the person truly believes this to be an important factor in determining the desirability of that person then honesty is in order.


----------



## 2ntnuf

Not picking on you. I've seen this written before in other ways and I always have a question pop into my brain. 

Why is it important to know all about felons and prostitutes, but not about past sexual partners? 

Prostitution is the selling of sex. If they are selling it, what is the difference between that and giving it away, if the quantity of partners is similar or the same?

Sorry, I just don't get it. In a case like that, I'm inclined to listen to the prostitute, since there might be extenuating circumstances, but the other just likes men/women.

Seems like...I don't know how to put it. That makes sense to me, anyway.  I guess I'm cornfussed(confused)?


----------



## clipclop2

I've found that men who use escorts are also pretty good at lying and manipulating other women as well. For instance telling them they would never pay for sex or telling lies about their wives...

Lila, you are ok with married men paying for sex or just single men? You realize that most of what prevents men ever paying for sex is fear and that once they knock that out having had sex with prostitutes becomes very easy for them. It doesn't get more difficult because they got married. It especially doesn't get more difficult if they believe paying for sex is not wrong.


----------



## clipclop2

*Re: Re: Prostitutes and Felons*



JCD said:


> Okay. Looking at Stephanie: is it that she likes sex or that I like sexual which is the problem? Do you expect your partner to have had no recreational sex (i.e. sex without commitment)? Assuming no STDs, is Stephanie too promiscuous for comfort? What makes Being with Stephanie egregious?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It isn't Stephanie that is the problem. He is the problem. His way of thinking and behaving.


----------



## Thundarr

Timing is important. No one should ever be blindsided with either of these after they are married. If they didn't know before saying 'I do' then they were betrayed from the start. When dating, there is a time when things become more serious and that's when this needs to be said.


----------



## clipclop2

2ntnuf, I guess I sort of struggle with that same question. How can you tell the difference between someone with a healthy mind and spirit who also has a good track record of selecting stellar partners for sex and one who has none of the above? Since people, women, girls, tend to use sex to get something other than sex it seems reasonable to assume that a high number points to an underlying issue. Was that issue ever addressed? That would be the next question.

Even if someone claimed they just did it because they liked sex it would be difficult to believe because people tend not to want to reveal negative truths. A little chat about family of origin would probably provide enough to decide the truth.


----------



## JCD

clipclop2 said:


> It isn't Stephanie that is the problem. He is the problem. His way of thinking and behaving.


HE is the problem. How is HE the problem? He wants sex. He asks a willing partner for sex. She says yes. They do it.

What flaw accrues to his soul for 'giving it away' that doesn't equally apply to her? Stephanie is allowed to like sex and be guilt free about it, but he is not? Why? Either both are right or both are wrong unless you can clarify a difference.

What is a 'stellar sex partner'? One who only goes into sex seeking a white picket fence? If, as you say, women only give out sex FOR something (child, husband, fence, inner insecurities) you have badly blurred the line between 'female sex partner' and 'pro'.

I am not picking on you, but I have to wonder why you give a pass to women who have issues and use sex to 'get stuff' but no such clemency is offered to men. If anything, men seem much more honest: they want sex, not trying to get whatever ulterior motive is in the mind of the woman.

I get the choice 'I don't like men who do casual sex' but fairness seems to dictate it apply equally to the genders.


----------



## JCD

clipclop2 said:


> <b>'ve found that men who use escorts are also pretty good at lying and manipulating other women as well. For instance telling them they would never pay for sex or telling lies about their wives...</b>
> 
> Lila, you are ok with married men paying for sex or just single men? You realize that most of what prevents men ever paying for sex is fear and that once they knock that out having had sex with prostitutes becomes very easy for them. It doesn't get more difficult because they got married. It especially doesn't get more difficult if they believe paying for sex is not wrong.


Well, as I have said before, if you raise the price of honesty too high, all you are going to get are lies. What do I mean by that?

If I love and trust you as a partner, and it tell you in confidence about a pro or Stephanie or some other shameful sexual choice...and then YOU decide that this early mistake is a) grounds for treating me like pond scum and b) should be put out there as an example to make all men fear making such a choice (sl*t shaming men) then you are darned tooting only going to get lies about that matter!


----------



## JCD

Thundarr said:


> Timing is important. No one should never be blindsided with either of these after they are married. If they didn't know before saying 'I do' then they were betrayed from the start. When dating, there is a time when things become more serious and that's when this needs to be said.


I totally agree. I am just curious at what and how women see as deal breakers.


----------



## clipclop2

here's why I don't have to be. Because you're not asking me whether I would marry Stephanie. and since I'm not going to marry Stephanie and I'm choosing a husband I want to choose a person with good morals. Unfortunately I found out after the fact what my husband was all about. there can be a bazilian Stephanie's out there. Doesn't mean that a guy has to pull out his **** and stick it into her. That's all on him. And you know it. in fact it's an insult that I should have to treat that guy the same as I would treat the guy who chose not to do Stephanie just because she was available the same way. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## clipclop2

and by the way I'm not getting women a pass. if you read my response to to 2 you know that. so yeah I do think you're picking on me but not so much as to pick on me but to defend men who do such things 

and I think you must have missed the fact that I faced such a disclosure after marriage.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## clipclop2

and by the way I'm not getting women a pass. if you read my response to to 2 you know that. so yeah I do think you're picking on me but not so much as to pick on me but to defend men who do such things 

and I think you must have missed the fact that I faced such a disclosure after marriage. I don't know if this is a largely theoretical discussion for you or you're defending yourself but this is my real life and I don't think it's very amusing.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JCD

Hmm. There is a vast difference between cheating on a current spouse and having a mistaken sexual relationship BEFORE your current relationship. My comment about 'raising the price of lying too high' is aimed at discussions of life before marriage, not to 'give a guy a pass for his infidelities'.

Do we understand that people may make stupid mistakes or not?

BUT...there are things which are too raw or unsettling for a man or woman to get over and we all get to draw our own lines.

My question is hypothetical but for you it has real world implications and I am sorry if I triggered you with the question. I don't defend bad actions, though I tend to require quality in application. You seem to be taking a heavily moralizing tone toward a man who seeks relationship free sex vs. that of the woman, but then again, you are correct: you aren't looking to settle down with a woman. Still, it doesn't sound very fair.

I am uncertain which post you are referencing at not giving women a pass.

Apologies once again.


----------



## Holland

clipclop2 said:


> He is not a ONS kind of guy? Did you just write that? You are rationalizing what he did to the nines.


lol no not rationalising anything. There is a difference between ONS and escorts. I am not dim enough to need to rationalise another persons behaviour especially when the use of paid sex in his situation does not worry me.


----------



## Lyris

I wouldn't care if my husband had paid for sex. Prostitution is perfectly legal in my country and I think that's as it should be.

Felon depends on what it's for. Probably would be a problem though.


----------



## clipclop2

He was married at the time, too.


----------



## Holland

clipclop2 said:


> He was married at the time, too.


 Who is this question/comment directed at?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

Before Marriage: 

my ex told me that when he was in the Army in Germany he went to a cathouse few times. There was one girl there who he had sex with a few times. I had no problem with that. Now if he was a guy picking up street walkers, or if he seemed to enjoy prostitutes as a normal part of his life.. nope. 

If he’d been a porn star I would stop any relationship. I think that it takes a very broken person to be a porn star. Don’t care to deal with that.

Now I have never felt the need for some guy to give he his entire sexual history. After being on TAM and reading all the nonsense that people pull I’d probably ask any future guy some big things.. like was he ever a porn star and his prostitute/call girl habits if any.

If the guy had one or more felonies I’d want to know a lot of detail about it. I’d get the court and police records. Most violence, drug convictions for hard drugs & trafficking, many none violent and sex crimes, auto theft, embezzlement, etc. I would drop hm.

After marriage:

If I found out some of this stuff after marriage, I’d first look at what our relationship was like and how he treated me and behaved since we’d been together. 

But for certain things I doubt I’d stay even if he’d been treating me well… like rape, child molestation, and other violent crimes.


----------



## johnnycomelately

lenzi said:


> This is a rather shortsighted way of thinking.
> 
> A guy who has been with a hooker has got some serious issues.
> 
> They don't simply evaporate over time.


That would give 20% of men in the US 'serious issues'. 

As a man I would forgive my wife for having visited a male (or female) prostitute in the past. What is the big deal? I would expect her to forgive me if I had. 

I was convicted of a crime when I was 19, and got a three month suspended sentence, and my wife knows and has no issue. 

We aren't running for public office here people. There are good people who get caught up in the law and there are very bad people whose rap sheets are clean.


----------



## JCD

clipclop2 said:


> He was married at the time, too.


That is a whole different issue than a single person who engaged in the same activity.

Sorry he did that to you.


----------



## clipclop2

Johnny I'msure that 20% of men in the US have issues that can be considered serious.


----------



## JCD

clipclop2 said:


> Johnny I'msure that 20% of men in the US have issues that can be considered serious.


Lenzi seems to be of the opinion that that number is woefully low, though she never delved into how many women had serious issues.


----------



## johnnycomelately

'Serious issues' come in many different shapes and sizes. Having slept with a hooker or been busted for protesting the Vietnam war when you were 21 does not a serious issue make. 

Being blinkered and censorious is also a 'serious issue' as it limits you intellectually and socially, and what could be more serious than that?


----------



## johnnycomelately

Therealbrighteyes said:


> P.S. Don't PM me with a request for the name of the movie. It's amazing that the "pious" men who ridiculed me when I first posted this, were the ones who PM'd me to find out the title.


 That doesn't surprise me at all. It is just like those politicians and 'Christian' leaders who bang on about homosexuality being an abomination and then get caught taking meth and getting 'massages' from male prostitutes. 
Ted Haggard and George Rekers being two of my personal favourites.

The people with real 'issues' are the ones who use moralising as a smokescreen for their prejudice and narrow-mindedness.


----------



## clipclop2

It doesn't surprise me either.

But I suspect your sons might be a lot less happy with it than you think. You are their mom.


----------



## 2ntnuf

I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.


So many forget.


----------



## Unique Username

Why wouldn't one run a background check on someone with which you were potentially going to get serious.......


----------



## Unique Username

Therealbrighteyes said:


> P.P.S. I managed to have a wonderful, respectable career that bought our first house. My husband is thankful that I understand finance like I do. Yeah, many porn stars manage to go on to other things that don't involve silicone molds. Some of us make a living in CMO's and derivatives.


What's a CMO?


----------



## JCD

I am not going to automatically dismiss 'sex workers' as beyond the pale. Most of them are just plain people who found themselves in a very bad place or they made very bad choices (sometimes both).

Any hesitation I would have with being with them are two fold: first, would I, as her partner, be able to take the potential fall out? (I say this hypothetically because I am married to a wonderful woman). I am uncertain of that answer, but that isn't a flaw in her as a spouse, but in ME. It would take a strong person to deal with the opprobrium of society. Additionally, could I, as a spouse, be strong enough to help her deal with such issues, and any scarring she has in her life personally.

Because the part which is on her is twofold as well: I think that industry can very much harden and damage any person, man or woman. And if you are in it long enough, there might not be any coming back. Obviously that is not always true, but it is always a concern. 

Second, the why's and character of the woman herself. If, as you say, it was a dark period which was shaken off, that isn't so much a deal breaker. However, if it is seen as 'easy money', which couples with substance abuse, frittering of money, general disrespect to people, or she was someone who was quite happy to exchange degradation for easy money...well...at that point, it isn't the 'porn' which is the problem, it is the person...who just happens to add porn to her list of negatives.

Not sure if I am making sense here. I guess I am saying there is a difference between a woman who was in the sex industry, a woman broken by the sex industry and a broken woman who just happens to enter the sex industry.

Asia Carrera seems to be a pretty smart woman who was in a dark place, made her money, and left to go onto making a reasonably decent life for herself...and good for her! I like a good redemption tale as much as anyone.


Edited to add: I think there is a world of difference between the role of hooker vs. porn star. I think the former is much more damaging than the later. IMO only.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

I just deleted my post. I am not ashamed, just don't need the headache. Anyways, I just wanted to write about my past because the level of assumptions on the other thread.


----------



## clipclop2

JCD quoted it.


----------



## JCD

clipclop2 said:


> JCD quoted it.


Not anymore.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Wow. Thank you, JCD. I wasn't going to ask but I really appreciate you understanding the sensitivity of this subject.


----------



## JCD

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Wow. Thank you, JCD. I wasn't going to ask but I really appreciate you understanding the sensitivity of this subject.


That is the point, isn't it? We all do or say stupid things in the spur of the moment. Sometimes we need to cut each other a little slack.


----------



## OrionsBelt

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I just deleted my post. I am not ashamed, just don't need the headache. Anyways, I just wanted to write about my past because the level of assumptions on the other thread.


I have been lurking on this site for a while but never signed up until now. What other thread are your referring to?


----------



## samyeagar

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Wow. Thank you, JCD. I wasn't going to ask but I really appreciate you understanding the sensitivity of this subject.


When I noticed you had removed it, I went back through to see if it had been quoted because I was going to ask anyone who had quoted it to remove it 



JCD said:


> Not anymore.


Top notch move sir.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

samyeagar said:


> When I noticed you had removed it, I went back through to see if it had been quoted because I was going to ask anyone who had quoted it to remove it
> 
> 
> 
> Top notch move sir.


I am touched. I really mean that. 

Anyways, to get back on topic. About a felony, I think it would depend what type. Did you get convicted of murder because you defended somebody else? Did you steal to feed your child? Did you become a registered sex offender because your girlfriend was 16 at the time when you were 18?


----------



## samyeagar

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I am touched. I really mean that.
> 
> *Anyways, to get back on topic. About a felony, I think it would depend what type. Did you get convicted of murder because you defended somebody else? Did you steal to feed your child? Did you become a registered sex offender because your girlfriend was 16 at the time when you were 18*?


This right here is why I get so frustrated with threads dealing with RJ and people's pasts. Some people are so quick to throw out the whole...the past is the past...but it is never that simple. There is always context that needs to be considered, and the fact that one person has had time to process it, but it's brand new for the other.

But...but...but...yeah, I know there are people who can't deal with the fact that their wife or husband dared have sex before they met at 40 years old, but as this thread has demonstrated...when it comes to a wide variety of issues "past" that the past IS important to a lot of people to help them make their way through, start, continue, or ultimately end a relationship. So as far as "the past is the past"...it's just not that simple.

ETA: I am not frustrated with you TRBE...I agree with what you were alluding to...context matters.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

samyeagar said:


> This right here is why I get so frustrated with threads dealing with RJ and people's pasts. Some people are so quick to throw out the whole...the past is the past...but it is never that simple. There is always context that needs to be considered, and the fact that one person has had time to process it, but it's brand new for the other.
> 
> But...but...but...yeah, I know there are people who can't deal with the fact that their wife or husband dared have sex before they met at 40 years old, but as this thread has demonstrated...when it comes to a wide variety of issues "past" that the past IS important to a lot of people to help them make their way through, start, continue, or ultimately end a relationship. So as far as "the past is the past"...it's just not that simple.
> 
> ETA: I am not frustrated with you TRBE...I agree with what you were alluding to...context matters.


I'm not in the camp of "the past is the past". What I would want to know in a partner is what had they done to make sure these behaviors wouldn't be repeated. There is only one behavior I could never look past and that is infidelity. If you cheated on partners in the past, that is my dealbreaker. I don't believe the ability to lie, hide information and grossly manipulate others is something that can be changed. It can be curtailed but it is always there. Hence, dealbreaker for me.


----------



## samyeagar

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I'm not in the camp of "the past is the past". What I would want to know in a partner is what had they done to make sure these behaviors wouldn't be repeated. There is only one behavior I could never look past and that is infidelity. If you cheated on partners in the past, that is my dealbreaker. I don't believe the ability to lie, hide information and grossly manipulate others is something that can be changed. It can be curtailed but it is always there. Hence, dealbreaker for me.


I am also interested in motivations as well. Infidelity for me is my only absolute deal breaker, which is actually different from my wife. Perhaps it is because of what she went through, or perhaps what she went through was in part allowed by this, but she has told me point blank that she could forgive and move past an affair...as long as it was the whole...but it was just sex thing. She would have a much harder, if not impossible time moving on from me telling another woman I was in love with her. I have made it perfectly clear that I would not tolerate infidelity either physical or emotional...different standards without being double standards because cheating on her just isn't something I can ever see happening.


----------



## JCD

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I'm not in the camp of "the past is the past". What I would want to know in a partner is what had they done to make sure these behaviors wouldn't be repeated. There is only one behavior I could never look past and that is infidelity. If you cheated on partners in the past, that is my dealbreaker. I don't believe the ability to lie, hide information and grossly manipulate others is something that can be changed. It can be curtailed but it is always there. Hence, dealbreaker for me.


I dunno. The ability to lie, hide and manipulate isn't ONLY in the domain of infidelity. Heck, if any of you recall 'tears' she cheated and yet was almost compulsively honest with her husband. So the two are not mutually inclusive.

And yet thousands of lying and emotionally manipulative people out there who continue to remain married because they haven't cheated. Just saying.

Before we get too far excoriating more morally rigid people, they are certainly playing a very 'safe' game. Statistically, they are less likely to get dinged by avoiding what they consider 'high risk' people. This isn't to say that some high risk people aren't lovely...but they are still high risk statistically. And when it comes to one's entire future, 'safe' isn't necessarily a bad thing.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

samyeagar said:


> I am also interested in motivations as well. Infidelity for me is my only absolute deal breaker, which is actually different from my wife. Perhaps it is because of what she went through, or perhaps what she went through was in part allowed by this, but she has told me point blank that she could forgive and move past an affair...as long as it was the whole...but it was just sex thing. She would have a much harder, if not impossible time moving on from me telling another woman I was in love with her. I have made it perfectly clear that I would not tolerate infidelity either physical or emotional...different standards without being double standards because cheating on her just isn't something I can ever see happening.


I meant having a past that involved infidelity. Cheating on me is a given. Do it and we are done but no, I would not be able to move past cheating on previous partners. To me, that speaks to their character, or lack there of. I know that probably sounds nuts to many people.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

JCD said:


> I dunno. The ability to lie, hide and manipulate isn't ONLY in the domain of infidelity. Heck, if any of you recall 'tears' she cheated and yet was almost compulsively honest with her husband. So the two are not mutually inclusive.
> 
> And yet thousands of lying and emotionally manipulative people out there who continue to remain married because they haven't cheated. Just saying.
> 
> Before we get too far excoriating more morally rigid people, they are certainly playing a very 'safe' game. Statistically, they are less likely to get dinged by avoiding what they consider 'high risk' people. This isn't to say that some high risk people aren't lovely...but they are still high risk statistically. And when it comes to one's entire future, 'safe' isn't necessarily a bad thing.


My feelings about infidelity are pretty rigid, I get that. Are they rational? Probably not. My experiences with it in my life (previous partner, father) is the ease at which they could carry it all out. It certainly spoke to their character. I don't trust them, regardless of their remorse. Again, not rational per se but it is based off of my life experiences. 

I agree that safe isn't a bad thing. Where I disagree with you though is that playing it "safe" in relationships makes it less likely that something bad will happen. I know it is only anecdotal but this website seems to have countless stories of virgins who marry, only for one to lose their minds and want to "experience others" about 10 years down the road. I can't help but wonder if they had not played it safe earlier, if this would be an issue.


----------



## samyeagar

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I meant having a past that involved infidelity. Cheating on me is a given. Do it and we are done but no, I would not be able to move past cheating on previous partners. To me, that speaks to their character, or lack there of. *I know that probably sounds nuts to many people*.


No, not at all. I was hoping you would take my meaning that for me, cheating is inclusive...on me during the relationship for sure, absolute dealbreaker, but also, a deal breaker, or relationship non starter is they cheated in the past.


----------



## Quant

A hooker is less hassle then a ONS,maybe the guy is just a rational person who doesn't want any complications.


----------



## Quant

Holland said:


> Now there is a massive generalisation.
> 
> My partner told me of his past going to strip clubs and paying for sex. Can't say it thrills me but in context it is not an issue for me. It was HIS past not mine, it was his situation. We have discussed it and just how empty it felt for him but was a means to an end.
> His marriage had ended, it was a very difficult marriage to a woman with some serious issues. He did not want a relationship in the foreseeable future but is a man that enjoys sex so he got it.
> He is not a ONS sort of guy, funny thing is that I have had more than my fair share of ONS in the past and when my marriage ended I went to town having fun. I didn't pay for sex, it was easy to find and I have no issue with casual sex.
> So who is better or worse in this situation? FWIW I don't care what anyone really thinks.
> 
> And you are wrong about the issues not evaporating over time. He is a man that craves love and affection, he is loyal and loving. His situation was what it was, his life is different now.


Easier for women to get casual sex unless the guy is one of the 5 percent of guys who are ladies men.Women just have to exist to get laid,not that there's anything wrong with that.
So that's probably why men get hookers.


----------



## samyeagar

Quant said:


> A hooker is less hassle then a ONS,maybe the guy is just a rational person who doesn't want any complications.


A lot of women aren't into lazy men so the ONS at least shows initiative and a willingness to put in the hard work for the reward


----------



## Quant

samyeagar said:


> A lot of women aren't into lazy men so the ONS at least shows initiative and a willingness to put in the hard work for the reward


Doesn't really matter some dudes can just not get it,either because they are disabled or disfigured there is no hope for them.


----------



## samyeagar

Quant said:


> Doesn't really matter some dudes can just not get it,either because they are disabled or disfigured there is no hope for them.


And I pretty much disagree with this. While some guys will have a more difficult time and have to put in more effort, there are plenty of women readily available and willing. It's not nearly as hard for a guy to get laid as some make it seem.


----------



## RandomDude

What if the man in question only did what he had to do to survive during his teens but became legit in adulthood?

Also what if the crimes he was caught and convicted for were simply assaults/battery/grievious bodily harm and his "victims" had it coming in the first place (like racists)?

Just curious tis all


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

samyeagar said:


> No, not at all. I was hoping you would take my meaning that for me, cheating is inclusive...on me during the relationship for sure, absolute dealbreaker, but also, a deal breaker, or relationship non starter is they cheated in the past.


I thought you meant cheating only on you. Yes, my feelings are pretty extreme but even as a young child and seeing it with my father, I knew it was the one thing I would never accept. It is a massive character issue to me.


----------



## samyeagar

RandomDude said:


> What if the man in question only did what he had to do to survive during his teens but became legit in adulthood?
> 
> Also what if the crimes he was caught and convicted for were simply assaults/battery/grievious bodily harm and his "victims" had it coming in the first place (like racists)?
> 
> Just curious tis all


Again...these are all contextual...


----------



## RandomDude

So can I safely assume: they ain't generally dealbreakers?


----------



## Quant

RandomDude said:


> So can I safely assume: they ain't generally dealbreakers?


You'll be alright.


----------



## renascent

I was in jail once. Not for a felony, but I was in jail regardless. I can assure everyone here that a certain percentage of those in jail were most certainly wrongfully convicted. And the percentage is far higher than most people would imagine. It's really sad that so many would disqualify honest people that were wrongfully convicted and wrongfully imprisoned.


----------



## samyeagar

RandomDude said:


> So can I safely assume: they ain't generally dealbreakers?


Context...you get the felony battery for seeing some guy drowning puppies and laughing about it, and you knock the sh1t out of him, and save the puppies...that may be the opposite of a deal breaker for some women...you knock the crap out of some guy because he had glasses and you wanted to make him look bad because you wanted his woman...yeah...might be a deal breaker...


----------



## RandomDude

samyeagar said:


> Context...you get the felony battery for seeing some guy drowning puppies and laughing about it, and you knock the sh1t out of him, and save the puppies...that may be the opposite of a deal breaker for some women...you knock the crap out of some guy because he had glasses and you wanted to make him look bad because you wanted his woman...yeah...might be a deal breaker...


That's great! Now how about his past? Crimes included mostly extortion, drug deals, shoplifting with several violent acts associated with organised crime? However, he didn't know any other way until adulthood, in which he did a 180

So still contextual?


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

samyeagar said:


> Context...you get the felony battery for seeing some guy drowning puppies and laughing about it, and you knock the sh1t out of him, and save the puppies...that may be the opposite of a deal breaker for some women...you knock the crap out of some guy because he had glasses and you wanted to make him look bad because you wanted his woman...yeah...might be a deal breaker...


Bingo. You are a registered sex offender because your girlfriend was two years younger than you and under age vs. a 40 year old man having sex with a 16 year old.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

samyeagar said:


> It's not nearly as hard for a guy to get laid as some make it seem.


I mostly agree with Quant if we're talking NSA. That's narrowing the potential pool down quite a bit so as to really decrease the odds of just happening to meet that person. Hence, I've always described NSA's as fortuitous events... not really something I can reproduce at will. You might meet that person this weekend, or not for a month... and even if you do meet that NSA willing person, you have to click that way.


----------



## samyeagar

RandomDude said:


> That's great! Now how about his past? Crimes included mostly extortion, drug deals, shoplifting with several violent acts associated with organised crime? However, he didn't know any other way until adulthood, in which he did a 180
> 
> *So still contextual*?


Sure...pattern of bad behavior that was later broken...context of youthful crimes in which he didn't know better indicates growing up surrounded by bad, knowing nothing different. To paraphrase something I recently had someone say to me...shows a strength of character to overcome...


----------



## Thundarr

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I'm not in the camp of "the past is the past". What I would want to know in a partner is what had they done to make sure these behaviors wouldn't be repeated. There is only one behavior I could never look past and that is infidelity. If you cheated on partners in the past, that is my dealbreaker. I don't believe the ability to lie, hide information and grossly manipulate others is something that can be changed. It can be curtailed but it is always there. Hence, dealbreaker for me.


Yea that one would be at the top of my list as well. Yet the thread by "tears" a while back makes me think there are exceptions. But yea that's the kind of past that would scare me more than other things.


----------



## EleGirl

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Bingo. You are a registered sex offender because your girlfriend was two years younger than you and under age vs. a 40 year old man having sex with a 16 year old.


This is why I don't think it makes sense to categorically dismiss anyone with a record. Our laws are far from perfect. And our judicial system is just plane broken. So some common sense is needed.


----------



## lenzi

renascent said:


> I was in jail once. Not for a felony, but I was in jail regardless. I can assure everyone here that a certain percentage of those in jail were most certainly wrongfully convicted. And the percentage is far higher than most people would imagine. It's really sad that so many would disqualify honest people that were wrongfully convicted and wrongfully imprisoned.


It's sort of like saying, it's not fair to squeeze the melons and discard those that have a few soft spots because the rest of the melon might be just fine.

If they've been in prison I'd go out on a limb and assume they're not one of those select few who were wrongly convicted. 

I read somewhere that the percentage of people who are in prison who say they're innocent is close to 100%.

What a surprise.


----------



## clipclop2

People are indeed allowed to know what they can and cannot deal with and behave accordingly. Morons like me continue to struggle after the fact. I wish I had known before saying I do.


----------



## RandomDude

samyeagar said:


> Sure...pattern of bad behavior that was later broken...context of youthful crimes in which he didn't know better indicates growing up surrounded by bad, knowing nothing different. To paraphrase something I recently had someone say to me...shows a strength of character to overcome...


Hmmm...


----------



## Thundarr

lenzi said:


> It's sort of like saying, it's not fair to squeeze the melons and discard those that have a few soft spots because the rest of the melon might be just fine.
> 
> If they've been in prison I'd go out on a limb and assume they're not one of those select few who were wrongly convicted.
> 
> I read somewhere that the percentage of people who are in prison who say they're innocent is close to 100%.
> 
> What a surprise.


People are not melons and people make mistakes. Yes it's a red flag because mistake are often due to character traits and will repeat. On occasion though, a person grows from mistakes.

These deal breakers are an indictment on our personal judgement. It's the 'better safe than sorry' mindset. I don't disagree with it in general but there are exceptions that people miss out on by drawing symbolic lines in the sand.


----------



## Miss Taken

Good and difficult question that I find myself struggling to answer. 

As a bit of an aside, (but it relates to the topic as it's causing me conflict in answering), I for one, am for the legalization of prostitution. (Not that I'd want to be one but because I think it'd be safer for all parties involved if it was regulated). On the other hand, as much as I don't want to judge a woman who happens to be a prostitute, I wouldn't want to be with a man that was with one. So I guess I do judge. -_-

As for the crimes, like others have said it's contextual. I break the law nearly every day by jaywalking and have zero guilt about it. I have gone to BBQs at local parks with friends and family and drank alcoholic beverages there (not legal). I have downloaded media/torrents from the Internet, saved images from Google or elsewhere on the Internet and then shared them elsewhere online without first asking the publisher for permission. So I am a "criminal" who in some cases willfully breaks or broke the law. And if you've done any of my, especially the latter examples, so are you.

We don't have the same standard of sex offender laws in Canada as the US, but I am familiar with the statutory rape laws as others have said. I would be hard pressed to judge a man who had consensual sex as a teen with his girlfriend and was then charged with rape. 

I have an acquaintance... well had. He went to jail at fifteen for manslaughter after beating up his abusive dad. His dad beat him his entire life and molested both of his sisters. One night his dad came at him while drunk and he had, had enough of it. He fought back and his dad fell hard on his head and died. It's a violent crime but does this mean that the then boy, now man (twelve years later) is a violent felon and should be held to the same standard. I've seen him on Facebook actually and he is now an aboriginal youth minister. 

To me, I would of course prefer to choose someone without any blemishes in their history. However, I like to meet people where they are. I do think the past is important but the optimistic part of me also believes people can change (for better or for worse). While many don't change, some people do. I know I'm not perfect and I've made mistakes but have also grown from them as well. I think others can do the same. So a shaded history wouldn't matter to me so long as it wasn't carried into the future and they grew from it/learned from it and aren't likely to repeat it.


----------



## JCD

OrionsBelt said:


> I have been lurking on this site for a while but never signed up until now. What other thread are your referring to?


It was in 'Coping with Infidelity' and while I don't recall the full title, it was something like "what if you discovered your wife used to be a porn star" or some such.

This was a regular thing which pops up, though sometimes it revolves around other sex trade jobs, and sometimes just revolves around 'how many' partners our spouse used to have.

Now, many women are very indignant at that sort of question, so I asked if other things were deal breakers for them. Very mixed responses so far.

I believe the attitude that TRBE is referring to is the idea that all porn stars et. al. are broken and irredeemable. I would not say 'all' myself. I think it would be a very strong minority at least, however.


----------



## JCD

Miss Taken said:


> To me, I would of course prefer to choose someone without any blemishes in their history.


I agree. And I want to meet a 22 year old virgin with a high sex drive, no family, is rich and owns a liquor store. Gorgeous goes without saying.

UNFORTUNATELY, we get people as they come, not as we want them, as you said.

Problem with these people who have no blemishes...they tend to demand the same...Likewise this hypothetical girl. She would be justified in asking what the hell I brought to the table!


----------



## Miss Taken

JCD said:


> I agree. And I want to meet a 22 year old virgin with a high sex drive, no family, is rich and owns a liquor store. Gorgeous goes without saying.
> 
> UNFORTUNATELY, we get people as they come, not as we want them, as you said.
> 
> Problem with these people who have no blemishes...they tend to demand the same...Likewise this hypothetical girl. She would be justified in asking what the hell I brought to the table!


I should have said, "those types" of blemishes. Not being a felon, never having paid for sex shouldn't be an impossible find. :smthumbup:


----------



## RandomDude

Miss Taken said:


> I have an acquaintance... well had. He went to jail at fifteen for manslaughter after beating up his abusive dad. His dad beat him his entire life and molested both of his sisters. One night his dad came at him while drunk and he had, had enough of it. He fought back and his dad fell hard on his head and died. It's a violent crime but does this mean that the then boy, now man (twelve years later) is a violent felon and should be held to the same standard. I've seen him on Facebook actually and he is now an aboriginal youth minister.


He was found guilty for manslaughter after defending himself? To be found guilty and sentenced to 12 years over an accident due to self defence at age 15, with no prior criminal offenses is pretty screwed up. One is only found guilty of involuntary manslaughter when it's proven to be deliberate and not accidental.

Then again, as he's aboriginal, it must have played a part. Sad reality of racism in this country. Screwed up really, I would have done the same, though if I truly wanted someone so close to disappear I would have hired a third party to rob the courts from their "motive".


----------



## Miss Taken

RandomDude said:


> He was found guilty for manslaughter after defending himself? To be found guilty and sentenced to 12 years over an accident due to self defence at age 15, with no prior criminal offenses is pretty screwed up. One is only found guilty of involuntary manslaughter when it's proven to be deliberate and not accidental.


Not sentenced to 12 years, this happened twelve years ago when he was fifteen. He was sentenced to five years but served three.
AFAIK, he hasn't reoffended. I was friends with one of his sisters back in my old home town. He seems to be doing okay for himself and his community from what I can tell (via Facebook). 



> Then again, as he's aboriginal, it must have played a part. Sad reality of racism in this country. Screwed up really, I would have done the same, though if I truly wanted someone so close to disappear I would have hired a third party to rob the courts from their "motive".


I don't want to comment too much on it but it could be. In my old home town, the racism was geared mostly to natives (we also sometimes call them aboriginals, which he is) unfortunately. Since they're the most visible minority in that city.


----------



## RandomDude

*sigh* it's sad really, but if I had met him in real life I would buy him a beer. Still I guess three years is better then twelve.

Sh-t, it's still a harsh sentence over an accidental death caused by self defence, armed robbery only carries fking 18 months, defending yourself from an abusive father 3 fking years.


----------



## 2ntnuf

"It's the principle". That statement is used to justify many things. Some are fair and some aren't. Justice is not always fair. Fairness is not always just. It's a messed up world. Some get what they deserve and some don't. Some get what someone else deserved. It's a testament to trying to do things for some reason other than justice or fairness. We all have opinions. Each of us thinks (s)he is right. Who decides? We know the ones who are in authority make mistakes because they are human. How do we live with that if we are the ones on the receiving end of what we believe to be injustice? Personally, I'm still trying to figure that out.


----------



## JCD

2ntnuf said:


> "It's the principle". That statement is used to justify many things. Some are fair and some aren't. Justice is not always fair. Fairness is not always just. It's a messed up world. Some get what they deserve and some don't. Some get what someone else deserved. It's a testament to trying to do things for some reason other than justice or fairness. We all have opinions. Each of us thinks (s)he is right. Who decides? We know the ones who are in authority make mistakes because they are human. How do we live with that if we are the ones on the receiving end of what we believe to be injustice? Personally, I'm still trying to figure that out.


Do not let the perfect get in the way of the good.

The vast majority of felons are guilty.


----------

