[LAVixian]

I think there would be people using this "free service", however, I think they would not talk about it. Same thing with food stamps, welfare, wic, etc. they all want it, but don't wanna admit to having had it. of course, i think this free service should be available... maybe it would keep the bullshitters and con artists off of us if they could get it for free....

just my thoughts

[anova444]

Originally Posted by Mokoa

No.

Not only no, but Hello No!

Not only Hell No, but Fuck No!

lol, hell fuck no.

Free sex is scary. What else are they trying to give away...People put ads in CL all the time wanting and offering it. If you're looking for free sex, peruse CL

[brittanylennox]

Originally Posted by LAVixian

I think there would be people using this "free service", however, I think they would not talk about it. Same thing with food stamps, welfare, wic, etc. they all want it, but don't wanna admit to having had it. of course, i think this free service should be available... maybe it would keep the bullshitters and con artists off of us if they could get it for free....

just my thoughts

Hey good point!

[Jake2.1]

I bet there would be a long wait in a waiting room and several tons of paperwork involved as well. And being the government, there would be something that has nothing to do with sex attached to the legislation like bridge or something.

I would feel sorry for the sex worker, cause they wouldn't be able to make enough money. They would get an attitude. You would walk into the room and she is just lying there limp with her legs open. "Just put in and get it done. I am already behind an hour." Would be like doing a doll.

Then someone would make a machine to replace the worker.

[Carl]

Originally Posted by brittanylennox

So... I am going to be brutally honest here. No one took the bait. I was hoping to see if anyone commented on the whole "no fraternizing" "in, out, wham-bam, thank you ma'am". Is sex still sex if you take out all the mental stuff?


Sorry. Looks like my own thread bit me in the ass...

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave
When first we practise to deceive!"

~ Sir Walter Scott, from Marmion: A Tale of Flodden Field, Canto VI, Stanza XVII (1808).

[brittanylennox]

Originally Posted by Carl

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave
When first we practise to deceive!"

~ Sir Walter Scott, from Marmion: A Tale of Flodden Field, Canto VI, Stanza XVII (1808).

Eh... I wouldn't call it deception.


For me, sex is 90% mental (conversation, environmental setting, etc.). I realize that quite a few men feel this way too. But, there are some that don't.

Is this hypothetical "government service" any different than the services offered by a SW or the men who request 15 minute appointments? Sure, the gentlemen may opt out of using a condom AND they can decide ahead of time if they find the woman physically attractive. But, where is the mental vibrator in these types of situations? I want pleasure between my legs and between my ears.

People say that we are highly motivated by sex. But are we, REALLY? What part of sex are we really craving?

[Jake2.1]

There have been plenty of studies out there that show that men tend to not be so mental about sex as women. I think men are forced to appreciate that aspect as they age and the body parts stop working like they used to. I know that it is way more than just the physical thing for me now that I have aged. I walk away from that type of situation very unsatisfied.

As a rule, I tend to stay away from the early 20 something providers because it seems that they just want to do a physical deed and get you out of the room. Somewhere in the late 20's, early 30's it seems that the providers that are still in the business are the ones that truly love providing a good experience. They seem to have captured the sensual side of the experience. The eyes and bodies seem to tell you that they want to not only please you but get pleased by you. . .and if you aren't ready, they are going to figure a way to get that pleasure by themselves in front of you. It is amazing when the woman is basically saying, I am going to get my O whether you come along for the ride or not. The younger ones seem to be more mechanical.

So to get back to the original point, I would assume if the chance to get government sponsored free sex came into a hypothetical reality, I think that it turn the providers involved into emotionless mechanical androids because of the sterile environment that I would envision a government run situation be like with all of the red tape, forms, etc. GFE would be out the door from what I would envision. So if that became the case then of course, no way.

And to comment on your last question. I would say that I crave the intimacy that comes from when the lady crawls up next to you all happy afterwards and wants to just be next to you at that moment because you gave her intimate pleasure and she reciprocated as well.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by Jake2.1

I bet there would be a long wait in a waiting room and several tons of paperwork involved as well. And being the government, there would be something that has nothing to do with sex attached to the legislation like bridge or something.

I would feel sorry for the sex worker, cause they wouldn't be able to make enough money. They would get an attitude. You would walk into the room and she is just lying there limp with her legs open. "Just put in and get it done. I am already behind an hour." Would be like doing a doll.

Then someone would make a machine to replace the worker.

Spoken like someone who has never gone to the doctor in Europe. Much less a hospital.

[LaLa]

I been told "it's cheaper to keep her", which I definitely believe is under rated. Every relationship has it's expenses. But as a client, you don't have to worry about the extra attachments of every need and expense. You donate for time, well spent, and then we can go our seperate ways.

[will_61]

Cheaper to keep her?

when I was keeping her she got all of it and could get me into debt, now that's she gone its only half, so I have a more for myself.

the goverment can't run ANYTHING effectively, IMHO.

[urhuckleberry]

Originally Posted by chelsea simms

I would run as far and as fast the other way as I could. Government involvement in anything is sure to screw it up, as it has everything it gets its fingers in.

Another reason I like this lady.. and I haven't even met her (yet)...

Huck

[brittanylennox]

Originally Posted by Jake2.1

As a rule, I tend to stay away from the early 20 something providers because it seems that they just want to do a physical deed and get you out of the room. Somewhere in the late 20's, early 30's it seems that the providers that are still in the business are the ones that truly love providing a good experience. They seem to have captured the sensual side of the experience. The eyes and bodies seem to tell you that they want to not only please you but get pleased by you. . .and if you aren't ready, they are going to figure a way to get that pleasure by themselves in front of you.

some of us bloom early

[Jake2.1]

Tex,
I do have a friend in England who told me that doctors there will split the day. Half for the government care and half for paying clients. He stated it is the only way they can make money to stay in business. He was psyched about England joining the EU because there would be an opportunity for him to go to France for health care because their system is much better than England's.

Brittany,
I am sure that you are one of the exceptions.

[shaft.drive]

Originally Posted by brittanylennox

I
What would happen if sex became a “right” and not a privilege? Let’s say, for example, that the government provided specific ladies that you could go to, for FREE, x times a month. Would you go and see them? Or would you continue to hire “privatized” escorts. Here are the stipulations of seeing the government issued ladies:
WOULD YOU USE THIS SERVICE, OR NOT?

Since this is so hypothetical & the rules do not prevent me from walking out if I don't like what I see, my response is "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth"

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by Jake2.1

Tex,
I do have a friend in England who told me that doctors there will split the day. Half for the government care and half for paying clients. He stated it is the only way they can make money to stay in business. He was psyched about England joining the EU because there would be an opportunity for him to go to France for health care because their system is much better than England's.

Brittany,
I am sure that you are one of the exceptions.

I have a great deal more experience with France's system than with that in the UK. But I've never had to wait to see a doctor in either country. When hospitalized in France, I can actually say it was a very pleasant experience and very efficient.

Of course much depends on what you need. In Europe, routine care is very easy to get. Here, that is the hardest thing to get. Especially if you have no insurance. Here, you are likely to have access to very expensive and highly interventionist procedures if you have a big disease and insurance. Overseas, they are a bit more sparing in those areas. But to me, it is far more just and cost efficient to provide basic health care to everyone. No telling how many expensive and highly interventionist procedures (not to mention lives lost) could be saved that way.