[mojo2]

Free rent for sex in New York

Wealthy New Yorkers are advertising rent-free rooms to women in exchange for sexual favours.

The New York Daily News reports the trend and lists a number of ads on the popular Craigslist.org website.

One, entitled "Take Care of My Needs and Live Rent Free", offers: "All you have to do is take care of all my urges, and I'll let you live in a one-bedroom apartment I own rent free."

Another ad reads: "All I am looking for is an attractive, playful, and submissive woman who is uninhibited to my proposal... substituting rent for sexual encounters."

In the posting, the 33-year-old man living in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, adds that the room comes with a TV, DVD player, internet-ready computer and a phone line.

"I don't need the rent but would like to fill it up with a woman who would love to show her appreciation for my generosity," he wrote.

But Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne warned that the advertisements amounted to prostitution.

"It is illegal to trade or solicit sex for monetary consideration or other consideration," he said.

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm...irkies.sexlife

Sounds like someone was inspired by the idea popularized by M---- Apartment.

[Doofy]

"It is illegal to trade or solicit sex for monetary consideration or other consideration," he said.

Oh dear. There goes most wives' abilities to get their hubby to take the trash out.

[hickey]

Im glad to see someone else has visited M---- Apartment. (Why can't we type the full name?)

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by hickey

M---- Apartment. (Why can't we type the full name?)

Links to porn sites not allowed? Approximations of links to porn sites not allowed?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Oh dear. There goes most wives' abilities to get their hubby to take the trash out.

[Millennium]

"It is illegal to trade or solicit sex for monetary consideration or other consideration," he said.

...and for good reason. Allowing such permanent arrangements essentially allows people to impose nonviolent but indisputably coercive situations where a person is forced to have sex: in other words, legalized rape. The only way to prevent this is to forbid such contracts. I suppose they could be made legal but nonbinding, but if they're nonbinding then they're useless for trade, and so you've effectively forbidden them anyway.

That's the problem with legalizing prostitution: once the money changes hands, the prostitute essentially loses the legal right to change her (or his) mind and deny consent. When that happens, you've created a situation where rape is legally sanctioned by way of contract law. Not all prostitution is rape, of course, but if rape is legalized in the case of the prostitution (which cannot be avoided unless the contracts are neutered), then all we've done is trade one moral decision for another, and I don't think the tradeoff has really put us "forward."

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Millennium

That's the problem with legalizing prostitution: once the money changes hands, the prostitute essentially loses the legal right to change her (or his) mind and deny consent.

That's ridiculous. She can change her mind and give the money back.

[brassplayersrock²]

that's true ipk, BUT, there are men out there (and women too) that would get really ticked off and force the sex on the woman or man if they give the money back.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Millennium

That's the problem with legalizing prostitution: once the money changes hands, the prostitute essentially loses the legal right to change her (or his) mind and deny consent. When that happens, you've created a situation where rape is legally sanctioned by way of contract law.

A civil contract can never overrule criminal law. When a prostitute stops consenting, then it's rape. Period.

[Pao|o]

I trump you this, prostitution is illegal thus overulling the civil contract in the first place.

[Chuckit]

What is it called? Mgοatse Apartment?

[hickey]

haha. It's a more common name with an apostrophe

[Doofy]

Mr Jackson would be proud.

[hyteckit]

I tried it, but it didn't work. All I got was weirdos and horny gay guys.

[baw]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

What is it called? Mgοatse Apartment?

Yeah, I'm lost.

[Spook E]

jeez, it starts with M and ends with ike's.

The site is pretty lame, and like B***Bus, totally staged.

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by brassplayersrock

that's true ipk, BUT, there are men out there (and women too) that would get really ticked off and force the sex on the woman or man if they give the money back.

What are pimps for?

[FulcrumPilot]

May be this planet is another planet's...er nevermind.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by The Godfather

What are pimps for?

Protection, like the mob.

-t

[mojo2]

If you were single and had an extra bedroom and didn't need the money and it wasn't illegal, would you do it?

Sure. Why not?

Hmmm, wait. What kind of girl would do that? And should I care about her moral fibre and mental condition and work ethic or just about her attractiveness and HIV status?

[hickey]

in my case, I would only worry about attractiveness and HIV status at first. But deep down I would hope something more meaningful would come of it.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by hickey

in my case, I would only worry about attractiveness and HIV status at first. But deep down I would hope something more meaningful would come of it.

I guess I would too.

But three images come to mind.

Meatloaf's "Two Out of Three Ain't Bad." (There ain't no Coupe de Ville hidin at the bottom of a Cracker Jack box.)

The film, "Pretty Woman."

And, the joke about the little boy in the ice cream store who wants a chocolate ice cream cone.

You know the joke?

[hickey]

cant say i do. wanna enlighten me?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by hickey

cant say i do. wanna enlighten me?

Thanks for asking.


Little boy goes into an ice cream shop and asks the clerk for a chocolate ice cream cone.

The clerk says they are out and to come back tomorrow.

The little boy left.


An hour later the boy returned and once again asked for a chocolate cone.

Again the clerk told him they were all out of chocolate, then asked if the boy wanted another flavor.

The boy refused and left.


Ten minutes later the boy returned and the clerk asked if he'd like some Vanilla, Tutti-Fruiti or Rocky Road.

The boy asked for a chocolate ice cream cone.

With that the clerk blew his top and began yelling at the kid, making him cry.

To stop the boy from his wailing the clerk said this:


"Answer these three questions correctly and I'll fix you up, little guy!"

The boys sobbing subsided.


"First question. Spell VAN as in VAN -illa."

The boy spelled V-A-N.

"Very good. Second question, spell STRAW as in STRAW -berry"

The boy spelled S-T-R-A-W.

"Final question kid. Spell STINK, as in chocolate."

The kid thought a moment then said, "Hey, wait a minute mister. There's no STINK in chocolate!"

The clerk replied, "THAT'S what I've been trying to tell you, kid. THERE'S NO STINKIN CHOCOLATE!!!"


In this case it's unlikely the kind of girl you'd think of settling down with would be attracted to such a proposition. But if the relationship you hoped for was only based on liberal attitudes about sex then you'd probably get what you wanted.

[hickey]

gotcha.

my grandma told me a joke similar to that once. I think thats the only time I've ever heard her joke at all.

[JoshuaZ]

Originally Posted by Spook E

jeez, it starts with M and ends with ike's.

The site is pretty lame, and like B***Bus, totally staged.

B-Bus is fake! NooooooOoooOoOOOoooo!

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by hickey

gotcha.

my grandma told me a joke similar to that once. I think thats the only time I've ever heard her joke at all.

It's a great joke as well as being a good life lesson. Sometimes there's just no friggin chocolate, no matter what you do or how much you try.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by JoshuaZ

B-Bus is fake! NooooooOoooOoOOOoooo!

I always feel bad for the girl after they take her $$ and kick her out of the bus out in the boonies somewhere.

If I was there I'd offer to give her a ride home.

If she'd do me, too.

I'd drive around for hours following the bxxx bus just to snag the castaways.

Then I'd videotape them as I asked if they wanted a ride. And if they said no I'd videotape the look on their faces when I sped away leaving them to walk home.

And if they agreed to do me I'd videotape them as they did me and then I'd make money by showing their vids on my website.

Haha! Just kidding.

[Spook E]

There was an interesting article in a florida paper (online) about the massive company behind b-bus and the audition process, how it all works etc.

One of the chicks wanted to bail out at the last minute and they were going to sue or something, can't remember.

They play at being rough, but their business dealings sound harsher by far. Even one of the guys that they use had enough of it (the white guy with the pony tail IIRC)

[Cadaver]

Originally Posted by Millennium

...and for good reason. Allowing such permanent arrangements essentially allows people to impose nonviolent but indisputably coercive situations where a person is forced to have sex: in other words, legalized rape. The only way to prevent this is to forbid such contracts. I suppose they could be made legal but nonbinding, but if they're nonbinding then they're useless for trade, and so you've effectively forbidden them anyway.

That's the problem with legalizing prostitution: once the money changes hands, the prostitute essentially loses the legal right to change her (or his) mind and deny consent. When that happens, you've created a situation where rape is legally sanctioned by way of contract law. Not all prostitution is rape, of course, but if rape is legalized in the case of the prostitution (which cannot be avoided unless the contracts are neutered), then all we've done is trade one moral decision for another, and I don't think the tradeoff has really put us "forward."

Yeah. That's why they should be paid after.

j/k

[chris v]

Housewife Charged In Sex-For-Security Scam

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by chris v

Housewife Charged In Sex-For-Security Scam

Haha... so true, so true.

[demograph68]

I smelled onions from all the way over here.

I'd gladly have sex for a room.

[baw]

Originally Posted by chris v

Housewife Charged In Sex-For-Security Scam

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by chris v

Housewife Charged In Sex-For-Security Scam

[Cipher13]

Originally Posted by Millennium

...and for good reason. Allowing such permanent arrangements essentially allows people to impose nonviolent but indisputably coercive situations where a person is forced to have sex: in other words, legalized rape. The only way to prevent this is to forbid such contracts. I suppose they could be made legal but nonbinding, but if they're nonbinding then they're useless for trade, and so you've effectively forbidden them anyway.

That's the problem with legalizing prostitution: once the money changes hands, the prostitute essentially loses the legal right to change her (or his) mind and deny consent. When that happens, you've created a situation where rape is legally sanctioned by way of contract law. Not all prostitution is rape, of course, but if rape is legalized in the case of the prostitution (which cannot be avoided unless the contracts are neutered), then all we've done is trade one moral decision for another, and I don't think the tradeoff has really put us "forward."

I see no moral problem with the situation, as long as they're non-binding (and even if they're not, in a way). As long as it's clear that consent is required at all times, and should consent be lacking at any time that constitutes the end of said 'contract'.

If a person wants to give sex in return for a service, why not? It's their choice, and they can deal with the consequences, in my opinion (whatever they may be).