A
male
age
51-59,
anonymous
writes:I recently recalled an argument I had with a woman some time ago. She slept with men for money. She tried to keep it secret, but once I found out, I was very troubled by it. One reason was that she did not really need the money--it was not like she was in a desperate situation. She did it because these men were rich and powerful and she wanted to be part of that world and get their influence. Another reason was that with the sex came terms of endearment. She said she loved them, called them affectionate names, etc.I was upset by this because it was hard for me to respect this. I could understand straight prostitution much more. This seemed like USING them, and seemed inhuman.I told her this, and she said, no, it was NOT using them.Why, I asked."It's not using them because I like them. I respect them for their success, and they help me and give me advice.""But you know they are short-term!" I exclaimed."I don't care, I am not looking for long-term now," she replied."But it cheapens sex and it cheapens words," I said. "You are not looking at them like people, but as objects.""No, I am looking at them like people," she said. "I respect their intelligence, and I respect their accomplishments. My sleeping with them is a sign of respect."It was a crazy way to me of looking at the world, but I began to wonder then, what does it mean to use someone. I always thought that (in the words of Kant), you should treat people as an end unto themselves, never a means to an ends. But maybe I am too idealistic. And maybe she did like these people for their qualities. I got confused.So, I submit to you: Was she using them?What does it mean to use someone in your own opinion?AND PLEASE do NOT send me replies: "It's none of your business what she does." That's not the question. I am asking a general question that has implications for my own view of relationships.Thank you!
View related questions:
cheap, money Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
reader, anonymous, writes (18 February 2012): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionAgain, thanks for the responses. I should add that actually this is an episode from the past. The person I spoke about and I no longer speak and have not for quite some time. But that was because of a rift in our personal relationship aside from her past.
When I was friends with her, I bent over backwards to understand what she did because it clashed so strongly with my own values. But I did say that ultimately, if she was straight with me, then I would not let the other stuff get in the way.
I only reflect on it now, much later, as I wonder about the nature of her relationships. Now, some replies:
@Tisha-1:
I understand you better now. Thanks for the clarification. Regarding judgment--you know, I once heard something which I try to live by: you should only judge someone from a place of love. In other words, if you do not love the person, do not judge them, because then it is coming from a place of hate or condescension or self-righteousness. But if you love the person, you want them to improve and be better -- so then judgment and criticism can have a place.
@anonymous female:
I think you are being very arbitrary in saying what this woman does is not using anyone because it involves mutual consent, but prostitution is using being it does not involve mutual consent. You say prostitutes are forced into the work, so it is not consensual. I would challenge that, as someone already has. Escorts, prostitutes--many choose it because they prefer it to other ways of making a living, which are often more difficult and take more time. Not all but many.
And you could say that same for this woman. She goes after rich men because she does not come from a rich background. So does that make her forced into it? Maybe that's not consensual either.
And straight prostitution seems to me to be more honest than what this woman is doing. With real prostitution, there are no pleasantries involved, no "I love you"s or other charms.
@Cerberus:
Well, like I said above, we're not friends anymore. But it was not because of her sidelines--it was how she treated me.
That was the ultimate deciding factor.
Still, you make a very interesting point how one can still be a devoted and good friend and do other bad things on the side. It didn't work for me with this person, but I am open to the idea that it can still be true.
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (17 February 2012): If prositution is not a choice, then what about all the poor men who commit crimes, sell drugs, etc, feed their families? Did they not have a choice either?
Grown adults are responsible for their own actions. Everyone has a choice. For every woman out there selling herself, there are other women just as poor who do not. For every man out there committing crimes, there are other men out there just as poor who do not.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (17 February 2012): OP - your examples of prostitution and rape are completely different from your friend's situation.It boils down to mutual consent and individual freedom. If there is mutual consent and mutual freedom to walk away anytime, there is no 'using.'Real prostitution is completely different - there is no mutual consent or freedom, it's entirely one-way at the expense of the woman. You think those women actually like what they do?? You think they actually aspired to be doing it and eagerly planned how to get into that line of work?? Most of them were forced into this line of work against their will, or unfortunate societal circumstances made them end up doing it! Most of them also become drug addicts because they hate this life so much having to do this, yet due to unfortunate circumstances they feel they have no other options. real prostitution is women being forced against their will to have sex with men that they dont' get to choose either, men they find utterly disgusting. And that is degrading. Nothing can be further from your friend's situation! She is free to walk away anytime she wants. She enjoys what she does, and so does the men she's with. Everyone is free to stop any time, and everyone is honest and open upfront about the arrangement and both parties are equally happy.With rape - again it's obvious that the woman is forced against her will, and only the man gets benefit and it's at her expense because she didn't want it. Again, complete opposite from your friend's situation. yes what your friend is doing is a business transaction. Does that make it 'using"? Are all business transactions "using?" If you get a foot massage and pay money for it, are you 'using' the person who gave you the foot massage, anymore than your friend is using or being used by her men? If you went to a restaurant and bought a dinner, are you "using" those people who cooked for you and served you the food? maybe you feel so upset by this because you have romantic feelings for her and you want to be in a relationship with her, and you're worried that she sees you as one of these other men whom she's happy to sleep with, without commitment. if so, then you should set your sights elsewhere for a relationship partner since this bothers you so much.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie +, writes (16 February 2012):
 To Cerberus,
Maybe I did over simplify it. But I sincerely doubt the women OP is talking about would "date" a man without money and the men that she dates, would date an average looking smart girl. I do think the stereotype of wealthy man + pretty girl thrives.
I don't think a man with money is less capable of loving as a poor man though, don't get me wrong. After all look at Paul McCartney...
And I do think her behavior is morally wrong. But thank goodness, I'm not living her life. Nor to I believe it is my job to sew on a a scarlet A on her chest.
...............................
A
female
reader, Tisha-1 +, writes (16 February 2012):
 OP, I didn't judge you. I simply took your filter as presented by your question and replayed what she might be thinking through that filter.
I actually originally was going to post that a friend of mine surprised me by getting involved with a married man who had 4 children. I was floored by her choice and it indeed did cause me to think about how she made choices. I tried to understand it from her perspective but I could never get around the basic fact that I would never ever in a million years get involved myself with a married man. That for me was a taboo that could not be broken.
In your case, you assumed I was judging you because I replayed your filter back to you. I was trying to get you to see beyond your question, to the basic fact that you and she see the world through different filters and that while you may not like it much, other people's filters will not be identical with yours.
As far as being judgmental goes, I wasn't aware there were shades of it. More judgmental? Less judgmental? I guess I may be more judgmental about someone who has STDs who sleeps with people and doesn't tell them about those STDs, or a woman who tries to get pregnant to trap a man, or a man who picks up women even though he has a wife and children at home. I am probably less judgmental about single people choosing to have sex with no intention of becoming life partners with that sex partner.
When you look into the abyss, the abyss looks back into you.... think about it. And I want to suggest that people who are judgmental about people judging them for being judgmental may be even more judgmental than people who judge people, no? Again, I'm going to extremes to make a point. If you agree that judging other people is fair, then you have to be prepared that your filters be used on your own judging process. That's all I did.
You now know what you know about her, she has told you that her decisions sit fine with her and I guess the question for you is.... what? Maybe your real question is, "was she using ME?" And that can only be answered by you. If she wasn't honest with you and led you to believe something that wasn't true, made promises that she had no intention of keeping, and got you to give her things based on those promises, well, yeah, maybe she did use you. I think Cerberus just summed it up well. Keep her as a platonic friend, at arm's length and don't let sex, money or love enter the picture, now that you know her approach to dating, 'gifts' and sex is very different from yours.
...............................
A
female
reader, So_Very_Confused +, writes (16 February 2012):
 Ah so this is NOT philosophical… this is personal… you said:
“I began wondering if she was real with me, or if she was just saying things to get things.”
So you figured if she had “arrangements” with others, perhaps she only wanted that with you and you assumed that she would lie to you because you believe her to be lying to them.
You do not know the dynamic of any other relationships she has… she may very well love parts of these others or parts of the relationship… it may be a matter of semantics for you.. her definition of love does not match yours. I love coffee ice cream. I love my children.. I love a good nap and I love my partner… all are love… all are different.
I am not judging you… I don’t’ judge people for the most part, at least I try not to. Try being the operative word. I don’t want to be judged for my past. We (should) use our past to learn and grow… if we don’t make mistakes then we don’t learn…
So your concern is “does she love me or is she lying to me” your concern is that you don’t trust her…. If you don’t’ trust her then don’t bother… trust is like a china tea cup it’s very fragile and once broken it can be mended but it always has a crack and a weak point that can break more easily the second time around.
...............................
A
female
reader, CindyCares  +, writes (16 February 2012):
 Based on your own reasoning... you should feel pretty safe. If you think that she slept with rich men just for their money ( but - she won't confirm that, she says she also liked them ), and that she used terms of endearment with them only to get out of them important gifts and favours ( but she denies that too, or at least she does not see it this way .. ) - if you have got no money and no position of power to share with her AND she was / is still around,- then this must mean she was / is sincere and genuine toward you.
The proof is in the pudding, if by being with you or around you she got / will get something material that she wants, then your doubts are quite legitimate, if she
was not / is not getting any material benefit from associating with you, then I don't see what are you personally worried about, why do you doubt her and how her past personal choices in sex and life should upset you / concern you so much.
Unless you want to know if she has an inborn manipulative streak that will inevitably come out when you win the Lottery . Personally I think that yes, that's probable. But we can only put people on trial because of what they actually do, not because of what they might be capable of doing under hypotetical circumstances.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (16 February 2012): OP you can't trust someone who will use people with the thing they use people for, it's that simple. If you were rich and sleeping with this girl then you couldn't for a second trust that she loves you. But as a platonic friend I'm pretty sure she's shown already you can trust her otherwise this wouldn't be playing in your mind so much.
I mentioned earlier about being a player. It doesn't mean when I was with my female friends that I wasn't 100% honest with them and talked to them about what I was doing or that they couldn't trust me. It was just the women I considered viable targets that couldn't trust certain aspects of me. They couldn't trust me to fulfil their emotional needs, they couldn't trust me to be there for them or to treat them as anything more than just an easy lay. But to the women in my life, the ones I cared and loved there is no way in hell the same rules applied. I would take a bullet for them.
I mean my current girlfriend was a close friend of mine during the time I was a player. She always meant more to me and could trust me and it took us a year after I'd stopped playing for us to even realize that there was something more to our feelings.
I can understand why you see her words in a different light but you need to differentiate between the dynamic of your relationship with her and the ones she had with her targets. It's very different.
I have an amazing friend who is very reliable with his time and company but you simply cannot trust him with money. You will never see it back, he owes so many people money it's ridiculous. So in order to ensure money never destroys the friendship and in essence lose all the great qualities he brings to my life as a friend, we have an understanding that he can't ask for nor will he ever receive a loan of money from me. He's not a bad person for this OP it's just a weakness in his character. He's not trying to fuck people over he's just absolutely useless when it comes to money.
It's the same for your friend OP. Keep her as a friend and never let money nor sex come into the equation. That way you never really have any reason to doubt her integrity towards you.
She doesn't have to have the exact moral compass on all things to be a good friend. She just has to bring more good qualities to your friendship than bad and the bad you have to ensure don't come into it.
I hate religion with a passion but two of my closest friends are devout and fundamentalist religious people. One I can have fun debating the pros and cons all day. The other it has become about tolerance of each others stances and not bringing them to the fore.
You're not perfect OP, and just as you want your friends to look past your flaws as they perceive them, if you want to be a good friend to her you'll look past hers and you won't question her overall integrity the way you are.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (16 February 2012): WOW OP.. EITHER YOU ARE NAIVE OR SEE THE WORLD IN JUST A YES AND A NO.
About your Anna Nicole example- Isn't it possible for you to believe that maybe because of this arrangement.. they are fond of each other.. and yes love each other
Some people in India still have ARRANGED MARRIAGES. And NO .. IT is not all about using one another for a specific purpose.. Eventually some of these people actually marry because of societal pressures or because they are not capable of picking a bride/groom for themselves.. or want to comply to their parents..
Doesn't mean that they don't love each other.. or won't fall in love.. or share a fondness for each other and stay loyal and respectful within the confines of this relationship...
Even some Love Marriages are actually just an arranged thing.. EVERY RELATIONSHIP HAS ITS OWN RULES/ BOUNDARIES ARRANGEMENT.
AND IF YOU READ PSYCHOLOGY BOOKS YOU WILL KNOW THAT IN A RELATIONSHIP THERE IS ALWAYS A GIVER AND TAKER.. THATS WHERE THE WORD COMPROMISE COMES FROM.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MARRIAGE AND THIS ARRANGEMENT IS - HERE THERE IS NO EMOTIONAL EXCHANGE AND NO KIDS.
You can only view it individually.. if an individual thinks he/she wants to be in a relationship for genuine reasons.. then he/she will most definitely be genuine without using somebody else or cheating somebody else..
Interestingly.. people seem to keep making this about genders...
If a guy had done this .. he would have been viewed the same way.. but wouldn't have been challenged so openly
IF A GUY HAD DONE THIS OP.... WOULD YOU HAVE DEBATED THIS IN A ADVICE COLUMN... OR WOULD YOU CHALK IT OUT AS "BAD BOY BEHAVIOR" AND NOT GIVE IT A SECOND THOUGHT..
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (16 February 2012): This is verified as being by the original poster of the question@Tisha-1:
I knew someone was going to pull out the "Who are you to judge" card. Yes, I am judging her -- the same way you are judging me for judging her.
If there was someone you were close with, and you found out they did things which contrasted with your value system, would it not upset you? It's easy to say, "Do whatever you wish, it's your life," with someone you don't care about. When it comes to someone you do care about, it's quite different.
What bothers me about this particular situation is that I began wondering if she was real with me, or if she was just saying things to get things. Once I realized she went through rich sex partners, telling them she loved them, calling them sweet terms of endearment...it cast all her actions and words in a different light. To me, love IS a serious thing, and if you use the word with everyone, it doesn't mean anything.
That's why it matters. If she were just sleeping with them, it would bother me, but not nearly as much. Somehow I always find the people who say "Who are you to judge" to be the most judgmental of others who actually care enough to form a judgment.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine  +, writes (16 February 2012):
 How do you know Nicole didn't love her husband? Did you know the couple personally? From what I remember of the story, she had a messed up life, and he had shown her a lot of kindness, and not only in financial terms. I personally think it was a kind of love, father figure love for her. But find it so funny how you just assume things as if that makes them true.
As for him, well he ended up in a wheelchair in the end before his death.. no reports of her having a lover on the side. There are many types of love in the world. She may have loved this man more than the family who seemed concerned with his money rather than anything else, and hounded this man about his own free choice in the years before his death.
You read the media and then you, some stranger, become judge and jury and make decisions about their lives. Kind of what you done with your original lady friend. That's also using people, using the stories of people lives for your own entertainment.
...............................
A
female
reader, Tisha-1 +, writes (16 February 2012):
I recently recalled an argument I had with a man some time ago. I told him that I slept with men for money. It wasn't really any of his business but he decided he deserved to know and to judge me on it. He seemed to be very upset by it for some reason. One reason was that he mentioned was that I did not really need the money--I was not in a desperate situation. He thinks I did it because these men were rich and powerful and that I wanted to be part of that world and get their influence. Another reason was that with the sex came terms of endearment. I told him that I said I loved them, called them affectionate names, etc. Maybe I should have told him I liked the way they treated me and the way I was spoiled and pampered by them. I think he expected that there should be holy harps playing whenever two people have sex. I guess he has never just had a bit of body on body, friction-filled, sensual sex with no other goal other than mutual pleasure. I think he puts an expectation that every sexual encounter everywhere needs to have some kind of seal of societal approval? Doesn't he get that some people just like to have sex without a specific end or goal in mind, other than mutual pleasure?
These men knew that in order to clear the first hurdle to get into my bed, that they had to be generous. They also had to be men that I could feel something for. I had to have a sense that I could feel love for them. I wanted sweethearts and wooers, and that is what I got. I treated them as lovers would do, giving them all the sweet words and sweet nothings that lovers since time immemorial have done. I wooed them as they wooed me. It was lovely.
He said he was upset by this because it was hard for him to respect this. He said he could understand straight prostitution much more. This seemed like USING them, and seemed inhuman, according to him. What I wondered was who had elected him judge and jury. And why would his respect have any impact or influence on my life? Maybe this was what really bothered him, that I didn't care what his judgement was? That I was going to live my life as I liked, whether or not he 'tsked' himself hoarse? That I enjoyed having sex with them and not expecting anything more than some nice presents?
He told me that he felt I was using them, and I said, no, it was NOT using them.
Why, he asked.
"It's not using them because I like them. I respect them for their success, and they help me and give me advice."
"But you know they are short-term!" he exclaimed.
"I don't care, I am not looking for long-term now," I replied.
"But it cheapens sex and it cheapens words," he said. "You are not looking at them like people, but as objects."
"No, I am looking at them like people," I said. "I respect their intelligence, and I respect their accomplishments. My sleeping with them is a sign of respect."
It was a crazy way to me of looking at the world, but I began to wonder then, why what my sex life had to do with his worldview. Why was it that I had to conform to HIS notion of what appropriate sex was, why he got so upset that I chose to have sex with men without the goal of a longterm relationship? Was he one of those people who believed that sex had to mean precise things and who was upset when the rest of the world didn't join into his personal view on the subject? I suspect he always thought that (in the words of Kant), you should treat people as an end unto themselves, never a means to an ends. But maybe he thinks he is too idealistic. And maybe he will never understand that I did like these people for their qualities. I confused him because he could not see the world from my viewpoint. He was so rigidly caught up in his own logic that he couldn't get his head around the notion that I liked having sex with some men, who then gave me presents. I wasn't pretending my feelings for them, I really did feel genuine affection and love for them when I was with them. It just wasn't the 'happily ever after' type of love, it was the 'love the one you're with' type of love.
------
You're trying to understand her through your filter. I'm not saying what she did is noble or prize-worthy but I think your premise is that she needs to believe the way you do and perhaps she feels exactly the same way, that you need to believe the way she does.
I think you're going to drive yourself a bit crazy trying to fit her world view into yours.... and I wonder why it matters so much to you.
...............................
A
female
reader, PerhapsNot +, writes (16 February 2012):
 He gave her gifts and provided for her in exchange for her youth and beauty but he NEVER put her in his will. He was not stupid and never prepared anything legally for her after his death. The court ruling stated that he was mentally fit and under no undue pressure when he wrote his will leaving nearly everything to his son and nothing to his gold-digger wife. Once again, he was not stupid and he knew what kind of a woman he was with. To say she was using him would be ludacris, as she didn't end up getting his fortune after he died.
...............................
A
female
reader, So_Very_Confused +, writes (16 February 2012):
I'll just quote my post from yesterday:
"A young woman who is kept by an 80 yr old man who knows she’s just there for the money but she takes care of him and treats him well and is with him, is that fine line where everyone may be deluding themselves that it’s real but deep down in both their hearts they know it’s all been a pack of lies skims that use and abuse issue but again both parties are aware of the lies and accept them…. "
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (16 February 2012): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionHi,
I am the OP. Most people seem to be saying that if there is deceit going on, it's USING, and if both parties agree to the terms of the arrangement (i.e., sex for money) it's NOT using.
I have given this a lot of rethinking and am reminded of the story of the late Anna Nicole Smith and her late husband, an oil tycoon named J. Howard Marshall. She was 26, he was 89 when they married.
Did Anna Nicole Smith's billionaire husband believe she really loved him? You have seen the photo: a beautiful and buxom 20ish blonde smiling next to her husband, a grinning, wheelchair bound, stooped-over 90-year-old man.
Most probably, each figured out he or she was getting a good deal. He would have the company of a sexy young woman in his declining years, and she would only have to put up with him for a few years and then inherit his fortune.
Of course, each claimed he or she loved the other. If anyone here believes that, I have a bridge to sell you. So, was each using the other and did each person bury it so deep inside him or her that each had to resort to self-deception?
I'd like to hear any thoughts on this. I figure there will still be a few saying, "Who are we to judge true love?" I hope, though, no one will be that naive.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (15 February 2012): She is a woman + it is her past sex life = nobody can judge her for it? Sorry but I don't buy this.
If we are not allowed to evaluate someone for this kind of behavior, then I would like to know what IS acceptable to evaluate someone on.
Sex is no different from any other behavior. When you have freedoms to do things, then you must also accept responsibility for your actions.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (15 February 2012): I think everyone is making this too complicated for words...
It seems simple.. if she doesn't love them and is just sleeping with them for their money.. then obviously she is using them..
If she has told them or they know of this .. then no she isn't using them.. they have an arrangement..
To the OP ... first of all yes its none of your business.. and secondly... you cannot tell for sure who is using who or what not...
Like many who seem to think that these guys are angels.. and maybe at the wrong end of the bargain... What if these guys are married.. having a married life... whom would you called used then?
so OP please do not judge her.. maybe these guys are being lied to.. but these guys could be lying as well.. you don't know the truth... and it is debatable as to how much of what you know is the truth.. so its best first to know the whole situation before making any judgements...
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (15 February 2012): Honeypie I think you've pretty much tapped into a stereotype about wealthy guys. Surely you can entertain the idea that someone who may be great at financial matters may be wholly naive when it comes to love. Intelligence isn't some all encompassing thing, even Einstein stated that for all his intelligence the one thing he could never figure is women.
You're exactly the type of woman I spoke about earlier that seem to think being rich makes these fair game to be used and abused by women only after their money, that somehow they deserve it for being rich.
I think you're stereotyping these guys as rich, powerful guys that are used to having models throwing themselves at them and like just picking up women in their flash cars and not caring about these girls. Or that they may somehow be happy with the thought that women are only after their money or that they don't need or want love because they're rich.
One of my closest friends is a multi-millionaire and he hasn't so much as had a date with a girl in all the time I have known him, which is a good 8-9 years. He's a self made man, he's a very astute and accomplished businessman but he is very self-conscious and has no confidence when it comes to women which is a pity because he's one of those guys that is first to help his friends when they need something and he's lucky enough to have a group of friends that never even consider his money as anything more than him never being stuck for cash.
I think you're being unfair to be honest and you justify what she's doing solely on the basis that these guys are rich therefore they should know better and because they're getting sex and the false promise of love that should be enough for them. But how does that work? They have to take the risk and hope that maybe this girl is genuine when she says she loves him otherwise they'd be alone and suspicious forever.
I think you're stereotyping these guys much the way as a lot of guys would stereotype a beautiful woman as being a bitch and using guys just because she can. We both know that there are inherent problems for all exceptionally beautiful women, that they may be used for sex, or may not be considered for anything more than their beauty but it should be common knowledge that just because a woman is beautiful doesn't mean she falls into a stereotype and there are many examples of women that are extremely attractive who are never even approached by guys, or that absolutely hate the idea of getting special treatment from people based on their appearance. Yet so many guys think it's okay to use and abuse these women because their beauty makes them fair game.
I think it's too simplistic to generalize the way you have, whether rich, poor, beautiful or average. You should treat all people with the same dignity and respect, not lead them on with false promises or assume that just because they have lots of money they should know that women only want them for that.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie +, writes (14 February 2012):
I think they are using each other. I'm pretty sure the men who are in the position of money and power are very aware of the people they surround themselves with in and out of bed. They didn't get rich and powerful by being stupid.
Do I find it immoral? yea, I do. I think she is borderline prostituting herself for a "fantasy" (that them men love her and she loves them, when it comes down to it, she loves their money and power and well, they love their own money and power too and enjoy having someone like her "rub" their ego.)
She might wake up one day too "old" to snag another wealthy powerful man and be a lonely lonely lady.
Her sense of right and wrong differs from yours. Her moral values differs too.
...............................
A
female
reader, So_Very_Confused +, writes (14 February 2012):
I am so far over my head with this conversation… it’s really beyond my skill level to make my points clearly… but I’m going to try…
There is use
There is what I call use and abuse
There is mutual use
FWB is a mutual use kind of thing… so you both use each other but it’s with knowledge and consent.
There are men that use women and they know they are being used and accept it… a kept woman comes to mind… he sets her up in an apartment, pays her bills and she’s at his beck and call and keeps a low profile…. He uses her for sex and companionship on the side and she uses him for financial support…
I have no problem with this type of use.
The TYPE of use I have a problem with is the lying… a woman lies to a man that she loves him and he supports her thinking she does love him… that to me is WRONG.
Or a man lies to a woman that he loves her and he wants to marry her but he won’t set a date because he knows he never really wants to marry her but he likes her company and he knows if he says NOPE I’ll never get married she will leave but he doesn’t want to be alone… that’s wrong too…
Two parties agreeing to use each other no matter what the agreement is (sex, money, companionship, dinner and dancing date, eye candy on the arm at an event) is perfectly acceptable to me and I do not see it as use… more like a business deal… because IT’S ABOVE BOARD AND HONEST .
One PARTY using another with lies and deception is wrong.
A young woman who is kept by an 80 yr old man who knows she’s just there for the money but she takes care of him and treats him well and is with him, is that fine line where everyone may be deluding themselves that it’s real but deep down in both their hearts they know it’s all been a pack of lies skims that use and abuse issue but again both parties are aware of the lies and accept them….
Again… as long as both parties are in agreement of what’s really going on even if they lie to others and to themselves on the face of it, that’s not use… that mutual use and abuse and that’s a business deal.
...............................
A
female
reader, PerhapsNot +, writes (14 February 2012):
You asked whether or not she was using the men and the clear answer is no. You didn't ask whether we thought prostitution or mutual using is morally justifiable. I don't have a high opinion of prostitutes or the men who visit them, nor am I a fan of users, but that was not the question. You wanted to know if we thought she was using them. Clearly you've been distraught by this woman who has kept this part of her past a secret and I don't blame you. I wouldn't want to be with someone, who is that hung up and places that much importance on wealth and prestige. But to say that she used these affluent men is just silly. They were using each other. How we all feel about that arrangement is a whole different topic.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): Also......
To me 'using somebody' is when one person isn't aware of it... like a rebound person who leads you to believe they are over their Ex,tells you they hate them blah de blah, when all along they are lying,using you to make Ex jealous and then go back to them,dropping you without even a phone-call
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): If she is having sex with these guys and ripping them off of their money by telling them she loves them .. then she is using them...
But if these men know about her motive .. then its prostitution.. escortism.. whatever u may call it... but just an arrangement..
In both cases she is a person without morals and with a deep hole which can be filled only by a DICK.. true slut there my friend.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): Supply and demand.. I know a couple of girls who worked in a massage parlour for about 3 yrs, the money was unreal. However they said the majority of the women were gay, disliked men immensley. These 2 girls were on drink n drugs to cope with the way of life but they had the cash to party every night.
Were they being used? Yes, but they did it willingly and reached an agreement of price for the business they offered. Personally I think it says more about the men who have to pay for a woman.
I only know one of the girls now and she gave up women and the job, married a plumber and has a child,you would never guess her past.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (14 February 2012):
"That's why you'll never see a woman criticize another for using her body to gain wealth."Wait a second, lets not put all women in the same basket. I think it's been made clear by several women here about men and women using each other.But I did misread this post, misunderstood the bit where she talks about love and tells them sweet words. I assumed this was of the flirting kind, not lying about how much you love a guy. If she is telling men she loves them but has no feelings, just to get money out of them, then yes she is misleading them and therefore she's a user. Same as when a woman has lots of sex before marriage, but then refuses to go into the bedroom once she has the wedding ring. Women who use their bodies for sex like that are wrong (imho). But it's to do with consent, lies, manipulation and contracts more than anything else. Using is a difficult term to make any proper sense of.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): Trading sex for anything other than a relationship always means that somebody is being used somehow. Even if it's the woman using herself.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): OP, I think it is pretty clear that you aren't looking for advice, but rather to validate your own opinion. Because the poster's here aren't saying what you want to hear, you are disagreeing.The way I view "using someone" is to boil it down to deception. For example if one partner is serious but the other views the relationship as short term and causal, that's using. For that matter if one partner thinks there's a committed relationship but the other person is sleeping around, that's also using. Another case is when one partner is in a committed relationship not because of love but for material gain.In your scenario, there is no relationship. The men want sex, and the woman wants money. So both are getting what they want, and nobody is being deceived. I have to conclude that neither party is using the other.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): One thing I forgot to say in her defence OP is that only a fool gets used by others. We can only ever get used if we let people use us.
It would pretty damn easy for those to not get used by her and that's to not give her money or buy her things all the time. It's pretty easy to spot a user OP all you have to do is cut off the thing that they want and see if they still hang around.
If a girl wants to know if a guy is interested in more than just sex from her then she withholds sex and see how he responds. These guys could just not give her money and stuff and see what happens after that.
OP this would all be fine if she was perfectly straight with these guys from the beginning but she's not.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): Seems this is always going to be a contentious issue OP. It's simple, if a woman uses sex as a tool to gain money and material possessions from us guys, to women that's not using that's mutual. You've seen the proof right here.
I've seen it over and over again here. Women will always side which each other on this topic and never consider a woman as being a user because they get the benefit of having sex with her like it's some kind of special thing to get. The thing here is she's telling them she loves them and deceiving them for her own benefit but the women of the world ignore that factor always because they're so used to men being the users and bad guys, that they can't fathom that most of us value love over money and are equally as susceptible to a woman saying she loves us as they are.
If the roles were reversed and we were speaking of a guy who told a girl he loved her but was only using her for sex, taking her out and letting her develop feelings for him while he only wants sex then they go nuts and think that guy is an asshole. Yet it is the exact same dynamic as the situation you describe. He's taking her out, buying her things, he says he loves her and all he wants is sex and not a relationship. That's same thing as you describe the only difference is she's using them for money.
I hate to sound sexist but you've gotten a load of replies from women here and most of them think she's doing nothing wrong. They assume these guys are heartless bastards that have absolutely no chance of falling in love with a girl who has told them she loves them and they're okay with arrangement of sex for money and status.
OP using a person is when one person uses power, deceit, blackmail etc. to get what they want/need from someone without giving the other person what they want/need and not having the intention to from the outset. The girls here don't see this as that kind of situation because those guys get to shag your friend. They and your friend don't consider for a single second that these guys may be seeking love, in fact all of the women here and your friend completely ignore the possibility that those guys are looking for more than just sex from her.
I used to be a player for a couple of years and I truly had a lot of women so I know why she does what she does and I know how she can justify it. You see I used to love picking up girls in clubs/supermarkets/on the bus/on the street and taking them home, the thrill of the chase, the thrill of a new body, a new sexual style etc. I wanted what I wanted and I never pretended I wanted anything more than that. I never said I loved them, I never told them I was going to start dating them, I never once lied and told them I was looking for a relationship or anything like that but I was still using them nonetheless because I didn't care what they wanted from me, I just wanted sex and if that's what they wanted too then we'd both benefit but if they wanted more then they'd be hurt. They got to have great sex with me for a night and that to me was ample reward and a mutual thing.
My justification to myself was that I never lied, I let them assume what they wanted and I didn't correct them. So they were only hurting themselves in my view, I see now that's not the case, it would have been nicer to be up front and explain to them but it's the girls who aren't into casual sex are the ones I liked the most. The same way your friend doesn't go around sleeping with anyone, she only picks rich guys who she can use for money and she lies too.
Does it devalue sex? That's a matter of opinion. Sex itself cannot never be devalued because it's just a physical act like a hug. Does a hug get devalued the more you hug others, people who don't matter? No it doesn't because a hug will always have more meaning when it's your mother, the same as sex becomes 'making love' when it's someone you're in love with.
OP sex for money is a trade that women never see anything wrong with. It's how they were raised and it's traditional role they're still okay with because throughout our history the only source of income fro women was through a man and old traditions die hard. That's why you'll never see a woman criticize another for using her body to gain wealth.
...............................
A
female
reader, Miamine +, writes (14 February 2012):
Your reference to Kant is very interesting.. but isn't it the case that there has been many criticism about how much we do for ourself (self-regarding actions) and how much we do purely to make other's happy (other-regarding actions)
Sex is a brilliant example.
When we have sex do we do it to please ourselves or others... If sex with you is bad, should I keep doing it just to make you happy? Is a prostitute using treating a man like an object to get to the money, or is he using her body to get himself an orgasm? If I want children, am I having sex with you because I love you, or using you as a method to get them children?
Back to this woman. She sleeps with men for their power and influence. Is she using them? What if had one night stands because she was lonely and desperate, what would make this different from the original situation, because she's using their body for sex and not for money or power? Where lies the difference.
And in Kant's kingdom of Ends, where would we all be. Well nobody could have sex with anybody, because at orgasm, you can't think of anyone you can only think of yourself. There would be no more one night stands, but then again, it might be better, people could only get married because their in love, not because their biological clock is running out, or because they are lonely, or because they like the person a lot but the person they really love is dead, unavailable or a truly unpleasant person.
Could we continue to shop. When I go shopping, do I look at the person behind the till and engage with them as if the are people, with lives, personalities, wishes and desires? Or do I just grab my stuff, pay for it and don't even think about the other person because I'm busy with the problems in my head.
I can't really get round using the word "consent", which has no place in a rule book on how to treat other people. People who like S&M, like pain with their sex, they like getting whipped. Am I wrong to refuse them because it feels like that's treating them like an object.
Is she using them.. No, they are using each other, like everybody does in sexual situations.
To me using somebody must include the notion of consent. Is a prostitute or her client, nope, they are both working together to satisfy mutual desires. Is a woman forced into prostitution being used, yes because she lacks consent, and really is an unwilling object. A woman dating a married man, again mutual usage, she wants something, he want's something and they both consent to their deal. The married wife with the cheating husband... more difficult, that's because you can't consent when somebody gives you lies and manipulation. But she's also not being used, it's more of a question of contracts. To lie and manipulate to get what you want, yes to me this is using. But when you have a private agreement, and you say yes to what is offered, then your not being used, you've used your freewill to choose.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): As a man of 36 of above years I would expect a little more wisdom from you. Slaves were being used but they did not agree willfully to be taken as slaves hence they were being used for someone else's personal gain. The people including myself set out to help you find answers in an unbiased way. But instead of concluding that that individual interpretations may vary you wanted to agree and disagree with the help offered. Perhaps you should reread my earlier post and accept that answers will vary.
She was not using them as she stated to you. She and the men she slept with had a contract if you will to engage in sex. She provided the services to her customers. She was selective of her clientele as she only wanted men with power n prestige. They wanted her for her obvious abilities. It was not using since she was honest and upfront with them n they were the same towards her. It was a business transaction. Just like certain businesses cater to a particular crowd to build their reputation so does she. Using a person is when only one individual have an idea of what is going on and there was no agreement about the matter. When someone is participating or willfully allowing things to happen and are being benefited by whatever gains then the person is not using. Using= trickery or deceit. Why ponder upon a matter that happen some time ago regarding a person's personal choice to use their body in such ways.....has absolutely nothing to do with u nor can it bring you enlightenment. Accept the fact that we all are different and our comprehension of one scenario or word may not be the same. Move forward regardless of the varying answers you may find and just try to obtain n maintain relationships with people of similar views.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionI'd also like to reply to some individual posts.
@Gabrielle Stoker:
It's true all relationships have an element of "being used". It's a good point. But there are some relationships that are ALL about using. It's where I think of how that other person can benefit me. If that's the basis, then the relationship is of a using nature.
@Anonymous #1:
Marriage could be about using. But its intent is to build something together, as partners. It may turn out to be about using (e.g., the husband works so the wife will give him sex) but that's a very low version of it, and not the intent of the institution.
@Anonymous #2:
"Generally when you "use" someone, the person being "used" probably doesn't know the "users" intention."
How about slaves? Slaves knew they were being used...and you'd be hard-pressed to argue they weren't.
@ChaliceODamnation:
I agree. I don't think anyone with a decent self-esteem or a good view of human relationships would _repeatedly_ sleep with someone else for money or power or fame.
@Edgardo:
I wonder when a powerful man sleeps with a young lady in exchange for gifts if there is not some deceit going on: he fools himself into thinking she loves him for him, and she thinks he cares for her as a person rather than arm candy. I think psychologically people have to tell themselves that or it won't work.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): This is verified as being by the original poster of the questionI thank you all for your responses. I thought about them.
And I disagree with almost all of them.
The way I am thinking now is this: Prostitution is about using other people. A person is not like a book, or clothing, or a gift that one pays money for and then gets to use.
If I have sex with a woman to gratify myself, I am relating to that person as an object. I may care about her as I do a work partner: I do not wish to hurt her and I even want to pay her well for her services. But I am not relating to her in an emotional way. In fact, I necessarily have to shut off my emotions, as does she. So there is no real relationship other than a buyer/consumer.
And it's different than buying a gift. I am using her body to relieve my sexual urges. Most of us identify strongly with our bodies. Our bodies are part of who we are, much more so than our books or house.
If our body was the same as an item in a store, why is rape so much more a hideous crime than theft? It's because a person's body being violated is much more serious than someone's property.
And if the body did not matter much more than a house or bank account, why do we bury it when a person dies? If the person is no longer there, why should it matter? We don't take the same care with his clothes! The answer, again, is the body is connected deeply to the person.
And just because I use her and she uses me, it does not mean we are not using each other...even if we both agree to it. There is a certain dignity to a person that must be respected, even if that person does not agree to it him- or- herself. Imagine I make fun of someone who is mentally retarded. The person may not know I am making fun of him, and may laugh with me. But it's still wrong.
And Pretty Woman aside, most prostitutes come away with issues. To repeatedly have sex with people where there is no love is damaging. There are issues of damaged self-esteem, disgust with men, a frustrated intimacy, and a lot of denial and lying to oneself. To be a contributor to that is also morally questionable.
I do agree that it is worse when there is delusion on one part. For example, if a person is intimate and feigns emotion when he or she does not mean it, causing the other to think there is an emotional tie. Unfortunately, this woman did do that as well.
Thanks again for your answers and for any future replies.
...............................
A
female
reader, Gabrielle Stoker +, writes (14 February 2012):
 If one looks hard enough, every relationship has an element of 'being used' in it. As long as the bias is not too significant in one direction, it's difficult to say anything wrong is happening.
In this particular case, if both the parties involved knew exactly what they were going in for, it's hard to say one 'used' the other.
At worst your friend is using sex as currency. It's not unusual.
...............................
A
female
reader, PerhapsNot +, writes (14 February 2012):
No, she was/is not using these men. These men want sex and they come to her for her services. They're getting sex from her and she in turn is getting off sleeping with powerful men, hence no using.
"But it cheapens sex and it cheapens words," I said. "You are not looking at them like people, but as objects."
Actually, if anyone is seen as an object, it would be her. Prostitutes are a sex objects. Their whole purpose is to provide and fulfill sexual requests from strangers and clients. It's their job description and men who visit them come for one purpose and one purpose only.
Using is one-sided. It's only using if one person benefits from an arrangement. Using would be pretending to be friends with someone because they have those toys or video games that you don't have, but want. That's how it starts off in childhood. As adults it gets more complex and complicated. There are always selfish people, who use and trample on friends/partners to get ahead in life or have a cushier life. Using someone involves deception and hurting the other person with your words and/or actions because they made an emotional/mental investment in you.
She is not hurting anyone. If she told these men that she likes them because she likes being around powerful men, would that upset them? No. They're getting sex and how she feels about them doesn't impact them negatively. If on the other hand she were to tell you that she loves you and made you believe you were in a relationship and one day you find out it was all a lie and she was using you to climb the social ladder, that she didn't even care for you - that would be using. It would be using because she lied to you, deceived you for her own personal gain and you ended up hurt over it. These men are not hurting. You only hurt if you're emotionally invested in someone that has no interest in making you happy and does things to make you miserable.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): If there was open honest communication between her and her partners then and it was completely consenting both ways - no blackmail, trickery, threats or coercion involved - then no one was using anyone. Another thing to think about: what about marriage? isn't that a way of "using" someone to get sex and money or using someone to further their own personal desires? of course you do give back something to the other person if you're married, but so does your friend in this situation so what she's doing isn't "using" those men anymore than, say, married people use each other. I'm not equating what she's doing with marriage, just saying that just because there is sex and money involved in a relationship doesn't by itself equate to anyone being "used". If both parties are getting something beneficial from the arrangement, and both entered into the arrangement consensually and can leave of their own free will, then no one is getting used. (in fact I think that many married people are actually being used by their spouses more than your friend is using these men she sleeps with)
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): The term being "used" has an insidious connotation, implies that there is some agenda. Generally when you "use" someone, the person being "used" probably doesn't know the "users" intention. This woman you refer to doesn't feel used. The men she sleeps with don't feel used. Whatever exchange is going on between them is of a open, honest nature. There is no agenda that is being hidden or kept secret. There is no deception. It is such an open and honest exchange of interests that nobody is being taken advantage. Both parties know exactly what they are in for and what they are getting themselves into. Generally a person who is being "used" doesn't know what they are getting themselves into. Doesn't know that he or she is being used. And I think that is where the difference lies, and perhaps, the point she is trying to make to you.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): Some people lose a part of them and let it die. Maybe she was one of those that could not see the true value of self worth for herself and in others.
Some people are born into this world and they are Narcissistic or Sociopathic.
Others may even have had trauma happen to them that warps their whole self love, self image.
I don't know her well enough but I can say this, just because you can feel and understand what real love and acceptance of others means and how to truly value another human soul; does not mean she knows this.
You will have to let it go. Grieve then heal and move on.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 February 2012): She was not using them as she stated to you. She and the men she slept with had a contract if you will to engage in sex. She provided the services to her customers. She was selective of her clientele as she only wanted men with power n prestige. They wanted her for her obvious abilities. It was not using since she was honest and upfront with them n they were the same towards her. It was a business transaction. Just like certain businesses cater to a particular crowd to build their reputation so does she. Using a person is when only one individual have an idea of what is going on and there was no agreement about the matter. When someone is participating or willfully allowing things to happen and are being benefited by whatever gains then the person is not using. Using= trickery or deceit. Why ponder upon a matter that happen some time ago regarding a person's personal choice to use their body in such ways.....has absolutely nothing to do with u nor can it bring you enlightenment. Accept the fact that we all are different and our comprehension of one scenario or word may not be the same. Move forward regardless of the varying answers you may find and just try to obtain n maintain relationships with people of similar views.
...............................
A
female
reader, tennisstar88 +, writes (14 February 2012):
 Sleeping with men in exchange for money is essentially prostitution, more upscale in her case. All that's missing is the street walking, skimpy clothing, STDs (hopefully), and pimp.
It depends...
IF these men were aware of her financial intentions then offered the sex as sort a sort payment, then no she wasn't using them. That's tit for tat and fair using on both parties's behalf.
HOWEVER if she tricked these wealthy men into thinking she was with them for sincere intentions, then of course that would be using them.
Some of those wealthy men who lag in the looks department or don't wish to have another future ex wife, welcome these "call girls". In exchange for their "services", they shower them with lavish gifts and money.
To use someone, it would be taking complete advantage of a person without their knowledge. In event the usee takes off their rose colored glasses and sees the user for whom they truly are, but does nothing about it, then they're just accepting the user's behavior. At that point it wouldn't even be "using" anymore. Essentially they're enabling the using to continue.
...............................
|
