The NationStates Feminist Thread

[Chessmistress]

Wrong.
The word Nordic Model has two meanings:
It can be referred to the socio-economical model in Norden.
It can be referred to the Swedish Model, the law about prostitution: prostitutes are totally free but purchasers of sex are criminalised. The Swedish Model has been re-labeled "Nordic Model" because it has been adopted even by Norway, Iceland, Canada and Northern Ireland.
In other words "Nordic Model " is a Feminist policy regulating prostitution, based on Radical Feminist thought:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitut ... l_position

Uhm, no. The Nordic Model has a clear definition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

No - the Swedish Model or Nordic Model has two definitions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_model

Swedish model may refer to:

Nordic model, sociopolitical model
"Swedish model" of prostitution control; see Prostitution in Sweden

http://www.catwa.org.au/files/images/No ... mphlet.pdf

CATWA argues that no effective policy can be developed against the trafficking of women into prostitution – which is overwhelmingly the most common form of trafficking – without an understanding of its connection to the legalisation of the industry of prostitution. Indeed, research now shows that the full legalisation of prostitution tends to increase inward flows of trafficking. We recommend what has been termed the ‘Nordic Model’, which criminalises the purchase of ‘sexual services’ but decriminalises those within systems of prostitution. This approach recognises that systems of trafficking and prostitution are largely driven by demand and, according, it targets the (overwhelmingly male) buyers rather than those (predominantly women) who are prostituted.
The Nordic Model also focuses on public education programs about the harms of prostitution and the importance of providing a range of dedicated support services for those in prostitution to enable them to exit. Furthermore, the available evidence suggests that the Nordic Model is effective in reducing sex trafficking.
This model has been adopted in Sweden, Norway and Iceland and is under consideration in France, Israel, Ireland, Northern Ireland and Finland.

Most women within prostitution cannot give true consent. Surveys of prostitutes find more than 90% prostitutes said they wanted out. The average age for women entering prostitution is 14.

[Ostroeuropa]

Surveys of prostitutes find more than 90% prostitutes said they wanted out.

Source?

[Kvatchdom]

Uhm, no. The Nordic Model has a clear definition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

No - the Swedish Model or Nordic Model has two definitions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_model

Swedish model may refer to:

Nordic model, sociopolitical model
"Swedish model" of prostitution control; see Prostitution in Sweden

http://www.catwa.org.au/files/images/No ... mphlet.pdf

CATWA argues that no effective policy can be developed against the trafficking of women into prostitution – which is overwhelmingly the most common form of trafficking – without an understanding of its connection to the legalisation of the industry of prostitution. Indeed, research now shows that the full legalisation of prostitution tends to increase inward flows of trafficking. We recommend what has been termed the ‘Nordic Model’, which criminalises the purchase of ‘sexual services’ but decriminalises those within systems of prostitution. This approach recognises that systems of trafficking and prostitution are largely driven by demand and, according, it targets the (overwhelmingly male) buyers rather than those (predominantly women) who are prostituted.
The Nordic Model also focuses on public education programs about the harms of prostitution and the importance of providing a range of dedicated support services for those in prostitution to enable them to exit. Furthermore, the available evidence suggests that the Nordic Model is effective in reducing sex trafficking.
This model has been adopted in Sweden, Norway and Iceland and is under consideration in France, Israel, Ireland, Northern Ireland and Finland.

Most women within prostitution cannot give true consent. Surveys of prostitutes find more than 90% prostitutes said they wanted out. The average age for women entering prostitution is 14.

The Swedish Model is not the Nordic Model.

This is not an official site for the Nordic Model, do not trust it with definitions. Prostitution has nothing to do with the Nordic Model, and public prostitution is completely illegal in Finland which utilizes the Nordic Model.

[Chessmistress]

No - the Swedish Model or Nordic Model has two definitions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_model



http://www.catwa.org.au/files/images/No ... mphlet.pdf



Most women within prostitution cannot give true consent. Surveys of prostitutes find more than 90% prostitutes said they wanted out. The average age for women entering prostitution is 14.

The Swedish Model is not the Nordic Model.

This is not an official site for the Nordic Model, do not trust it with definitions. Prostitution has nothing to do with the Nordic Model, and public prostitution is completely illegal in Finland which utilizes the Nordic Model.

I'm not surprised, since you're from Suomi.
WRONG.
Your link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model
Bottom on the left, just click on Svenska, and the Nordic Model magically becomes
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Den_svenska_modellen
"Den svenska modellen" aka "The Swedish Model"
Sorry

[Kvatchdom]

The Swedish Model is not the Nordic Model.

This is not an official site for the Nordic Model, do not trust it with definitions. Prostitution has nothing to do with the Nordic Model, and public prostitution is completely illegal in Finland which utilizes the Nordic Model.

I'm not surprised, since you're from Suomi.
WRONG.
Your link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model
Bottom on the left, just click on Svenska, and the Nordic Model magically becomes
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Den_svenska_modellen
"Den svenska modellen" aka "The Swedish Model"
Sorry

Swedes tend to be arrogant, but still, no. The swedish definition is not a supreme definition of it.

[Chessmistress]

Surveys of prostitutes find more than 90% prostitutes said they wanted out.

Source?

A lot

http://www.feminisms.org/3265/the-myths ... %99t-help/

Alan Young, counsel for the applicants, readily made the concession that their arguments don’t apply to the majority of women in prostitution. When one of the judges on the Court of Appeal interrupted him with the comment that his arguments seemed to assume women were voluntarily in the trade, he responded, “some sex workers have no choice, for some it is a choice. The point is there are people – 5, 10, 20% of the population – who want to do sex work and the law won’t let them.” The judge then asked how his argument impacted women who were coerced into prostitution. Young responded, “it doesn’t. That’s a social problem that social welfare agencies and social workers need to solve. I don’t want to sound flippant, but we’re not here to solve a crisis.”

The judge asked, “so what you’re arguing today only applies to women voluntarily in the trade?”
Young said, “most definitely.”

His estimates may actually be accurate. In a study submitted at trial with 854 women in 9 countries, including Canada, 89% of women interviewed said they wanted out of prostitution. In another study submitted at trial conducted in the downtown eastside of Vancouver, 95% of prostituted women interviewed said they wanted out of prostitution

http://www.feministcurrent.com/2011/11/ ... any-other/

The reason for a man to buy sex from a woman is, without a doubt, because he desires pleasure without having to give anything in return. This is a male-centered purchase. If we are to define sex as something pleasurable for both parties then how on earth can we define prostitution as sex work? There is something decidedly unprogressive about calling something ‘sex’ when the act is, in fact, solely about providing pleasure for one party (the male party) without any regard for the woman with whom you are engaging in this supposed ‘sex’ with. Doesn’t this defy the whole enthusiastic consent model?

While I certainly support human rights and worker rights, I also support women’s rights and believe that, as a feminist, I cannot and will not work towards normalizing the idea that women can and should be bought and sold. I certainly will not promote this as part of my progressive politics.

Prostitution exists because of the inextricable link between capitalism and patriarchy. The two, under these circumstances, cannot be separated. Desperation, poverty, abuse, addiction, a lack of other opportunities for work, a need to pay the rent and feed the kids, a history of colonialism and racism, and of course, a misogynistic culture that treats women as things that exist to feed the capitalist wheel, to sell and to be sold, all work together to create a society wherein prostitution not only exists, but thrives (if you consider an abundance of men profiting from prostitution and sex industries ‘thriving’). Why is the response to the abuse, to the exploitation, to the deaths, and to the trauma that many women experience as a result of being prostituted, to treat this as simply ‘a job like any other’? What other job demands that the employee be violated? Maybe raped? Maybe abused? Maybe murdered? Maybe called horrid names until self-confidence has been worn down to a thread? Maybe develop PTSD? What progressive person would argue that this kind of treatment should be legitimized? That women’s bodies, indeed, should be available for purchase by men? And that men should feel A-OK about that?

In what profession is it expected that ONLY women must provide for ONLY men as part of equitable workplace legislation (and I don’t believe I should have to remind everyone that yes, the vast majority of prostituted women service men)? How is it progressive to institutionalize gender inequity? Women as things that can be bought or sold when under duress, to men who have the means, is not a progressive position to take. Why our fellow left wing politicians and comrades have not explored alternatives to the normalization of sexism and abuse, such as the Nordic model remains somewhat of a mystery to me.

http://the-wellhouse.org/sexual-slavery/prostitution/

Nearly 90% of prostituted women say they want out immediately, but the decision is out of their hands and in the hands of their pimps, their boyfriends or husbands, their addictions, or their children’s financial support.

Terminology

“Prostitute” is not an appropriate term for a person providing sexual services, as it implies choice or a willingness to participate. The descriptions “prostituted,” “sexually exploited,” and “sex trafficking” are more accurate.

https://www.shelleylubben.com/prostitution-faq

Q. Isn’t prostitution mostly a choice?

A. When prostituted women are asked if they want to leave prostitution, consistently around 90% say they want out immediately but the decision is out of their hands and in the hands of their pimps, their husbands, their landlords, their addictions, their children's bellies. A recent study of street prostitutes in Toronto found that about 90% wanted to leave but could not, and a 5-country study found 92% wanted out of prostitution. If they are there because they cannot leave, they are not choosing to be there.

If prostitution were really a choice it would not be those populations with the least amount of choices available to them far disproportionately pushed into it. If prostitution were a choice there would no billion-dollar black market trade in coerced, tricked, kidnapped and enslaved people known as human trafficking.

[Galloism]

The reason for a man to buy sex from a woman is, without a doubt, because he desires pleasure without having to give anything in return.

Not going to read the rest of this, but this started out with a very obvious falsehood. See if you can spot the falsehood.

Q. Isn’t prostitution mostly a choice?

A. When prostituted women are asked if they want to leave prostitution, consistently around 90% say they want out immediately but the decision is out of their hands and in the hands of their pimps, their husbands, their landlords, their addictions, their children's bellies. A recent study of street prostitutes in Toronto found that about 90% wanted to leave but could not, and a 5-country study found 92% wanted out of prostitution. If they are there because they cannot leave, they are not choosing to be there.

If prostitution were really a choice it would not be those populations with the least amount of choices available to them far disproportionately pushed into it. If prostitution were a choice there would no billion-dollar black market trade in coerced, tricked, kidnapped and enslaved people known as human trafficking.

I bet I could get a similar response rate at Taco Bell.

[Chessmistress]

The reason for a man to buy sex from a woman is, without a doubt, because he desires pleasure without having to give anything in return.

Not going to read the rest of this, but this started out with a very obvious falsehood. See if you can spot the falsehood.

No.

[Valyrian Freeholds]

The fucking nordic model everyone. "Oh no officer I was just selling this man drugs, ok? You arrest HIM for using such products."

Stop treating prostitutes as special fucking snowflake victims, they wanna make money just like almost everyone else in this world, let them. It's called economic freedom.

[Galloism]

Not going to read the rest of this, but this started out with a very obvious falsehood. See if you can spot the falsehood.

No.

You can't see the falsehood inherent in that sentence? It quite literally contradicts itself in the same sentence.

[Hirota]

Source?

A lot

none of those are peer reviewed studies. They might mention peer review studies, but none of them appear to link to an actual study. Second-hand accounts are not entirely reliable sources.

Nonetheless, I did find this study: http://www.prostitutionresearch.com/pdf ... ntries.pdf which appears to be the one most repeated in these second-hand accounts. The methodology seems rather biased and poorly implemented - for example one can imagine that someone in an addiction centre might be more inclined to get out than someone who has less personal difficulties. I can imagine that women working on the street are probably more likely to be assaulted than those in a safer environments.

(Belated expansion on that point). It occurs to me that this survey ignores that apparently a lot of people don't like their job. I have absolutely no doubt prostitution is one of the shittier jobs available, but lets not pretend the grass is always greener.

[Kvatchdom]

Not going to read the rest of this, but this started out with a very obvious falsehood. See if you can spot the falsehood.

No.

So you are indeed simply joking?

[Barboneia]

No.

So you are indeed simply joking?

Oh, how we wish.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Not going to read the rest of this, but this started out with a very obvious falsehood. See if you can spot the falsehood.

No.

Basically, you can't just "not give anything in return" when you are giving monetary compensation for an act.

That is not "nothing", that is "something", just not something that the author thinks should matter because it's money, not feelings or whatever else have you. If it indeed was nothing given in exchange for sex then either one of the two: you raped someone, or you are just too damn good at talking to people you feel attracted to without having feelings for them and for them to not ask you to spend a cent on them.

[Kvatchdom]

So you are indeed simply joking?

Oh, how we wish.

They have to be joking. Nobody can be this ignorant.

[Galloism]

No.

Basically, you can't just "not give anything in return" when you are giving monetary compensation for an act.

That is not "nothing", that is "something", just not something that the author thinks should matter because it's money, not feelings or whatever else have you.

Bingo. Prostitution cannot be "sex without anything in exchange", or it's not prostitution.

I mean, unless the john fails to pay what he should pay, then it's still prostitution but also a breach of contract. In places where prostitution is legal, prostitutes could sue.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Basically, you can't just "not give anything in return" when you are giving monetary compensation for an act.

That is not "nothing", that is "something", just not something that the author thinks should matter because it's money, not feelings or whatever else have you.

Bingo. Prostitution cannot be "sex without anything in exchange", or it's not prostitution.

I mean, unless the john fails to pay what he should pay, then it's still prostitution but also a breach of contract. In places where prostitution is legal, prostitutes could sue.

I'm wondering if the real issue people who are against prostitution have with prostitution is more likely to be not so much this "economic coercion" for women, but rather the fact that it takes men off the priority of looking for a woman to start a family with and invest feelings in them.

[Chessmistress]

No.

You can't see the falsehood inherent in that sentence? It quite literally contradicts itself in the same sentence.

No. Sex is supposed the give pleasure to women.

I want highlight another thing, also to answer to the other user who criticized the ban of strip clubs in Iceland, the most Feminist country of the world.

http://www.feministcurrent.com/2015/06/ ... -the-talk/

Another host, Aisha Tyler, responds: “At 18 you can vote, at 18 you can drive, at 18 you can go to war… I would never strip and I would never want my child to strip but, as a feminist, I don’t want to take away the agency of a young woman to make whatever choice she thinks is right for her life at that time. Stripping is not prostitution, these women are protected.” She adds, “I know a lot of men who have gone to strip clubs and are like, ‘Look, I just went in there and a girl danced on the stage and now I don’t have $7000 in my pocket, so who really got taken advantage of in this situation.'” (Darlene looks peeved, at this point.)

Now, we’ve heard these arguments many times before. Men pretend like they are the ones who are “vulnerable” in these exchanges, because they are the ones “losing money.” Of course, if paying for sex or lap dances or going to strip clubs removed men’s power, you’d think the patriarchy would be a thing of the distant past by now… What isn’t discussed by Tyler is that a primary reason these women are taking off their clothes, on stage, for men, is because they are economically disadvantaged, whereas these men are not. Therefore the power imbalance will always remain. When a wealthy CEO pays a factory worker to make his product, that factory worker is not taking advantage of that CEO. Class does not work that way.

Of course, that existing power imbalance serves men, which is why they continue to ensure women don’t have access to other options outside the sex industry to pay for college/life. If suddenly these women had access to free post-secondary school, or good jobs, or universal daycare for mothers, or whatever, there would cease to be a need for women to resort to stripping. Men are not the vulnerable ones, simply because they are paying to objectify young women. That’s why they have $7000 in their pockets in the first place and aren’t up on stage shaking their dicks around.

Tyler goes on: “We victimize and we fetishize women constantly, but I don’t want to say that that’s not a way to make a living that could be better than sex work.”

Darlene responds, clarifying that she isn’t interested in making strip clubs illegal, “I’m saying, ‘Don’t put ads that are targeting people that just turned into adults.'”

So I guess I have a couple of questions — if you wouldn’t want to be a stripper, yourself, and you also wouldn’t want your daughter to work in strip club, what makes it so A-Ok for other women?

Of course, the answer to that question is “choice” and “agency.” Also known as, “It’s the American way!”

America doesn’t want to do anything about poverty, porn culture, a sex industry that preys, particularly, on marginalized women, and they continue to privatize the shit out of everything, which further reinforces class and race disparity, but they do want to talk about how much “choice” and “agency” American citizens have.

The argument that says, “These women are 18 years old, why shouldn’t they have the choice to become strippers” is the same argument that doesn’t question why, 1) Men aren’t making these “choices” in droves, and 2) Why women aren’t offered access to college without having to get naked for predatory men.

In one tweet she says, “As a feminist, I refuse to slutshame, as tempting and enjoyable as it may be.” I’m not sure what this was in response to, because no one was shaming women who work in strip clubs, nor do feminists call other women “sluts.” Rather, it is men who label women “sluts” and enjoy degrading them. That’s why they go to strip clubs, abuse prostituted women, and watch porn that degrades women and sexualizes male violence and rape. It is a neoliberal manipulation to call the women who fight against misogynist terms like “slut” and who challenge men who enjoy degrading women, “slutshamers.” It also conveniently avoids addressing the real problem.

But I wonder what would happen if men used all their agency to make the choice not to open and/or frequent strip clubs and pay for sex and, instead, advocated for free post-secondary tuition, union wages (and supported the labour movement, more generally), affordable housing, a viable welfare system, and affordable health care instead?

Only in a world where men don’t choose to sexualize and objectify women and where women have real, viable choices, in terms of their survival, can we talk about “agency.” Until then, yeah, I guess I’m “judging.”

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You can't see the falsehood inherent in that sentence? It quite literally contradicts itself in the same sentence.

No. Sex is supposed the give pleaure to women.

This is demonstrably false by the very fact every human is a selfish creature.

I don't have sex with women to give pleasure to women, at least, that's not my intent when I have sex with a woman. Rather, it is to be pleased and feel good. Her pleasure is only secondary to my pleasure. It feels nice to know I am pleasing the girl I am in bed with, but it is not a necessity to achieve my own pleasure for her to be pleased.

The opposite, of course, applies for a woman having sex with me. My pleasure is only secondary to her pleasure and while she might feel good in pleasuring me, deep down she knows it's not a necessity for me to be pleased in order for her to have pleasure.

You're confusing the fact men like to chase women and have sex with them with the fact that women want to be pleased whenever they have sex. Just because a man chases a woman to have sex with her doesn't mean he, particularly, gives a shit about their pleasure during sex.

[Chessmistress]

No. Sex is supposed the give pleaure to women.

This is demonstrably false by the very fact every human is a selfish creature.

I don't have sex with women to give pleasure to women, at least, that's not my intent when I have sex with a woman. Rather, it is to be pleased and feel good. Her pleasure is only secondary to my pleasure. It feels nice to know I am pleasing the girl I am in bed with, but it is not a necessity to achieve my own pleasure for her to be pleased.

The opposite, of course, applies for a woman having sex with me. My pleasure is only secondary to her pleasure and while she might feel good in pleasuring me, deep down she knows it's not a necessity for me to be pleased in order for her to have pleasure.

I cannot comment that without breaking the rules
That's absolutely impossible, maintaining full control after this it's far beyond my capacities.
I have to give up for today.

[Galloism]

You can't see the falsehood inherent in that sentence? It quite literally contradicts itself in the same sentence.

No. Sex is supposed the give pleasure to women.

I mean, this is true, but it in no way relates to the inherent contradictory falsehood of the opening sentence of your source.

I want highlight another thing, also to answer to the other user who criticized the ban of strip clubs in Iceland, the most Feminist country of the world.

http://www.feministcurrent.com/2015/06/ ... -the-talk/

Another host, Aisha Tyler, responds: “At 18 you can vote, at 18 you can drive, at 18 you can go to war… I would never strip and I would never want my child to strip but, as a feminist, I don’t want to take away the agency of a young woman to make whatever choice she thinks is right for her life at that time. Stripping is not prostitution, these women are protected.” She adds, “I know a lot of men who have gone to strip clubs and are like, ‘Look, I just went in there and a girl danced on the stage and now I don’t have $7000 in my pocket, so who really got taken advantage of in this situation.'” (Darlene looks peeved, at this point.)

Now, we’ve heard these arguments many times before. Men pretend like they are the ones who are “vulnerable” in these exchanges, because they are the ones “losing money.” Of course, if paying for sex or lap dances or going to strip clubs removed men’s power, you’d think the patriarchy would be a thing of the distant past by now… What isn’t discussed by Tyler is that a primary reason these women are taking off their clothes, on stage, for men, is because they are economically disadvantaged, whereas these men are not. Therefore the power imbalance will always remain. When a wealthy CEO pays a factory worker to make his product, that factory worker is not taking advantage of that CEO. Class does not work that way.

Of course, that existing power imbalance serves men, which is why they continue to ensure women don’t have access to other options outside the sex industry to pay for college/life. If suddenly these women had access to free post-secondary school, or good jobs, or universal daycare for mothers, or whatever, there would cease to be a need for women to resort to stripping. Men are not the vulnerable ones, simply because they are paying to objectify young women. That’s why they have $7000 in their pockets in the first place and aren’t up on stage shaking their dicks around.

Tyler goes on: “We victimize and we fetishize women constantly, but I don’t want to say that that’s not a way to make a living that could be better than sex work.”

Darlene responds, clarifying that she isn’t interested in making strip clubs illegal, “I’m saying, ‘Don’t put ads that are targeting people that just turned into adults.'”

So I guess I have a couple of questions — if you wouldn’t want to be a stripper, yourself, and you also wouldn’t want your daughter to work in strip club, what makes it so A-Ok for other women?

Of course, the answer to that question is “choice” and “agency.” Also known as, “It’s the American way!”

America doesn’t want to do anything about poverty, porn culture, a sex industry that preys, particularly, on marginalized women, and they continue to privatize the shit out of everything, which further reinforces class and race disparity, but they do want to talk about how much “choice” and “agency” American citizens have.

The argument that says, “These women are 18 years old, why shouldn’t they have the choice to become strippers” is the same argument that doesn’t question why, 1) Men aren’t making these “choices” in droves, and 2) Why women aren’t offered access to college without having to get naked for predatory men.

In one tweet she says, “As a feminist, I refuse to slutshame, as tempting and enjoyable as it may be.” I’m not sure what this was in response to, because no one was shaming women who work in strip clubs, nor do feminists call other women “sluts.” Rather, it is men who label women “sluts” and enjoy degrading them. That’s why they go to strip clubs, abuse prostituted women, and watch porn that degrades women and sexualizes male violence and rape. It is a neoliberal manipulation to call the women who fight against misogynist terms like “slut” and who challenge men who enjoy degrading women, “slutshamers.” It also conveniently avoids addressing the real problem.

But I wonder what would happen if men used all their agency to make the choice not to open and/or frequent strip clubs and pay for sex and, instead, advocated for free post-secondary tuition, union wages (and supported the labour movement, more generally), affordable housing, a viable welfare system, and affordable health care instead?

Only in a world where men don’t choose to sexualize and objectify women and where women have real, viable choices, in terms of their survival, can we talk about “agency.” Until then, yeah, I guess I’m “judging.”

This is why men who are drug dealers or work two jobs while going through college are victims of the system and we should make hiring college students illegal and arrest only drug users not drug dealers. To help them.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

This is demonstrably false by the very fact every human is a selfish creature.

I don't have sex with women to give pleasure to women, at least, that's not my intent when I have sex with a woman. Rather, it is to be pleased and feel good. Her pleasure is only secondary to my pleasure. It feels nice to know I am pleasing the girl I am in bed with, but it is not a necessity to achieve my own pleasure for her to be pleased.

The opposite, of course, applies for a woman having sex with me. My pleasure is only secondary to her pleasure and while she might feel good in pleasuring me, deep down she knows it's not a necessity for me to be pleased in order for her to have pleasure.

I cannot comment that without breaking the rules
That's absolutely impossible, maintaining full control after this it's far beyond my capacities.
I have to give up for today.

Too shocked by the truth? And yes, I know you think of me as a selfish bastard, but it's the truth.

Same as you think of yourself, so do I think of myself. Having sex feels good, and pleasing a woman feels good, for me. If it didn't feel good I wouldn't do it.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

No. Sex is supposed the give pleasure to women.

I mean, this is true, but it in no way relates to the inherent contradictory falsehood of the opening sentence of your source.

Is it? Or is more that the fact that pleasing our partners makes us feel good and that's why we desire to please our partners?

[Galloism]

I mean, this is true, but it in no way relates to the inherent contradictory falsehood of the opening sentence of your source.

Is it? Or is more that the fact that pleasing our partners makes us feel good and that's why we desire to please our partners?

I guess that depends on how much of a selfish bastard you regarding the person you are having sex with.

Which could vary from partner to partner.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Is it? Or is more that the fact that pleasing our partners makes us feel good and that's why we desire to please our partners?

I guess that depends on how much of a selfish bastard you regarding the person you are having sex with.

Which could vary from partner to partner.

I have the idea that people look for their own self-interest and their own good, regardless of the circumstances people like to feel good while doing something (and that includes doing things for others), otherwise they wouldn't do it. Because we all know what's best for ourselves.

So far, I haven't been wrong.