mike carey

The origins and the current status are probably related, but is a way the link is no longer relevant. In most societies that are influenced by religions, more particularly the Abrahamic ones, the morality of sex work is tied up with the morality of sex more broadly. Sex has a particular status of being a uniquely special interaction between two people, and anything that seems at odds with that special status is seen as immoral. The Church view that sex is must be within wedlock and must have the purpose of procreation makes anything other than that immoral in the view of the Church, and it's not a view unknown outside the Church. On that morality scale, anything outside married procreative sex is immoral and should be equally so, there should be no tiers of immorality but there are. A lot of it comes down to, 'Things I don't like are immoral', which is not the basis for a system of government. (Keen observers will see what I did there.) There's a lot of muddled thinking and hypocrisy around the issue. If you accept that recreational sex or sex out of wedlock are not immoral it's a bit of a stretch to think that paid sex is. Still it's a relatively cost free way for some people to excuse some of their own behaviours and set themselves up as being moral by condemning something they don't do as immoral. Also it's easy to be captured by an institutional view of a hierarchy of morality and to feel guilt if you transgress it. If you question the idea of sex as a moral minefield, consider the famous 'I did not have sex with that woman'. That is premised on the view that there are times when sex is immoral, and therefore more effort goes into proving that what you did was not sex rather than address the idea that if there was anything immoral it was the whole situation rather than the specifics of which tab went into which slot. (To be clear, I see marital fidelity as part of the contract, and negotiable during the term of the contract, not part of the definition of the arrangement or an issue of morality.) So no, I don't think hiring is immoral, either for the hirer or the provider. The arguments about trafficking are just so much nonsense. Restaurants can and do exploit workers and arrange to have people trafficked for that work. That doesn't make them immoral. Even on the premise that sex work may not be moral, the possibility that some workers might be trafficked would not make it more so. The only truly immoral thing in any way linked to sex work is the army of campaigners against it who buy its services.

A prehensile appendage perhaps?

Maybe I should to. Amongst other things ...

And I wouldn't for a moment suggest that this was not part of the reason 2020 may not seem so bad for them. Still, they had a reasonably strict lock-down for some weeks.

Last night our time I saw someone in New Zealand retweet a 'Thank God 2019 is over' tweet that they had posted a year ago, noting that five minutes into 2021 it was looking OK. It took me aback, thinking after 2020 why could you think back to 2019. I then realised that they had just had the fatal White Island/Whakaari eruption days before and 2019 was the year Christchurch happened. As bad as last year has been for most of us, not everyone might think it was the worst. We can all, however hope that 2021 is better and strive to make it so.

Had red wine, snacks, some sport on TV and in bed before the witching hour. Woke up at a civilised hour on Friday morning, nice day out today. Champagne and sparkling Shiraz still in the fridge for later.

For some of us it already is!And warm and sunny at the moment. So far so good. (Apart from state borders in this country being slammed shut again.)

Yikes! Being fisted would probably be easier.

Me? Keep up? You are sure making an art form of missing the point, but that's hardly surprising. I am fully aware that the world has changed but that not everyone has changed with it.

@marylander1940 I had finger trouble and posted before I had finished writing. Finished post is now up.

He said 'for some people', it has nothing to do with what he thinks. You and he may well have non-discriminatory attitudes, not all people do, it is those people @marylander1940 was talking about. Or are you seriously suggesting that everyone has moved on from racially based preferences and he didn't notice, because that is what your post suggests.

My January 2020 flights to and from New Zealand were the first time I have ever paid cash-money for international business class seats. (I have done so on domestic flights, and first once on a Malaysia-Singapore flight.) And yes, J-class flat beds, whether you've paid for them, had an upgrade or had the fare paid by an employer, are great. Not that they are needed between Auckland and Sydney or Melbourne. My determination years ago that life was too short for economy air travel has waned, and being satisfied with premium economy or taking the risk of a points upgrade from economy have worked their way into my travel planning, as has the idea that for a couple of hours, economy is bearable, but not on a low-cost airline. So far. So, as with most things, at times it is worth paying more for quality on what is functionally the same product or service.

It's easy to be unaware of the fact that there are false negatives and false positives if you are not watching all this closely, especially somewhere that has a flood of cases each day that obscures the details. Even here, when the numbers are low enough that there is public discussion about any false positives that are reversed, because one, two or three fewer cases seems to make a material difference, it's easy to 'know' about such tests but for the fact not to register. It's only when a false result hits you personally, either for a loved one or for yourself, that you really think about it and for resentment possibly to bubble up, and for it to be 'about' you. It's not, it's the way things are. More power to you @Epigonos for laughing it off. The inconveniences and deeper trials of this pandemic are not over, anything that helps us to live through them, individually or collectively, is to be welcomed. You have given us all a positive way to approach it.

Did he 'steal' it, or was it his brand and seeing it there absent-mindedly thought he'd brought it with him? Perhaps unlikely, but impossible?

It would have confirmed so many stereotypes if you had said, 'Actually I'm a lawyer, but I didn't want to say that.'

Some may have felt that was rather too much of a challenge. A lack of ambition perhaps, but still.

I love the way some people think!

Yes, but the term is an abomination! A plot by the capitalists and plutocrats to rob working people of their money by forcing them to replace things that shouldn't have broken. (*Sings 'We'll keep the red flag flying here!'*) *Disclaimer: This is mock outrage, it should not be construed as a serious political comment.*

Joyeux Noël!

I have no words ...

In my trips to these forum gatherings (and the other travels I've had in conjunction with them) the men I've met have been 20 or more years younger than me, and none of them has shown the slightest hesitation in meeting me. Others I've simply chatted with at the gatherings have engaged with me on twitter. That said, I never assume anyone is open to a meeting, and ask. For most, ageism doesn't come into it. As I've said before, if it's safe, I'll be there again.

Fenugreek is one of the classic spices used in Indian cooking. Perhaps I need to break out my Indian recipes and start making them again. (Lately I've favoured Thai curries.)

It's nothing official, but today is widely known in Australia as 'Gravy Day' It comes from a 1990s song by Paul Kelly. The words of the song set it on 21 December. The song is a letter a prisoner is writing to his family about missing them for Christmas, and talks of quirks of their normal family Christmas gatherings, and lamenting the separation. A couple of days ago the Economist published an article noting that the sentiments in the song resonate with the sorts of separations that families will be facing this year. In a quirk, the federal government today announced the appointment of a new Chief Health Officer. His name? Professor Paul Kelly. Anyway, happy gravy day.

If I'm not mistaken, the vaccine achieves a 90% success rate across the population, not 90% protection for each individual.

Possibly several times!