Originally posted by littleguy
Guy,
You said "on the whole, escorts are vastly underpaid"
I know I'm going to regret asking this, but on what basis do you believe this is so?
littleguy,
i hope i don't give you any cause for regret. i have no reason to do so, because your question is a polite and sensible one.
a long time ago, i read some passages from a book about this thing of ours. it was written from the typical civilian point of view, ie, we clients are 'scum'; the women are all pathetic 'victims' -- you know, the usual routine. but, there was a passage i particularly remember; because, it put a slightly different spin on things. it went something like: ~the paradox is that the men are vastly overpaying (for what they are getting), and the women are vastly underpaid (for what they are giving up).~
of course, i would strongly disagree with the first assertion. speaking personally, i'm getting from escorts a life that is a joy to live. i don't want to offend any of the civilians who are lurking here; but, let's just say that all of my civilian friends are married -- and, i don't exactly lie awake at night wishing i could trade places with them, if you get my drift.
looked at from the perspective of what the escorts are receiving, the picture is more ambiguous, imo, than the client side of the equation. i do have to admit, there is something anomalous about certain escorts having a higher annual income than Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg combined
. but, then, as Babe Ruth is supposed to have said when it was pointed out that his salary was higher than that of the POTUS, "did the President hit sixty home runs in a single season?"
for that matter, Britney Spears and Alex Rodriguez make much more than brain surgeons and doctors who do heart transplants. but, unlike Supreme Court Justices and skilled surgeons, the best years of an athlete's or performing artist's career tend to be much fewer. and, whereas almost any lawyer or doctor is all but guaranteed a secure middle class existence, the athlete or artist who isn't one of, say, a few hundred 'stars', is pretty much dependent upon teaching gigs, commercial work, etc. (the historic connection between this thing of ours and performing artists is an interesting and fruitful topic for a lengthy discussion of its own. suffice it to say here that it has only been since the early part of the 20th century that performing artists (of either gender) were able to make a living without resort to the generosity of male 'patrons'.)
up to this point, the parallel between escorts and athletes/performing artists holds. but, there is also a significant divergence that weighs in favor of a financial premium for escorts, over and above the economic value of otherwise similar expenditures of talent, time, and effort.
whereas athletes and performers are not generally shunned by mainstream society (in fact the latter were shunned, prior to the 20th century, for the reason mentioned above), escorts are subject to severe stigmatization, especially, as noted by an escort elsewhere, by civilian women.
but, there is a much more important reason why escorts are entitled to a financial premium. whatever the risk of injury to athletes/performers (itself a justification for financial premium), it pales in significance with the risk of disease and violence that escorts are routinely subject to. TBD mentioned that he gets a report of violence to another escort weekly. for a variety of reasons, on both sides of the pillow case, this trend will be exacerbated if the economy continues to stall. and, we are at the upper-middle end of the market. below us lies the abyss.
in summary, how much is too much for a client to pay for a much happier life? and, how much is too much for an escort to
be paid for putting her life and limb at risk?
[Edited by guy catelli on 03-12-2001 at 04:24 PM]
