OK, I think they are both wrong, but if you had to pick which one was MORE wrong, who would it be? Who is the more immoral of the two?
I say the wife.

Man spots his wife during visit to brothel (http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSN0959912720080109)

WARSAW, Poland - A Polish man got the shock of his life when he visited a brothel and spotted his wife among the establishment's employees.

Polish tabloid Super Express said the woman had been making some extra money on the side while telling her husband she worked at a store in a nearby town.

"I was dumbfounded. I thought I was dreaming," the husband told the newspaper on Wednesday.

The couple, married for 14 years, are now divorcing, the newspaper reported.

Mod Note: I have added the appropriate hyperlink to the original Reuters article, which appears to have been copied in full, without credit, here. All members are reminded that hyperlinks or some other form of acknowledgment are required when reproducing source material for discussion.

She was doing it for money, he was cheating on her.
I say the man, since he would benefit from her money.

The man, because he is Polish. :P

Need more info.
How they treat each other, why she needed more money, how often was this guy going to prostitutes and is that why she needed more money, who makes sure there is condom use during extra-marital sex, when did the prostitution start for each of them, and so on.

Nobody is immoral. The woman was a bit dishonest by not telling her husband, but that's understandable and few would do that.

She was doing it for money, he was cheating on her.
I say the man, since he would benefit from her money.

I contemplated that as well. She was doing it to make extra money. He was spending extra money to go to a brothel. Was he keeping them in debt with brothel visiting? And was that debt pushing her into that job?

Need more info.....

well, that's all your getting. If you can't decide, then you can't.

Nobody is immoral. The woman was a bit dishonest by not telling her husband, but that's understandable and few would do that.

I figured the wife was worse because I figured she was sleeping with a whole lot more partners than her husband was.

Ever think about the fact that the man might not have gotten any at home ever since his wife took that damned job at the store ? :D

Huh.
When women cheat, they are whores, when men cheat its cuz they aren't getting any at home.
Either way, its the woman's fault <heavy sigh>
:p

Huh.
When women cheat, they are whores, when men cheat its cuz they aren't getting any at home.
Either way, its the woman's fault <heavy sigh>
:p

You are forgetting what kind of 'job' (lol) the woman really took.
Maybe after screwing unfaithful husbands all day she was too tired to get it on with her husband.

Huh.
When women cheat, they are whores, when men cheat its cuz they aren't getting any at home.
Either way, its the woman's fault <heavy sigh>
:p
Women usually use the logic that when a man cheats it's 'cause he's a dog, but when a woman cheats she's obviously being neglected at home. So it's always the mans fault. I prefer your version. ;)

Personally I think both of them are equally immoral, she could take a job anywhere but she chose there. To be fair though it doesn't say what they were doing, she could be a secretary, and he could be visiting an old friend or his drinking buddies.
For the purpose of lacking naivity however I'll presume the worst of both of them. They deserve each other, unfaithful and probably riddled with STD's, serves them right.

Huh.
When women cheat, they are whores, when men cheat its cuz they aren't getting any at home.
Either way, its the woman's fault <heavy sigh>
:p

It's also exponentially easier for a woman to get laid than it is a man. :rolleyes:

And if the guy isn't getting any at home, maybe the wife shouldn't be so damn stingy with the vag.

Ever think about the fact that the man might not have gotten any at home ever since his wife took that damned job at the store ? :D
and like most guys he was willing to sit down with his wife, ask real questions, answer real questions, be emotionally honest, respect her feelings about what she wants and does not want around sex, etc.

well, that's all your getting. If you can't decide, then you can't.

I would say that anyone who can decide should not be a social worker, judge, police officer, teacher, etc.
Any job that requires understanding the complexity of human behavior, motives and emotions.

and like most guys he was willing to sit down with his wife, ask real questions, answer real questions, be emotionally honest, respect her feelings about what she wants and does not want around sex, etc.
Yep, always the man's fault for not providing 24/7 emotional support for his woman, yet she can tell him 'no' whenever she wants. :rolleyes:

and like most guys he was willing to sit down with his wife, ask real questions, answer real questions, be emotionally honest, respect her feelings about what she wants and does not want around sex, etc.

I was talking about the woman being a whore.. :shrug:

Who is to say what is right and wrong?

If it was up to me, I would say the man. Like previously stated, the wife just did it for extra money, the man was cheating.

Who is to say what is right and wrong?

If it was up to me, I would say the man. Like previously stated, the wife just did it for extra money, the man was cheating.

Yes the man was cheating, but don't you think the woman was kind of cheating as well ? You can be sure the man feels it that way..

Who is to say what is right and wrong?

If it was up to me, I would say the man. Like previously stated, the wife just did it for extra money, the man was cheating.
You must be a woman. Most women will not take the blame for anything. It's always the man's fault. :rolleyes:
I'm not saying that the man is blameless here, far from it, but to say that 'the woman was just making some extra money' and leave her blameless, is just...ridiculous.
I actually think I became a bit dumber from reading your totally double-standard post.

Who is to say what is right and wrong?

If it was up to me, I would say the man. Like previously stated, the wife just did it for extra money, the man was cheating.
Of course money is always an acceptable reason for cheating on someone, right?

Of course money is always an acceptable reason for cheating on someone, right?

Absolutely not. Neither are in the right of the situation. Far from it; I just believe the man is more in the wrong. Hard decision though.

Absolutely not. Neither are in the right of the situation. Far from it; I just believe the man is more in the wrong. Hard decision though.
It's not more wrong to value money higher than fun?

Of cause the woman is more immoral here. She is giving away her body for a few Euros, it rarely gets lower than that. Yes the man is cheating but the woman is technicaly cheating also, who more than likely would have far more partners, given her profession.

Is there a 'wrong-scale' somewhere I don't know of ?

Is there a 'wrong-scale' somewhere I don't know of ?
Isn't it chinese?

Oh, nevermind....

Isn't it chinese?

Oh, nevermind....

No, I think you mean a Ming vase ;)

http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/core9/phalsall/images/mingvas2.jpg

No, I think you mean a Ming vase ;)

You could be onto something, the Ming-scale of morality, named after the emperor, you know, Ming the Merciless.;)

You could be onto something, the Ming-scale of morality, named after the emperor, you know, Ming the Merciless.;)

Uh yea, but I thought it was Ming the Merciful.. :D

Her.

He cheated on her once, but she continually did that to earn money. Stupid whore. Literally. :)

Her.

He cheated on her once, but she continually did that to earn money. Stupid whore. Literally. :)

he got caught once. From the very nature of what she was doing, you know she was having sex with numerous men. But we don't know how many brothels he had been to, or how many streetwalkers he had picked up.
Would she have needed to do what she did for extra money if he hadn't been spending it on hookers?

true...

Solution: Pay wife to have sex at the brothel with each other. That way you get a little bit more added kink as well with the money staying in both their pockets. ;)

- N

Yep, always the man's fault for not providing 24/7 emotional support for his woman, yet she can tell him 'no' whenever she wants. :rolleyes:
I was reacting to your assumptions.
The woman could have been the worse jerk in the situation.
But to assume, as most men do, that if they are not getting any it has nothing to do with them, is convenient.

I was talking about the woman being a whore.. :shrug:

You know. Something very bizzare happened here. I quoted the wrong person. I meant to quote Mike Nostic. My response was to him and not to you. But the amazing thing is he got it anyway and responded to my response to you.

its all good, she was working, and he wanted sex, perhaps they shouldve talked about it, when i took calls for girls my husband knew exactly what i was doing, and no i didnt have sex for money!! i just enjoyed seeing all the men come and go.

.... i just enjoyed seeing all the men come and go.

:roflmao: literally?? :D

You know. Something very bizzare happened here. I quoted the wrong person. I meant to quote Mike Nostic. My response was to him and not to you. But the amazing thing is he got it anyway and responded to my response to you.

Eh.. ok

:roflmao: literally?? :D

i knew someone would say somthing to that, no not literally, my husband knew what i was doing, and that job put this roof over our heads the pay was good, and no i am not considering doing it again, (well...not unless needs must anyway)

The man, because he is Polish. :P

i resent that

Uh yea, but I thought it was Ming the Merciful.. :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ming_the_Merciless

:p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ming_the_Merciless

:p

Drat ! :(

lol

Maybe the wife was just getting the money back from where it was going. Isn't there a country song about a wife opening a bar in their house, to keep the money home ?

According to a local madam, more wives turn an occasional trick than most guys think. Not just for the money, but the thrill. And they don't think it's cheating, because there's no emotional involvement.

Thing to do, if you're a guy, is never go to hookers. That way you'll never know, unless one of your buddies rats, and no problem.

Vhe ahh effer zho pleezhed with Kuo - Ming, dahling, Vhase or ennyvhere.

Her.

He cheated on her once, but she continually did that to earn money. Stupid whore. Literally. :)

So he paid to cheat.
While she was paid.
and somehow she is stupid?

Notice how all our words for women who sell sex
are milder than those for those who buy.

Men can't stand themselves.
So when they come home they want to look in the eyes of someone 'pure'.
If the woman is at all like them, they have nowhere to hide from their self-hate
except by hating the women even more.

"It's her job to be pure."

Behind every man there's a good woman, his wife, and behind her is another good woman his mistress. ;)

OK, I think they are both wrong, but if you had to pick which one was MORE wrong, who would it be? Who is the more immoral of the two?
I say the wife.

Man spots his wife during visit to brothel (http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSN0959912720080109)

WARSAW, Poland - A Polish man got the shock of his life when he visited a brothel and spotted his wife among the establishment's employees.

Polish tabloid Super Express said the woman had been making some extra money on the side while telling her husband she worked at a store in a nearby town.

"I was dumbfounded. I thought I was dreaming," the husband told the newspaper on Wednesday.

The couple, married for 14 years, are now divorcing, the newspaper reported.

Mod Note: I have added the appropriate hyperlink to the original Reuters article, which appears to have been copied in full, without credit, here. All members are reminded that hyperlinks or some other form of acknowledgment are required when reproducing source material for discussion.

The man. At least the woman could claim she needed the money to feed her kids.

So this guy goes to a brothel for a bit of fun and who does he find working there? His wife!:eek::eek:
A Polish man got the shock of his life when he visited a brothel and spotted his wife among the establishment's employees. Polish tabloid Super Express said the woman had been making some extra money on the side while telling her husband she worked at a store in a nearby town.

"I was dumfounded. I thought I was dreaming," the husband told the newspaper Wednesday.
Oh, and here's a big surprise:
The couple, married for 14 years, are now divorcing, the newspaper reported.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080109/od_nm/brothel_dc_1

wasn't there a topic on this exact occurance in society?
I must say, they both have sinned.

Reminds me of the "Nicole? , Papa?" advert spoof where the dad pulls up to the kerb.

Did he have to pay her like any other customer?

If marriage is a contract of sexual exclusivity, then they are both in violation of that contract. They are both equally wrong.

The personal motive is irrelevant (IE - he wanted sex, she wanted money).

Mod Note:
I've just merged a thread from Free thoughts with this thread, so you might notice a slight break in continuity.

She was doing it for money, he was cheating on her.
I say the man, since he would benefit from her money.The woman, without a doubt. Being a whore is worse than going to one. Not to mention that while he was planning on having extra-marital sex with one woman that day; she's been having sex with probably ten men a day! How could what he was going to do compare?

PS Once again it's demonstrated that if you want my opinion on an issue, just assume it's the opposite of SAM's.

So he paid to cheat.
While she was paid.
and somehow she is stupid?

Notice how all our words for women who sell sex
are milder than those for those who buy.

Men can't stand themselves.
So when they come home they want to look in the eyes of someone 'pure'.
If the woman is at all like them, they have nowhere to hide from their self-hate
except by hating the women even more.

"It's her job to be pure."

I do NOT think it's anyone's job to be pure. I do however think that if you measure someone who cheated once against someone who continualy did it for money, the latter is worse.

no, it is her job to be pure and so is his job to be pure. However both men and women of this time I currently live in, are sinless to say the least.

Being a whore is worse than going to one.

Hard to be a whore if nobody's buying.

Hard to be a whore if nobody's buying.

it's a state of mind, the state of mind of "whore" or acceptance of going to such low morals, nevermind the action.

If i missread the artical i apologise in advance

Now why does everyone seem to be assuming she only did it for the money?
why is it that no one ever seems to realise that women enjoy sex too?

who cares if one is more wrong than the other

If i missread the artical i apologise in advance

Now why does everyone seem to be assuming she only did it for the money?
why is it that no one ever seems to realise that women enjoy sex too?

who cares if one is more wrong than the other

it doesnt matter if its for money or not, its wrong Period.

who cares if one is more wrong than the other

Good question. I've an answer but it doesn't exactly comport to local standards.

• • •


it's a state of mind, the state of mind of "whore" or acceptance of going to such low morals, nevermind the action

Huh?

it doesnt matter if its for money or not, its wrong Period.

It's the world's oldest profession. That's a long, large market you're calling wrong. Perhaps it's modern moral presuppositions that are askew?

it doesnt matter if its for money or not, its wrong Period.
Can you state the general ethical rule she is breaking so we can take a look at it?

Can you state the general ethical rule she is breaking so we can take a look at it?

there is no such thing as a general ethic rule, everyone has their own ethics which have some sort of high probability of being the same as others' ethics. The ethics state that exposing oneself in a sexual manner for whatever purpose there is, to individuals that are not in a lawful marriage of love, is immoral.

....Now why does everyone seem to be assuming she only did it for the money?
why is it that no one ever seems to realise that women enjoy sex too?....

she was having sex for money. She wasn't having affairs. She wasn't sleeping with the guys for free.

So???

You have never herd of women who like being prositutes???

So???

You have never herd of women who like being prositutes???

yes, because they make lots and lots of money!

Orleander thats just silly. YES some women and men do it for the money, others do it because they like the sex and the fact that someone is willing to pay them to have sex with them. Not every women is forced into prostitution inspite of what feminists may say. Some people ARE forced into it like my male friend but others chose to do it. Same thing with stripers some do it for the money, others just like the feeling of power it gives them and the money is added bonis

Yes, but when you take money for it, its about the MONEY. They may have a job they like, but its a job. Its about the MONEY.

i disagree.

Hypothetical

Your married (i dont know if you are or not and i dont care either way)
a guy offers you and your husband $1,000,000 if you will sleep with him
a) would you take the money
b) would you feel that your relationship wouldnt suffer
c) would your husband feel the same way about you

Honestly

humans in general and sociaty put more importance on sex than they do on most other labors.

Now you MAY have an open realationship and who cares but most people dont. As a person who HAS been cheated on i know exactly what my responce would be to that kind of offer

No i am not excusing the man who went to a pro
but nither am i nieve enough to assume that because it was for money that was the only thing involved. It may have been that she was that poor she had no other choice and that is sad but that is not how all sex workers get into it.

I don't understand what your hypothetical situation had to do with it.

your the one who thinks sex for money is all about the money so put your mind where your mouth is

If sex for money means nothing then why would you hesitate to take the money AND to think it wouldnt change your relationship

???? I never said it meant nothing.
I said its about the money. Its a job and people get paid for jobs. How many volunteer hookers do you know?

umm how many girls and guys have one night stands??? alot i would assume

thats beside the point, I am not going into the ambulance service because the money is good im going in because i want to help people. The money is just what i need to survive. Why do you assume that a pro's motives are more greedy than mine?

If it was ONLY about the money why did she chose this proffession? she could have chosen anything?

If it was because it paid MORE money than anything else than she is immoral for putting money above her relationship
If it was for other reasons like that she enjoyed being a pro then yes she is hust as imoral as her husband who went to a pro

Put it this way, if it was ONLY about the money why didnt she tell her husband?