Prepago vs Prostituta?

[benjio]

Benjio,

What are you talking about??? 

And, who is "Anyone"? 

Don't you mean "I" as in Benjio.  Speak for yourself.

I don't intend on using the "word" in the future on P-L out of respect for anyone on P-L who found it offensive.  I've moved on past that and I suggest that you do the same.

Obviously, my comments on this particular thread are relevant only to this particular thread. 

The observations and subsequent comments I made were directly addressing your (and mudds) first response dancing around and using every word possible to describe these women without calling them hookers.

So if you agree that a prepago is a prostitute, why didn't you just say that in the first place?

For your information, I not defending or justifying my choices of words by asking you a direct question on this post.   

My comments and questions on this thread were directly related to what you wrote on this thread.

I don't hint, I am very direct and to the point.

Zulu

Zulu,
 
Let me get this straight...are you saying that this thread has absolutely nothing to do with other? Even though Brazilian Girl started it with a direct quote of mine from the previous discussion in question? Even though the subject matter, the ideas associated with terms used to define women that date for money in foreign countries, is essentially the same? Are you claiming that your third reply to this thread has nothing to do, or in common with the initial argument you were trying to use to justify your use of a derogatory term? I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly before replying again.
 
I'm trying to figure out how you'd claim to have any accurate idea of what a prepago is when in your opinion the term is equal to a racial slur in the Phillipines. Did you not make this comparison? Although apologizing for your use of that term, you have yet to acknowledge the fact that the two aren't the same. So I'm assuming you have absolutely no idea what a prepago is, and therefore couldn't present a convincing argument either way. I present this question to you once again...how much time have you spent in Colombia?

[z_k_g]

Zulu,
 
Let me get this straight...are you saying that this thread has absolutely nothing to do with other? Even though Brazilian Girl started it with a direct quote of mine from the previous discussion in question? Even though the subject matter, the ideas associated with terms used to define women that date for money in foreign countries, is essentially the same? Are you claiming that your third reply to this thread has nothing to do, or in common with the initial argument you were trying to use to justify your use of a derogatory term? I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly before replying again.
 
I'm trying to figure out how you'd claim to have any accurate idea of what a prepago is when in your opinion the term is equal to a racial slur in the Phillipines. Did you not make this comparison? Although apologizing for your use of that term, you have yet to acknowledge the fact that the two aren't the same. So I'm assuming you have absolutely no idea what a prepago is, and therefore couldn't present a convincing argument either way. I present this question to you once again...how much time have you spent in Colombia?

Benjio

What is it that you want to discuss here?

I will be quite clear, for the second time so you will get it.

Read every word in my posts on THIS thread.  I do not make any comparisons to anything.  You are making ASSUMPTIONS and they are totally incorrect.

The only person that has made comparisons on THIS thread is BENJIO. 

I have nothing further to add to what I have written in the other threads, and I will NOT be making any comparisons on THIS thread to anything I've written on other threads. I will not even refer to a discussion that is irrelevant to this discussion.

So....are you clear?

Now...Based on what YOU wrote here, a prepago is a prostitute, you wrote that.

Is that correct?  You answered that question, not me.

You asked have I been to Colombia, is that a rhetorical question?  Because....I have NEVER claimed I've been to Colombia, I have NEVER claimed I know anything about Spanish or for that matter, I've NEVER attempted to define the word prepago.

The fact is, you and many many other well traveled posters here defined prepago in intricate detail way way before I even knew or heard of the word, so I got a full understanding of the definition.

Zulu

[V_Man]

No Zulu.
As I quoted, you stated (in shouting capitals) that:

PAYING A WOMAN FOR A RELATIONSHIP IS PROSTITUTION!!

I draw your attention to the word RELATIONSHIP.

One class of relationship is marriage. When that relationship ends the pimary bread winner (almost ways the man) must pay the other (almost always the woman) for that relationship. You can talk about assets and alimony and perhaps partly even child support. Call it what you like. The man is paying for the relationship that he had with the woman. That is the explict reason for these laws. Otherwise the assests would be divided based on the parties incomes during the relationship.
For example: A marriage with no kids. A wife may choose to spend 4 years filing her nails and spending her husbands income without lifting a finger to contribute to the running of the house, his career or anything that enriches them both. After 4 years he must pay her the value of half of his assets. The laws in most if not all western countries have been specifically written with this intention.
If you deny that the man pays the woman for the relationship that they had  (marriage) then please explain your reasoning.
Incidently most western countries now treat defacto relationships the same way as marriage so there is nothing particularly special about marriage under the law. In addition I know in the UK some men have had to make the same payments to mistresses when they ended the relationship.

Your quote one again:

PAYING A WOMAN FOR A RELATIONSHIP IS PROSTITUTION!!

You wrote this after it was explained to you that a prepago is paid with assests for maintaining a RELATIONSHIP with a man. Sometimes for years. Whereas a prostitute is paid for sex.

For some reason you think that:
(a) there is no difference between a prostitute and a prepago
(b) there is nothing in common with a prepago and paying for a relationship after the relationship is terminated - provided the terminated relationship is called a marriage.

You are entitled to your view. I just haven't followed your reasoning.

[z_k_g]

No Zulu.
As I quoted, you stated (in shouting capitals) that:
I draw your attention to the word RELATIONSHIP.

One class of relationship is marriage. When that relationship ends the pimary bread winner (almost ways the man) must pay the other (almost always the woman) for that relationship. You can talk about assets and alimony and perhaps partly even child support. Call it what you like. The man is paying for the relationship that he had with the woman. That is the explict reason for these laws. Otherwise the assests would be divided based on the parties incomes during the relationship.
For example: A marriage with no kids. A wife may choose to spend 4 years filing her nails and spending her husbands income without lifting a finger to contribute to the running of the house, his career or anything that enriches them both. After 4 years he must pay her the value of half of his assets. The laws in most if not all western countries have been specifically written with this intention.
If you deny that the man pays the woman for the relationship that they had  (marriage) then please explain your reasoning.
Incidently most western countries now treat defacto relationships the same way as marriage so there is nothing particularly special about marriage under the law. In addition I know in the UK some men have had to make the same payments to mistresses when they ended the relationship.

Your quote one again:
You wrote this after it was explained to you that a prepago is paid with assests for maintaining a RELATIONSHIP with a man. Sometimes for years. Whereas a prostitute is paid for sex.

For some reason you think that:
(a) there is no difference between a prostitute and a prepago
(b) there is nothing in common with a prepago and paying for a relationship after the relationship is terminated - provided the terminated relationship is called a marriage.

You are entitled to your view. I just haven't followed your reasoning.

V_man,

I will provide a basis for my reasoning, that "Paying for a relationship is prostitution"  (Sorry for the shouting caps! )

When you marry a person the basis of the relationship is understood to be a mutual joining of families, traditions, assets and hopefully genes with the production of children and the continuation of both family lines.

When you hire a prostitute, a woman employee, whether that includes sex or companionship (a relationship), or both, you are exchanging MONEY (or gifts) for a specific SERVICE.

The two may have similar characteristics, for example both may involve women, expenditures of cash, but they are, fundamentally, not the same.

Zulu

[Gato4Astrid]

Prepagos = BEFORE PAY


Prostitutas = AFTER PAY ??


jajajaja


Do we get refund? 

[aconcepts]

"That is why I have said many times before....you don't really know what type of relationship you have until you say "NO" and then see what her reaction is.....if she is really your girlfriend she'll still be there the next day"

I love this quote.

So simple and so true.

[thekfc]

Let me get this straight...are you saying that this thread has absolutely nothing to do with other? Even though Brazilian Girl started it with a direct quote of mine from the previous discussion in question? Even though the subject matter, the ideas associated with terms used to define women that date for money in foreign countries, is essentially the same? Are you claiming that your third reply to this thread has nothing to do, or in common with the initial argument you were trying to use to justify your use of a derogatory term?

I would say that this thread is a continuation of the other thread - I think that it was a good idea that the op started a new thread to ask her question so it would not get "lost" in or further "split" the other thread. 

The original thread, this thread & the other two "split" threads all have a direct "relationship" with each other - they just went in different directions.

[whitey]

"Pay for play" in all it's various forms is much more nuanced in Colombia than in North America. It's deeply embedded in the culture, mostly out of economic necessity (not drugs like it often is here), and is often tacitly approved by the family or at least ignored.  "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" is very much alive on this issue.

On the coast (and for all I know most/all of Colombia), it is not at all uncommon for men to have a wife and family, a novia or two with other children of theirs and long-standing relationship, and the occasional mistress for added variety and short-term flings.  These relationships are facilitated through gifts, paying for bills, groceries, school, cell phones, whatever.

Many times the families on both side know, and don't say anything.  I've heard several stories of women who got engaged to guys that are already married and living with his wife and family, were introduced many times to the guy's mother ... and the mother NEVER SAID ANYTHING.

Another time I heard about a married guy who had his girlfriend drop by the house, angry that the guy hadn't paid her bills or whatever the arrangement was, and she was complaining about this to the maid.  The family was ticked off.  But not at him ... at the girlfriend for having the nerve to come over and "disrespect" the family like that.

BG - does this sort of stuff go on in Brazil?  I'd be surprised if it didn't ...

[fathertime]

For example: A marriage with no kids. A wife may choose to spend 4 years filing her nails and spending her husbands income without lifting a finger to contribute to the running of the house, his career or anything that enriches them both. After 4 years he must pay her the value of half of his assets. The laws in most if not all western countries have been specifically written with this intention.
 

if a man were to allow this to happen, then he knows what he has 'paid' for...i imagine that is how some marriages go....i'd be sick of that arrangement after about 5 days i think.


Fathertime!

[michaelb]

The prepago is paid to stay around so that the John can have more sex with her on other occasions.

The John is paying the prostituta to go away (and shut up) after the sex is finished.

That's the real difference.   

[mudd]

Prepagos = BEFORE PAYProstitutas = AFTER PAY ??jajajajaDo we get refund? 

now thats funny 

[braziliangirl]

"Pay for play" in all it's various forms is much more nuanced in Colombia than in North America. It's deeply embedded in the culture, mostly out of economic necessity (not drugs like it often is here), and is often tacitly approved by the family or at least ignored.  "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" is very much alive on this issue.

On the coast (and for all I know most/all of Colombia), it is not at all uncommon for men to have a wife and family, a novia or two with other children of theirs and long-standing relationship, and the occasional mistress for added variety and short-term flings.  These relationships are facilitated through gifts, paying for bills, groceries, school, cell phones, whatever.

Many times the families on both side know, and don't say anything.  I've heard several stories of women who got engaged to guys that are already married and living with his wife and family, were introduced many times to the guy's mother ... and the mother NEVER SAID ANYTHING.

Another time I heard about a married guy who had his girlfriend drop by the house, angry that the guy hadn't paid her bills or whatever the arrangement was, and she was complaining about this to the maid.  The family was ticked off.  But not at him ... at the girlfriend for having the nerve to come over and "disrespect" the family like that.

BG - does this sort of stuff go on in Brazil?  I'd be surprised if it didn't ...

Yeah, Whitey. I've heard very similar stories. And like the last one you told, the woman is always the one doing wrong, the man is just doing his job.

[z_k_g]

"Pay for play" in all it's various forms is much more nuanced in Colombia than in North America. It's deeply embedded in the culture, mostly out of economic necessity (not drugs like it often is here), and is often tacitly approved by the family or at least ignored.  "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" is very much alive on this issue.

On the coast (and for all I know most/all of Colombia), it is not at all uncommon for men to have a wife and family, a novia or two with other children of theirs and long-standing relationship, and the occasional mistress for added variety and short-term flings.  These relationships are facilitated through gifts, paying for bills, groceries, school, cell phones, whatever.

Many times the families on both side know, and don't say anything.  I've heard several stories of women who got engaged to guys that are already married and living with his wife and family, were introduced many times to the guy's mother ... and the mother NEVER SAID ANYTHING.

Another time I heard about a married guy who had his girlfriend drop by the house, angry that the guy hadn't paid her bills or whatever the arrangement was, and she was complaining about this to the maid.  The family was ticked off.  But not at him ... at the girlfriend for having the nerve to come over and "disrespect" the family like that.

BG - does this sort of stuff go on in Brazil?  I'd be surprised if it didn't ...

Whitey,

Pay for Play,  P4P is prostitution right? 

Just wanted to make sure that is what you mean.

Zulu

[whitey]

Whitey,

Pay for Play,  P4P is prostitution right? 

Just wanted to make sure that is what you mean.

Zulu

Well, maybe at it's core, yes ... if your viewpoint is very black and white.  It's more complicated, more nuanced than that.  It's not as transactional.  It's not like: if you give me $X I'll do Y.

[z_k_g]

For example: A marriage with no kids. A wife may choose to spend 4 years filing her nails and spending her husbands income without lifting a finger to contribute to the running of the house, his career or anything that enriches them both. After 4 years he must pay her the value of half of his assets.

V_man,

I would add that in this SPECIFIC example (which happens quite often) the man made a very POOR  selection for a wife.  He did not do proper due diligence, do my "risk factors" test I listed in another post, or simply use aconcepts "NO" relationship test method.

This SPECIFIC example of a failed marriage would SEEM similar to a long term prostitute relationship because the female seemed to be in it for the money so she is a leech and planned all along to get paid and to get half.

But even with this extreme example, I still point out that the man had NO intention of simply paying a prostitute, long term or short term.  He thought he was getting a wife and all things I mentioned earlier that goes with a marriage he simply chose the wrong woman for a wife.

So, once again, I simply disagree and reject your premise that real marriages are simply sophisticated, legal, long term P4P arrangements.

Just my opinion

Zulu

[z_k_g]

Well, maybe at it's core, yes ... if your viewpoint is very black and white.  It's more complicated, more nuanced than that.  It's not as transactional.  It's not like: if you give me $X I'll do Y.

Whitey,

I disagree, Its completely transactional by the very nature of the interaction.  If money were not involved there would be NO relationship or sex, correct?

I just find it difficult to use euphemisms for things that are clearly what they are.

If I see a some one stealing, that's theft not "borrowing".

A murder is not "a retirement" or "ethnic cleansing"

A lie is a lie, not "putting the spin on it"

Euphemisms are much used literary devices too often overused to soften the blow of the real truth and to make things abhorrent socially acceptable to the public.

But the truth is simply the truth.

So....If I see a woman getting cash or gifts for a relationship, quid pro quo, then that's PROSTITUTION even though you may use the euphemism- prepago, mistress, temporary wife, etc.

Looks like lie, sounds like a lie, tastes like a lie, must be a lie.

Zulu

[whitey]

Whitey,

I disagree, Its completely transactional by the very nature of the interaction.  If money were not involved there would be NO relationship or sex, correct?

I just find it difficult to use euphemisms for things that are clearly what they are.

If I see a some one stealing, that's theft not "borrowing".

A murder is not "a retirement".

A lie is a lie, not "putting the spin on it"

Euphemisms are much used literary devices too often overused to soften the blow of the real truth and to make things abhorrent socially acceptable to the public.

But the truth is simply the truth.

So....If I see a woman getting cash or gifts for a relationship, quid pro quo, then that's PROSTITUTION even though you may use the euphemism- prepago, mistress, temporary wife, etc.

Looks like lie, sounds like a lie, tastes like a lie, must be a lie.

Zulu

Zulu, I understand your point, but it's a very binary way of thinking ... and in this case has no cultural understanding.  You are applying a very rigid way of thinking to a culture and society that thinks DIFFERENTLY about this issue.

[z_k_g]

Zulu, I understand your point, but it's a very binary way of thinking ... and in this case has no cultural understanding.  You are applying a very rigid way of thinking to a culture and society that thinks DIFFERENTLY about this issue.

Whitey,

Yes, you are correct....its binary

I just want to get the definition right before we factor in the "cultural" aspect which is, in my opinion, not relevant to the definition of the word.

The Euphemism "prepago", based on the information provided by our learned posters here, is a Colombian created word for a prostitute that doesn't directly take money all the time, is typically young, a kept woman, you give her gifts and maybe a car or jewelry.

I get that.

Also this form of prostitution is open and culturally acceptable in Colombia, I get that too.

Mind you, I'm have not made any type of moral or ethical declaration of "right or wrong", I am not judging these women.  I am just calling a prostitute a prostitute with no sugar coating. 

The Colombian society has created a special place and given these particular prostitutes a special name, "prepagos" to differentiate them from other prostitutes such as- street walkers, mistresses, etc.

A rose by any other name is just as sweet.

In my opinion P4P is P4P no matter what you want to call it, no matter how young the women, and no matter if its in Colombia with "prepagos", in France with "mistresses", or in Iran with "temporary wives".

Zulu

[Woody]

Whitey,

I disagree, Its completely transactional by the very nature of the interaction.  If money were not involved there would be NO relationship or sex, correct?

I just find it difficult to use euphemisms for things that are clearly what they are.

If I see a some one stealing, that's theft not "borrowing".

A murder is not "a retirement" or "ethnic cleansing"

A lie is a lie, not "putting the spin on it"

Euphemisms are much used literary devices too often overused to soften the blow of the real truth and to make things abhorrent socially acceptable to the public.

But the truth is simply the truth.

So....If I see a woman getting cash or gifts for a relationship, quid pro quo, then that's PROSTITUTION even though you may use the euphemism- prepago, mistress, temporary wife, etc.

Looks like lie, sounds like a lie, tastes like a lie, must be a lie.

Zulu

Zulu,
This is the real world, not Sunday School. The world is not black and white, it is shades of grey.


You call all types of transactions that involve the transfer of wealth from male to female for the purpose of emotional and physical fulfillment prostitution. There are situations where this is absolutely prostitution and there is nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade. That said, what do you think is a primary motivator in women looking outside their own non-first world nation for a husband from a first-world nation? I would say that the top motivators are Security and Fidelity. Now, in this modern world, money = security. There are certain traits that all woman look for in men, but it really comes down to can the man fulfill his role as a protector and provider. You may argue a multitude of other factors, but they all can be placed into the protector/provider category at their core. Even looks and humor can be placed into those category. Looks steming from the classic need of physical strength and fitness to protect/provide and in a modern day sense in can the guy hold down a job. Appearance can have a very large impact on a man's employability and ability to excell at a job. Humor is a good barometer for a man's character and how well he can play with others (AKA, hold down a job in today's world).


Now, using your black and white logic, that would mean the safe application of the word prostitute to the wife/girlfriend of every since person on this forum. I know that was not your intent and I know that you will vehemently disagree with me that your faulty logic leads to such conclusions, but that is what it boils down to.


Is a prepago a prostitute? Sure, just as much as a gold digger is, or any American woman that will only date wealthy guys. Are there varying levels of prepago? You bet your arse there is. On the one end of the spectrum you have what could easily be mistaken for a prostitute. A woman that will only fulfill the man's emotional and physical desires after some form of compensation has been established. On the other end of the spectrum is the woman that has certain fiscal needs that she feels that it is a man's responsibility to fulfill in a relationship. If the man is not fulfilling those fiscal responsibilities, she sees the relationship as one that does not provide the level of economic security she believes she is capable of finding elsewhere and will leave.


This is only one dynamic of the relationship. She will have no emotional ties at one end of the spectrum, and difficult to break emotional ties at the other end. (Yes, I mean that prepagos and even prostitutes are human beings. I don't look down on them, rather I attempt to understand the life choice and circumstances that led them to where they are today.)


Relationships are about the mutual fulfillment of physical and or emotional needs. This applies to prostitutes, prepagos, gold diggers, girlfriends, wives, and even your parents.


The real question you have to ask yourself is, "What kind of relationship am I in and is it sustainable and satisfying in the long term?"


-Woody


P.S. The correct euphemism for "ethnic cleansing" is genocide. A word that has connotations of far deeper hate, xenophobia, and malice than murder accurately portrays.

[Calipro]

Whitey,

Yes, you are correct....its binary

I just want to get the definition right before we factor in the "cultural" aspect which is, in my opinion, not relevant to the definition of the word.

The Euphemism "prepago", based on the information provided by our learned posters here, is a Colombian created word for a prostitute that doesn't directly take money all the time, is typically young, a kept woman, you give her gifts and maybe a car or jewelry.

I get that.

Also this form of prostitution is open and culturally acceptable in Colombia, I get that too.

Mind you, I'm have not made any type of moral or ethical declaration of "right or wrong", I am not judging these women.  I am just calling a prostitute a prostitute with no sugar coating. 

The Colombian society has created a special place and given these particular prostitutes a special name, "prepagos" to differentiate them from other prostitutes such as- street walkers, mistresses, etc.

A rose by any other name is just as sweet.

In my opinion P4P is P4P no matter what you want to call it, no matter how young the women, and no matter if its in Colombia with "prepagos", in France with "mistresses", or in Iran with "temporary wives".

Zulu

Everything you have said is correct....and for guys that do not make a distinction between a mistress and a street walker...this is where the road ends;-)

[V_Man]

Zulu,

Firstly, please read Woody's explanation carefully.

Secondly please do not place your values on me. I do not share your binary thinking. I am trying to show you the flaws in your binary thinking in cultural terms that you can relate to.

So, once again, I simply disagree and reject your premise that real marriages are simply sophisticated, legal, long term P4P arrangements.

No Zulu, that is not MY premise. I am suggesting that logically this is the conclusion one must reach if one adopts YOUR premise.

But even with this extreme example, I still point out that the man had NO intention of simply paying a prostitute, long term or short term.  He thought he was getting a wife and all things I mentioned earlier that goes with a marriage he simply chose the wrong woman for a wife.

What you appear to be saying is that a man who has a prepago is deluding himself if he thinks she is not a prostitute. However if he marries the exact same type of woman then, although he is still deluding himself, it is somehow completely different and has nothing to do with paying for a relationship.

Can you accept that just perhaps things are begining to get a little fuzzy here?

In addition, do you agree that there are guys that realise she is a bit of a gold digger but marry her anyway?
Do you agree that there are guys that are totally aware that she is marring him for his fame and fortune but he figures he can afford to have a trophy wife?

Can you tell me why these relationships (common in our culture) are completely different and can never be compared to paying for a relationship?

I disagree, Its completely transactional by the very nature of the interaction.  If money were not involved there would be NO relationship or sex, correct?

Zulu, how many marriages are terminated by women once the money dries up? I don't know, the answer but I know it is common. Can you tell me why we have common terms such as "Gold Digger" and "Trouphy Wife" in our culture? I don't understand how these things can be such a common part of our culture and yet according to you it has nothing to do with payment for a relationship.

Why is a trophy wife so magically different?

Oh hang on. Now I notice that you have the used the term "real marriages".  Therefore are you saying there are two classes of marriages? "Real marriages" and the other kind? Does the other kind of marriage have a name? I want to get all my euphemisms correct. Can you tell me, are the other kind of marriages binary opposite to prepagos as well? Or do we now have 3 classes?

If we have 3 classes then are we allowed to have 4 classes?
No?
How come we can have two classes of marriage but we can't distinguish between prepagos and prostitutes? I'm getting a little bit lost on that one.

So if it is marriage then is has nothing to do with paying for a relationship or prostitution. However if there is any kind of pay for play then it is prostitution. Is marriage to a trophy wife prostitution? How can it be? That would break the first rule. But surely a trophy wife is one type of pay for play. So that breaks the second rule.

Also how do we define trophy wife? The catty girls next door reckon this other woman is a trophy wife based solely on the fact that she is young, hot, foreign and he pays for everything for her. They do have a good point actually. But the husband reckons that his wife has feelings for him. He makes some good points as well. Do you reckon, it's a "real marrage" or the other kind? There was no check box on the marriage license.

Also my mate has a girlfriend. He pays her rent. They sleep together in the weekends. She goes to church and she does not think that she is a prostitute. Is she?

Zulu I am finding your binary rule here very confusing in our own culture. Can you clarify this for us?

[Alabamaboy!]

Well, maybe at it's core, yes ... if your viewpoint is very black and white.  It's more complicated, more nuanced than that.  It's not as transactional.  It's not like: if you give me $X I'll do Y.

This is my impression of the prepago scene. Although there are a lot of prepagos who negotiate prices and services beforehand and provide their domicilio services in hotel rooms or wherever, most seem to operate more like Whitey is describing.

There seems to be a very small group of hardcore prostitutes who work in casas or clubs. They seem to be highly stigmatized.

Then there seems to be a pretty solid group of good girls on the other end of the spectrum.

Then there is a hugeeeeeee middle category of interesadas/prepagos which runs the spectrum of girls who will take off for a weekend from their regular Colombian boyfriends to be with a gringo in Rodadero who will bring her a few "gifts" and throw a few hundred thousand COP her way to help pay for her "tuition at the U" or whatever thing before returning to the States. Or the more "hardcore" prepagos who are actually college girls who have a friend who works at the front desk of a hotel and pimps her out to guys coming into town. I was amazed at this. I would be in whatever city and the first time I would return home to the hotel at night without my girlfriend, the people at the front desk would ask me if I wanted a "date" for the evening. Then they would show me a pic of a super sweet innocent looking girl who you would never suspect was a prepago. But they would tell me "noooooo she is not a prepago, she is just a good girl who needs a little help paying her tuition....she does not do this with just anyone...but you seem to be like a very handsome clean guy. She is looking for a husband you know." Some story like that. Lots of girls looking to be mistresses to Colombian guys. Not a bad gig really. Get all the good stuff without doing his laundry, cooking his meals, etc. And many times the goal ironically appears to be financial independence from men by paying for their schools and developing their own career.



And the movies, music, magazines and the culture in general more or less glorify the life of a prepago. Whether she is hanging out with wealthy gringos, europeans, or Colombian narcos.

[z_k_g]

Zulu,
This is the real world, not Sunday School. The world is not black and white, it is shades of grey.


-Woody


P.S. The correct euphemism for "ethnic cleansing" is genocide. A word that has connotations of far deeper hate, xenophobia, and malice than murder accurately portrays.

Good points Woody.

Also genocide is murder on large scale.

Zulu

[z_k_g]

Zulu,

Firstly, please read Woody's explanation carefully.

Secondly please do not place your values on me. I do not share your binary thinking. I am trying to show you the flaws in your binary thinking in cultural terms that you can relate to.

No Zulu, that is not MY premise. I am suggesting that logically this is the conclusion one must reach if one adopts YOUR premise.

What you appear to be saying is that a man who has a prepago is deluding himself if he thinks she is not a prostitute. However if he marries the exact same type of woman then, although he is still deluding himself, it is somehow completely different and has nothing to do with paying for a relationship.

Can you accept that just perhaps things are begining to get a little fuzzy here?

Zulu I am finding your binary rule here very confusing in our own culture. Can you clarify this for us?

V_man,

I read Woody's post, and he has some good points....however, I'm a bit confused about his Sunday School reference.....but I digress...

I think that you and Woody are missing MY point.

If you hire a woman explicitly for sex or a relationship she is at that point a "prostitute", a "sex worker" for hire.

If you hire a person for a job and they accept payment for that job.....You need plumbing work, you hire a plumber, you need a quick blowjob you hire a hooker, you need a date you hire an escort, you need a relationship with long term sex you hire a prepago or contract with a mistress.

This employment is what I mean by "black and white" and "binary".

You are paying (with gifts or cash or both) for a specific service and the prepago provides the service.  This is very clearly "quid pro quo" something for something.
 
She is now your "employee" and you have paid for services that she will render.

"Black and White", you pay she delivers. 

This employee and employer relationship has nothing to do with USA, SA, Asia, Europe or is specific to any culture, ethnic group or race.  You will find Prepagos, mistresses, temporary wives, hookers, prostitutes, etc in all cultures and in every country.

You hire them they do their job and when the money runs out the employment is over.

Zulu

[z_k_g]

V_man,

You continue to compare prostitutes to bad marriages.

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME!

I think this is worth repeating....

When you marry a person the basis of the relationship is agreed to be:  (Just my list yours may differ)

1. Love and mutual admiration and respect
2. mutual joining of families for social, religious and cultural reasons
3. Combining the traditions and knowledge of the elders (grandparents) so that they can influence, teach and raise the grandkids
4. Combining of monetary assets such as land, valuables and political influence to continue to keep wealth in the family line
5. Combining genes with the production of strong, smart and healthy children and the continuation of both family lines

You HIRE a prepago or prostitute.  She is HIRED, CONTRACTED for a specific task, sex, relationship or both.

With a foreign bride, if you do not conduct proper due diligence and marry a hooker, gold digger or green card shark then that is called "poor decision making" and you were probably thinking with your little head and ignored the red flags and got married despite obvious warning signs.

Also, if you marry an American or foreign woman, for all of the right reasons, and spend months or years getting acquainted are deeply in love and make all the "right" decisions, some marriages just go south, for whatever reasons. 

Unfortunately, the way our courts operate you may get shafted in the divorce.

But in neither case, no matter how bad the circumstances and how bad the divorce......you were not explicitly HIRING you wife.

You explicitly HIRE a prepago or prostitute. 

She is CONTRACTED for a specific task, sex, relationship or both.

Zulu