We did get the milking machine for sperm donations. I feel like that covers a lot of ground. I gotta wonder how many rich people have one of them somewhere in their house.
You talking “rich” as in “doing pretty well, financially” or “rich” as in “truely wealthy”? Because at some point, I’d imagine that the rich person would just hire a “housekeeper”.
Billionaire Robert Kraft was caught at a low-end “massage parlor” in Florida. It seemed like a slam-dunk case but his lawyers were able to argue that the warrant allowing detectives to place hidden cameras in the rooms didn’t explicitly include recording the videos so the recordings couldn’t be used in court as evidence. Without the recordings of him asking for and receiving sexual services from a potentially trafficked person the prosecutors weren’t able to make a case and he remains a free man, not guilty in the eyes of the law even though what he did became widely known. Still blows my mind that he had the financial resources for any variety of overtly-transactional or less-overtly-transactional-and-perfectly-legal-in-most-jurisdictions relationships with willing participants, yet he chose the really cheap and illegal route with someone who was likely coerced into the action by a third party. Was that part of the appeal?
Did you reply to the wrong comment? I only implied that rich people would probably hire a prostitute of some form, rather than buy a sex toy. What does that have to do with the specific type of sex workers that Robert Kraft chose to visit?
I guess I interpreted your comment to mean they would go for a higher-end arrangement, something more exclusively available to people with large amounts of money, not a cheap arrangement found in an older shopping center.
We did get the milking machine for sperm donations. I feel like that covers a lot of ground. I gotta wonder how many rich people have one of them somewhere in their house.
You talking “rich” as in “doing pretty well, financially” or “rich” as in “truely wealthy”? Because at some point, I’d imagine that the rich person would just hire a “housekeeper”.
Billionaire Robert Kraft was caught at a low-end “massage parlor” in Florida. It seemed like a slam-dunk case but his lawyers were able to argue that the warrant allowing detectives to place hidden cameras in the rooms didn’t explicitly include recording the videos so the recordings couldn’t be used in court as evidence. Without the recordings of him asking for and receiving sexual services from a potentially trafficked person the prosecutors weren’t able to make a case and he remains a free man, not guilty in the eyes of the law even though what he did became widely known. Still blows my mind that he had the financial resources for any variety of overtly-transactional or less-overtly-transactional-and-perfectly-legal-in-most-jurisdictions relationships with willing participants, yet he chose the really cheap and illegal route with someone who was likely coerced into the action by a third party. Was that part of the appeal?
Did you reply to the wrong comment? I only implied that rich people would probably hire a prostitute of some form, rather than buy a sex toy. What does that have to do with the specific type of sex workers that Robert Kraft chose to visit?
I guess I interpreted your comment to mean they would go for a higher-end arrangement, something more exclusively available to people with large amounts of money, not a cheap arrangement found in an older shopping center.