Which occupation do you consider more honorable?

[Aquagraph]

A prostitute or a policeman?

Both are doing what their job description says. The police of this example doesn't take bribes and the prostitute isn't going to rob you.

[Narc]

I don't attach honour to professions, so I can't pick one.

[squirreltual]

Narc's post was going to be my reply, word for word

In a way this question is also: which would you prefer to be. I'd consider both then go for the third option.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I'd go with the prostitute since I'd rather people make love than try to control everything... but you can't really judge a person based on their occupation.

What somebody does for a living, to put food on the table, isn't a necessary reflection of who they are or even what they believe in. Most cops are assholes, true, but are you really going to paint them with that broad of a brush? I think many therapists/social workers are nothing more than childish gossipers feeding off the pain of other people but I have also met a few that were genuinely empathetic, kind and caring and just wanted to do the right thing for people.

I have another comment but I think it's special enough for its own post. =p So double posting...

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I think socionics can revolutionarize society because so much of life is based on how well you personally get along with others.

We all met the shy kid that didn't want to go to school when they were around somebody they disliked, but when they were around a teacher that had genuine empathy for them, they went - and when/if they met somebody they really liked, were even excited and looked forward to that. If we don't study relationship theory or how people are narcissistically, we are going to just create more bombs, civil wars, and terrors- and more awkward moments where we share our emotional realm with people that we really shouldn't.

Terror literally happens from trying to make a fish fly, when it can't fly - it would rather swim, but we say 'You have to be well-rounded, you have to fly like the birds!' But the fish cannot fly, it's not in the nature. It is sociopathic and sadistic to make somebody do something they don't want to do or are not wired to do.. .we are all narcissistic and should be respected for our uniqueness. So let's socionics be an anchor to that, to respect somebody's independence without trying to turn them into somebody they are not. Let's all stop trying to control how other people feel so much. It doesn't matter if your kid doesn't like sports or violin lessons or learning about homosexuals. It doesn't matter if they don't want a normal job or if they refuse to work in a fake middle class atmosphere. It just doesn't matter as much as you think it does... let other people's kindness and charity be natural rather than forced, or it will be a worse cruelty than we can ever imagine it to be.

[Finale]

Motive is a better indicator of honor vs. the profession itself.

For example, someone might become a police officer because they are willing to put their life on the line to make a positive impact on their community, reduce crime and improve safety for their friends and neighbors. Others may become a police officer because they want to exert authority, bully people, carry a weapon and wear camo fatigues.

On the flip side, a woman may become a prostitute because she is a single mom and has a hard time providing for her children. Another woman may become a prostitute because she's too lazy to wake up everyday before noon, does a crap load of drugs for recreation and is trying to win the heart of Tyrone when no matter how much cash she hands him, he just slaps her and drops her back off at the curb.

[olduser]

police officer, at least it's a profession people choose, not something shitty circumstances or criminals force them into. Okay, that's generalizing, but i imagine prostitution is not a rewarding profession and therefore not one people do willingly. Policing can be. Police constantly deal with the darkest side of human nature(and are sometimes cut from the same cloth as those they police), and sometimes prostitutes as well.

[Absurd]

Both are doing what their job description says.

Wrong.

The police of this example doesn't take bribes and the prostitute isn't going to rob you.

Wrong.

A prostitute or a policeman?

Cabbage or cabbage?

[FoxOnStilts]

They're the same. No one profession is more 'honorable' or 'better' than another. This includes military which is a profession.

[Scapegrace]

Whores often lovingly sex up men who otherwise probable would never be able to have sexual experiences. I inched watched a documentary about disabled men who seek out love from prostitutes. Sometimes they don't even want sex. They just want physical affection, and while it is kind of sad that they have to *pay* for it -- it is obviously therapeutic for them.

No profession is itself honorable, but I think every profession can be carried out honorably.

It upsets me that more value is assigned to someone doing their *job* with the police or military though.

[strangeling]

It upsets me that more value is assigned to someone doing their *job* with the police or military though.

Why?

[Scapegrace]

Why?

Because their lives are not more valuable than a trash collector's life, or a novel's life, or a lawyer's life.

When they sign up for their jobs they are completely aware of the risks.

[strangeling]

Because their lives are not more valuable than a trash collector's life, or a novel's life, or a lawyer's life.

When they sign up for their jobs they are completely aware of the risks.

More valuable? They are the one's that die so the trash collector, novelist, and lawyer can live their lives...I'd say they are seen/treated as less valuable... what do you mean?

[Scapegrace]

Are you kidding me? No they're not. If someone shoots a cop, even if its just a scared, stupid, kid it's pretty much an instant death penalty (in states with capital punishment). You can rape and murder a child with less recourse.

It's lovely that they "protect" and "serve," but they also frequently abuse their power. And as I said: the become a cop with the knowledge that their job is potentially dangerous. People don't weep and moan every time someone dies on an oil rig because that is dangerous.

[strangeling]

Are you kidding me? No they're not. If someone shoots a cop, even if its just a scared, stupid, kid it's pretty much an instant death penalty (in states with capital punishment). You can rape and murder a child with less recourse.

I think the gist is that if they weren't tougher on people who shot cops, they might be unable to do their jobs. Power is a very political thing, I guess.

It's lovely that they "protect" and "serve," but they also frequently abuse their power. And as I said: the become a cop with the knowledge that their job is potentially dangerous. People don't weep and moan every time someone dies on an oil rig because that is dangerous.

Right, but people aren't perfect and we all make mistakes and abuse power at times. And just because someone accepts a job that is dangerous doesn't mean they don't deserve to be missed, if something happens to them. I'm guessing people who work on oil rigs don't have a community of people that feel a loss when someone they have come to appreciate is shot and killed one day. Some people also find the idea of a police force being decimated by criminals disheartening in itself as well because it means the structure of society is falling apart; to them it's more important than someone in an oil rig dying from an accident.

So I'm not really sure what you mean by more valuable. They are valued for what they represent, I suppose. Do you then think they shouldn't represent such value? Can a society function on good faith between individuals and groups, without a populace that respects the power structure enough to allow it to keep things in some kind of harmonic check?

[strangeling]

I think in a way police are treated as icons for the country itself. So, the same way people overreact to terrorist attacks, people overreact to the death of a cop. It becomes personal for a misguidedly patriotic person, because he feels a part of himself is being attacked.

I say "misguidedly" because if one is to feel patriotism, it should be for the "common citizens" of the country who actually symbolize the culture and national identity, not the state.

Maybe cops would have a better reputation and stop being such dicks if they were treated as if they held "just another job," but they aren't and don't, the same way movie stars and famous politicians don't.

(most of this is not really directed towards you, Scape. But your comment is what inspired the thought, so that's why I quoted it.)

Contrary to popular opinion, everything doesn't always stem from narcissism. Well, maybe sometimes it does for the stupid people; but there's more to it then that. That's a rather shallow way to look at the value a police force represents for society, as well as a military.

[strangeling]

I didn't use narcissism as a basis for judging their value. I used narcissism to explain their publicly perceived image and propensity for being giant cocks about asserting their exaggerated sense of dignity and honor. I didn't even so much as infer an interest in "value" (in the sense of what good they contribute to society) in that post.

Value includes how something is perceived (or image), which can be good or bad (according to you, I focused on good). And that's partly what I talked about in my argument. So you did infer value, as I referenced it. And more specifically, you judged their "value" in doing so, by reducing it to patriotic narcissism. And masking such a judgment under the guise of "perception" doesn't somehow make it okay...

[FDG]

Catching criminals and serving justice however, would.

Because that's really what policement do?

[strangeling]

butts

[Words]

I never get these type of questions, it's like typology always one or the other.

I'd say that it's neither of them per se, it's more so what the person does with the job that makes it honourable, eg a policeperson harrassing vulnerable people who are mostly minding their own business to another one going out and catching da rapist, one method is honourable the other is not.

[Aquagraph]

It's rarely about "what" and more about "how" and "what for". However..

Technically both perform a desired service to society, so the main differentiator is how much one respects family and sexual intimacy. I believe those people who have children and/or are married would more likely say 'policeman', whereas single people without ethics may struggle more with this question.

Prostitutes are giving up part of their sexual intimacy so that other people would have a chance of actualizing their own. Often prostitutes pursue that lucrative line of work to feed their family. Many people don't respect their family enough to swallow their pride and be willing to do anything that it takes to provide it.

However, I don't know any honorable means of stopping someone from doing something that doesn't hurt anyone. I respect a policeman who knowingly ignores to follow guidelines that would lead them to take such actions but those policemen are rare because they will be pressured to do such by their superiors and partners.

[Absurd]

Prostitutes are giving up part of their sexual intimacy so that other people would have a chance of actualizing their own.

Actually they do that to get paid for the service they offer and not to deliver enlightenment to the buyer.

[willekeurig]

I find it hard to respect policemen because they have made a choice to become policemen. I have no trouble respecting someone who's a prostitute, but the occupation alone wouldn't be big enough a reason to make me honour him/her.

If I had to choose, I'd still become a policeman myself. I'd be damn corrupt though - I'd refuse to act against my own sense of morality, which unfortunately happens to conflict with the law more often than not.

[Aquagraph]

A lot, however, abuse their authority.

Sometimes they must either:
1. Restrain from someone doing something that doesn't hurt someone.
2. Disobey their orders.
In my opinion they can preserve their honor by disobeying an order which steps on someone's liberties but this will likely cost their police status.

[ashlesha]

I never get these type of questions, it's like typology always one or the other.

I'd say that it's neither of them per se, it's more so what the person does with the job that makes it honourable, eg a policeperson harrassing vulnerable people who are mostly minding their own business to another one going out and catching da rapist, one method is honourable the other is not.

i liked what a lot of people had to say in this thread but this is pretty much where i'm at with the question too.

[Aquagraph]

I never get these type of questions, it's like typology always one or the other.

I'd say that it's neither of them per se, it's more so what the person does with the job that makes it honourable, eg a policeperson harrassing vulnerable people who are mostly minding their own business to another one going out and catching da rapist, one method is honourable the other is not.

Policemen don't really make a lot of choices about what cases and patrols they get as far as I'm concerned. They might make choices about not harassing a hippie who is passing by but they are assigned.
Do you consider that the officer in charge of rape investigation is more honorable than the one assigned to bust a home party or what did you mean?

[Creepy-male]

Yea I really like Narc's answer as well.

In general I find it kind of cringe worthy having people honor me because I wear a badge and act like the protector of society or because I get them off and make them feel good. I find more personal honor at least in just having personal integrity.

The prostitute I guess provides pleasure to society while the cop tries to constrain society -- its like the id versus the superego and having to choose one or the other feels like some diabolical choice... I'd rather exist in some zone where there is no honor and badges and people are people and there is a balance between feeling safe, protected and gratified.

[Words]

Policemen don't really make a lot of choices about what cases and patrols they get as far as I'm concerned.

I see

Do you consider that the officer in charge of rape investigation is more honorable than the one assigned to bust a home party or what did you mean?

Well if there is someone being raped in close vicinity but the copper doesn't do anything because a) can't be arsed b) finishes shift soon c) is afraid then what do you think I think?

[chriscorey]

Honor: honesty, fairness, or integrity in one's beliefs and actions: a man of honor. "intentions"

[Creepy-male]

Prostitutes are giving up part of their sexual intimacy so that other people would have a chance of actualizing their own.

I disagree with this, this idea of sexual intimacy being better when its "innocent" and the more a person gets with others the more it degrades them. In other words the prostitute is essentially withering away there innocence so that someone else can prosper. Prostitution itself is somewhat cringe worthy for both involved, if you are the buyer and not the giver you may enjoy the experience but its not some holy grail of sexual enlightenment -- at the end of the day there is still the pain staking realization that its your money the other person is after and not you. You are just as disposable as a "john" as she is as a ragdoll for you to fuck. It's a mutual agreement, sexual tension builds up in the guy to critical levels and he needs to release it, so he pays a few bucks for some peace of mind and the prostitute opens the gates to herself for the guy for a limited time so she can collect some cash. It's just that simple and doesn't necessarily entail and process of enlightenment or moving towards some higher level of intimacy.

EVEN THEN! Let's say the prostitute allows the guy to feel great and cheers him on to sexual enlightenment with her magical pussy power (/sarcasm), then why does it have to be such a horrid experience where one person has to fall into the shadows and loose their "sexual intimacy" so the other person can have it. It's a bad choice, like yea sure you can take it all and achieve some pinnacle but it comes at the price of another .... enjoy that. Great! Now you must choose in life whether to be the mule who falls into the shadows for others or the person who excels at the expense of others. And you know that whichever one you select you are always going to think its the nobler choice. I'm the servant who is loosing their innocence, I'm so much better than those greedy fuckers who just take at the expense of me. Or it's I'm effective unlike those broken has been types, I'm at least pursuing something, I don't feel guilty its at their expense.

It forces you to choose and imposes competition onto which choice is better... why can't both sides win. Why can't the pathway to actualization and intimacy involve a mutual improvement and coexistence... isn't that kind of the biological point of sex, if you stop a think about it. Both sides merging their genetic self together to create something new? If you use birth control then yes its likely not going to involve having a baby, but all the emotional underpinnings of this biological process are essentially at work... the idea of creation and merging and life. And sometimes that is enough to restore one's innocence, I mean everyone dies, but to keep the fire lit and the process going, to get outside of the worst parts of yourself and contribute the best to someone else in order to create something new and better. That means a lot more than something like virginity where a person is essentially a prisoner in themselves.

With guys virginity is a burden they try to loose, for women its sort of sickenly akin to keeping an unopened bottle of wine in the traditional view. People want them to be innocent so they can be the first one to crack it open and take a drink. ITS OVERRATED MAN, they are fooling themselves in my opinion. They are missing the point, but people can continue with the pointless charade and games for all I care.

[leckysupport]

Policemen have the ability to cause far more damage to society than prostitutes, the police need honor as a form of ethical self-regulation.

[Pa3s]

I'd rather exist in some zone where there is no honor and badges and people are people and there is a balance between feeling safe, protected and gratified.

Yeah, me too.

[squirreltual]

Policemen have the ability to cause far more damage to society than prostitutes, the police need honor as a form of ethical self-regulation.

Yes, because they are a group. So of course they collectively wield more power. People in this thread seem to be talking about prostitutes as self-employed, empowered women. For me this doesn't even get close to the reality of prostitution which is more about human trafficking gangs, which of course are harmful - yes even in countries where prostitution is legalised - more so according to studies actually. Globalisation is a twat in many respects. It's not honorable to be human trafficked.

So then we're talking about a minority of prostitutes being "good prostitutes" vs. the minority of police being "bad police". Maybe ideally you'd prefer global anarchy? How achievable does that seem? It's really easy to diss them to feel oh so cool and liberal and I've almost certainly done it Maybe I'm just in a bad mood because I'm hungry but I feel most of this thread in no way reflects reality and grrrr... HIV anyone???

[Words]

Yes, because they are a group. So of course they collectively wield more power. People in this thread seem to be talking about prostitutes as self-employed, empowered women. For me this doesn't even get close to the reality of prostitution which is more about human trafficking gangs, which of course are harmful - yes even in countries where prostitution is legalised - more so according to studies actually. Globalisation is a twat in many respects. It's not honorable to be human trafficked.

So then we're talking about a minority of prostitutes being "good prostitutes" vs. the minority of police being "bad police". Maybe ideally you'd prefer global anarchy? How achievable does that seem? It's really easy to diss them to feel oh so cool and liberal and I've almost certainly done it Maybe I'm just in a bad mood because I'm hungry but I feel most of this thread in no way reflects reality and grrrr... HIV anyone???

You've had a lot of experience with prostitutes?

[squirreltual]

More than you may assume. But my point is more that legalized prostitution is bad for human trafficking victims. Now excuse me, I am off to eat a sandwich.

[Absurd]

Policemen have the ability to cause far more damage to society than prostitutes, the police need honor as a form of ethical self-regulation.

Prostitute police people can cause 'damage' as well, by giving you AIDS instead of a gun.

[Aquagraph]

I disagree with this, this idea of sexual intimacy being better when its "innocent" and the more a person gets with others the more it degrades them. In other words the prostitute is essentially withering away there innocence so that someone else can prosper. Prostitution itself is somewhat cringe worthy for both involved, if you are the buyer and not the giver you may enjoy the experience but its not some holy grail of sexual enlightenment -- at the end of the day there is still the pain staking realization that its your money the other person is after and not you. You are just as disposable as a "john" as she is as a ragdoll for you to fuck. It's a mutual agreement, sexual tension builds up in the guy to critical levels and he needs to release it, so he pays a few bucks for some peace of mind and the prostitute opens the gates to herself for the guy for a limited time so she can collect some cash. It's just that simple and doesn't necessarily entail and process of enlightenment or moving towards some higher level of intimacy.

EVEN THEN! Let's say the prostitute allows the guy to feel great and cheers him on to sexual enlightenment with her magical pussy power (/sarcasm), then why does it have to be such a horrid experience where one person has to fall into the shadows and loose their "sexual intimacy" so the other person can have it. It's a bad choice, like yea sure you can take it all and achieve some pinnacle but it comes at the price of another .... enjoy that. Great! Now you must choose in life whether to be the mule who falls into the shadows for others or the person who excels at the expense of others. And you know that whichever one you select you are always going to think its the nobler choice. I'm the servant who is loosing their innocence, I'm so much better than those greedy fuckers who just take at the expense of me. Or it's I'm effective unlike those broken has been types, I'm at least pursuing something, I don't feel guilty its at their expense.

It forces you to choose and imposes competition onto which choice is better... why can't both sides win. Why can't the pathway to actualization and intimacy involve a mutual improvement and coexistence... isn't that kind of the biological point of sex, if you stop a think about it. Both sides merging their genetic self together to create something new? If you use birth control then yes its likely not going to involve having a baby, but all the emotional underpinnings of this biological process are essentially at work... the idea of creation and merging and life. And sometimes that is enough to restore one's innocence, I mean everyone dies, but to keep the fire lit and the process going, to get outside of the worst parts of yourself and contribute the best to someone else in order to create something new and better. That means a lot more than something like virginity where a person is essentially a prisoner in themselves.

With guys virginity is a burden they try to loose, for women its sort of sickenly akin to keeping an unopened bottle of wine in the traditional view. People want them to be innocent so they can be the first one to crack it open and take a drink. ITS OVERRATED MAN, they are fooling themselves in my opinion. They are missing the point, but people can continue with the pointless charade and games for all I care.

What the fuck are you talking about?

[Aquagraph]

Yes, because they are a group. So of course they collectively wield more power. People in this thread seem to be talking about prostitutes as self-employed, empowered women. For me this doesn't even get close to the reality of prostitution which is more about human trafficking gangs, which of course are harmful - yes even in countries where prostitution is legalised - more so according to studies actually. Globalisation is a twat in many respects. It's not honorable to be human trafficked.

This is true. I could have added that the prostitute in question is not forced, just like I added that she/he isn't going to rob you.

[Pookie]

Because their lives are not more valuable than a trash collector's life, or a novel's life, or a lawyer's life.

When they sign up for their jobs they are completely aware of the risks.

I completely agree, and its befuddling how often my co-workers disagree with me.

[leckysupport]

Yes, because they are a group.

Also because they've been handed powers by the government (or some other powerful entity) to keep order. Corrupt or incompetent police can very easily fuck up a society in more ways and far quicker than morally corrupt prostitution (most prostitution is highly morally corrupt because of reasons you've stated). I'm not saying that prostitutes are good and policemen are bad, but that policemen can cause a fuck-load of damage when they are bad and prostitutes cause far less damage when they are bad.