The subject who is truly loyal to the Chief Magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures.
This article was published more than 6 years ago. Some information in it may no longer be current. Welcome to Sex Qs, a weekly column where The Globe's Amberly McAteer seeks answers to your sex questions, talking to sexperts and regular Canadians alike. Have a question? Fire away: sexquestions globeandmail. Last week, I told a reader seeking sex advice to "never, ever โ ever!
He had been given the "green light" from his wife, who has admitted to a low libido, to have casual, non-monogamous sex. I urged him to try harder with his wife, but, if he had to, seek a casual arrangement with a willing party on the Internet. The contrarian responses were fast and furious: If he's looking for sex without the emotions, the e-mails and online comments and phone calls argued, a professional, monetary transaction is the way to go.
Everyone has a talent! I had not a clue this would cause an uproar. I thought most people were on the same page โ I mean, we're talking about reducing someone's daughter to a paid means for sexual enjoyment. So I felt it important to clarify, to dig deeper into these pro-prostitution beliefs that had rattled me for days. Let's be clear: This debate isn't about the criminality of sex work, a heavy and complex subject filled with grey areas โ that's a matter for the Supreme Court of Canada, which is currently battling all sides of the debate.
At issue is what values embody worthwhile sex, and my philosophy is this: Whether it happens during a one-night stand, a summer fling, a friends-with-benefit arrangement or a life-long marriage, there must be a base human connection โ two willing, interested humans agreeing to a good time โ and a special, intimate experience.
