Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site h-sc1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!h-sc1!desjardins
From: desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Sex by numbers (really, prostitution)
Message-ID: <297@h-sc1.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Apr-85 12:26:20 EST
Article-I.D.: h-sc1.297
Posted: Wed Apr 24 12:26:20 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Apr-85 23:27:24 EST
References: <206@osu-eddie.UUCP> <1192@houxm.UUCP> <942@ames.UUCP> <1106@ihuxe.UUCP> <1288@watdcsu.UUCP>
Organization: Harvard Univ. Science Center
Lines: 19

> 
> >	2)  is morally wrong
> >		It's immoral because it is psychologically degrading and
> >		against biblical (gasp!) teachings.  Is there a religion
> >		that supports prostituion?
> there isn't now, to my knowledge, but there was at least one of the
> minor greek goddesses who looked after prostitutes of the time.  the
> priestesses earned money for the temple and it was the duty of
> believers to visit the temple often to make their contribution.  

I've been doing some research for a paper on woman's position in the
family.  One book I have (written around 1914) claims that the reason
for the downfall of the family is the disappearance of the "out-family
woman".  Included in this group are the temple prostitutes (you see, this
kept the family together because the husband could combine extra-marital
fun with religion) and mistresses of Roman statesmen (since their wives
were not allowed to be intelligent or appear with them in public).

	marie desjardins