Printable View
Perhaps a state governed service, like the lottery?
Take it off the streets. Free up the police and the jails. Fair pay, healtheir, insurance, training for the men and ladies? Furthering education opportunities?
What is your oppinion on this? A reasonable solution? Or would it make things worse?
I'd approve but you have to create a whole new set of circumstantial laws to fairly regulate it...
The following purportedly happened in Germany soon after they legalized prostitution. Apparently a brothel owner was perusing the local unemployment lists and saw a particularly good looking woman therein. He offered her a job which she turned down...
...causing her to immediately lose her unemployment benefits because she turned down a legal job.
Here's a link to a news article
(Now wouldn't that make for an interesting bdsm-story... a society where innocent young men and women can be "drafted" for service in legal sex dungeons, where they are at the mercy of well-heeled doms and dommes.)
That is a wrinkle I would never have considered. WOWQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
Fortunately, or maybe unfortunately if you happen to be a rich BDSM freak who is planning to open a brothel in Germany, it does not seem to be true. Here is what Snopes.com has to say about it:
http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp
Anyway, I would be oppsed to legalized prostitution on moral and religious grounds, but I do think that it might be feasable if we could find a government that would not take advantage of the workers in some way.
Anybody think that would happen in the real world?
That i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhabbi
No, I really doubt you could have it running without others - the government, organized crime or other actors - trying hard to cut their slice of the money (as they often do today). People who argue that prostitution should be legal and easy will sometimes say, or imply, that it should be run just like any office 9-to-5 job with public taxation, health insurance. sick leave and the clents coming to get their services quite in the open, but would the "sex workers" and their customers really want to comply to that? No, it's just a shop front. Legalizing prostitution would not blot out the old market with its diseases, crime connections and its streams of black money and narcotics, it would just ensure there was a white sector of some sex workers, but behind that, business as usual, and now protected by the veil of this white sex business.
It's true the story that unemployed women in Germany would have been forced/suggested to look for work in the sex trade was a "paper duck", but that's just because it is not, even in Germany, a job like any other. If it were, you'd feel free to tell your friends "yeah I've been receiving sex customers for five years now" and to get interviewed with name and portrait in newspapers and tv. Which you don't - I've never seen an interview with a sex worker where he/she actually left anónymity behind and came into the open with real name and face photo...I'm not into stirring up hard feelings here, but I think much of the lobbying to have prostitution/sex services considered "a job like any other" comes from first, there's lots of money in the trade, and second, the fact that if you're doing a job that's demeaning and damaging on you - your health, ypur living, your chances of getting anywhere else - you damn well don't want to own up to being trapped in this line of work, so chances are you'll say "hey, I like this profession, I didn't need no expensive education and I can still make as much money as a doctor and have fun".
If it were a job like any other, then there would be pressure, more or less formal, on people who are out of work, "shouldn't you consider selling sex, hon?"
Some of you might answer "But hey, you sometimes fantasize about forced sex and prostitution yourself" Yes, in the same way that many of us get turned on by rape and kidnapping, but that doesn't mean I would really want to work the street, or even to do a full-time living selling sex to people I'd got hooked up with on the internet). Not that many here who would want to get raped by a stranger for real either..One is heady fantasy, the other is a sordid reality and to me, part of the point about the fantasy (beyond the turn-on factor) is that it dramatizes the powerplay between , for instance, a tart and her customers, or other men she once knew.
The reality is Prostutiion will always exist, whether in small dingy buildings or someone walking the streets it will always be around.
If we leaglize it, we can "Clean it up" forcing those invloved to regulalrly take STD tests. taxing their income and business and use the tax moneyto pay off countless County, State and Federal Bills.
Some disagree for moral or religious reasons which I respect, however since it will always exist in some form every where, we legalize, control it, keep it clean and allow the governemt to collect revenue from this.
Let's legalie it and let Law Enforcement work on more serious issues such as Drug and Arms Trafficing, Sexual Predators, just to name a few,not to mention if we leaglize it, we can use the tax revenue gained from it to cover these costs as well
i'm not against legalizing it, but the fact remains that even if it was legalized...that wouldn't clean it up. it might clean up the part they could control. but that won't stop people from continuing to try and do it illegally. go to a legal brothel and pay so much for it...or pick some chick up off a corner somewhere and get it for 20 bucks? ~shrugs~ just the way it is...
if prostitution was legalized then there would be health screenings and records, meaning you have a choice for going to someone you know is clean or going to someone illegal who could get you sick.
Also it would bring in more regular money as people could go to them instead of them standing on corner trying to avoid cops.... this could bring prices down.
Something to think about. Prostitution is legal in Nevada, but only under certain circumstances. Yet prostitution is ilegal in Las Vegas.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrkRvn
Why, becuase the goverment cannot regulate it. The bordellos in Nevada are expensive, thus the regualr guy still looks fopr the illegal prostitute. Most people cannot afford $500 for a half hour.
I'm of the opinion that stuff you can't stop might as well be legal. The main problem is that both the buyer and the seller want it to go on. Both the victim and the offender, (no matter if the victim is the man or the woman) want it to continue and want to keep it away from the cops. Since women aren't as strong as men, making it illegal will make them easy targets for violent crime done by men. No matter how repulsive we might think prostitution is, making it illegal doesn't make it go away. We don't condone everything that we make legal. That's a common missconception. We shouldn't mix up the laws in the lawbook with the ones in the Bible. Laws are intended to make life easier for everybody, not act as ethical guides. I'm willing to bet that whether we legalise it or not will have absolutely no impact on the number of women making money off it. All we do by legalising it is protecting the women from violence.
That German problem is easy to fix with a law making sex-jobs exempt from the losing her benefits. So it's no biggie and doesn't really have any impact on the dilemma.
Why not legalize it and keep it clean and tax it to death like other things such as liguor, smokes ect
Actually, what snopes is saying is that the news article is legitimate but was posed as a potential 'what if' scenario... which is what I also was pointing out. The potential for bureaucratic abuse exists... and is still potentially the seed for a hot story. :26:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhabbi
Quote:
Originally Posted by baby girl(W)
$20?? Where? ;)
Until prostitution is legalised everywhere, and they get accepted for it, we won't know what will happen.
It may be easier to handle, it will generate less funds for criminals, make it safer for both men and women wishing to do this work. It may happen like it did in America with the ban on liquor. When it was banned, the criminals made good money on speak-easies, and when the ban was lifted, they weren't competitive anymore.
It would possibly make it a lot more safe for women everywhere. Some people, like myself, love sex, want it all the time, but can't seem to get a girlfriend or a one night stand even. Some are more perverted and less sane than I am, and end up as rapists because it's "filthy", "abnormal", not "morally right", and not to forget, illegal, to pay a visit to a hooker. Sometimes you get caught in a downward spiral of such thinking, till one day you snap.
It would possibly make it safer for the customers and hookers too, knowing there were health regulations on the trade, as there are on every other trade there is.
I have often considered paying a visit to a hooker. In the past to get over my "virginity". Presently because I miss sex with a partner so much, I think I am going to burst. What's stopping me, is that I don't know if the one I choose takes care of herself, get tested, doesn't do drugs, doesn't have a pimp that will come in and demand more money of me once it's done. Or if I am gonna continue having bad luck and walk up to a police woman working under-cover, or get busted by the police when I leave the place we went to.
So, I continue writing sad poems and feeling depressed and continue being no help to the society because, with other things that I feel bad for, give me a clinical depression. All the time because I can't get sex legally.
hrm .
I vote legalize, it keep it unregulated. Those who have a "clean service" o their own will probably get more clients ... eventually it would sort itself out.
give the cops time to do more serious things like others have said.
Why be hassled for something that's going to happen anyway. kinda like pot ... it grows wild, how are you going to bust someone for that? can't be done here.
And for some there will always be sheep and cows. buwhahaa!!
It should be legalied, whether it is legal or not it will ALWAYS exit, make it legal, keep it clean and tax it to death
why tax it or anything for that matter.
Our whole tax system and beauracracy are a farce anyways .. give them more revenue they become more corrupt.
tax them and lower indivdual taex, but in either case by making it legal it is kept clean, desease free which is critical for this
Without taxes how does this country pay for things??
perhaps the country should be worrying about paying for less.
then how does the country pay for it's war efforts, social security benefits, item we import, rural and urban upgrades of highways, elelctrical grids, oil for gas, i am open to ideas
Taxes are needed for a country to take care of its citizens, no question there. It's just the unfairness of the taxes I believe (sorry if this is not your exact view Wolfscout) Ws and myself are angry at. For me, personally, it's how the taxes are spent. Here in Norway we are currently building a brand new opera house. As far as I know, a lot of tax money has gone into the building of this. We need culture, and diversity of it, but to cater to one style of culture so excessively?
That's not all that's wrong with how taxes are spent here in Norway, but it's one of the things currently in the news because it's about to open in a short time (less than a year) and it has been controversial long before the first spade was put to the dirt.
To recoup: We need taxes, but we also need to take a long hard look at what we do with the taxes.
When/if prostitution is legalised, off course they will pay income taxes like the rest of us. And I mean like the rest of us. No more, no less. Why should they pay more? It's not unhealthy in too large doses like smoking or drinking or ingesting drugs are, so why tax it more than the two legal items of the three I mentioned?
To recoup: We need taxes, but we also need to take a long hard look at what we do with the taxes.
I COULD NOT AGREE MORE
It's not unhealthy in too large doses like smoking or drinking or ingesting
drugs
Yes but you also risk with Prostitution the chance of ctaching AIDS, in that regard it is far more dangerous the either of the other 2, but if they keep it clean and have people tested weekly (make the business pay for it) ok thne aids screening has to be done
Our country (United States) wastes more tex money then any other country i know of i do not know about Norway sorry
Wharae taxes are used for and how much they are raised is usualy left up to the Party in charge of the White House
That covers it for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by OttifantSir
The people at large have no say in how their money is spent.
Elected officials vote themselves raises, vote to pay thier own retirements etc. They decide what is important and where the funds go.. often to meaningless private interests ( ie. porkbarrel projects.)
When they handle it wisely i'll stop complaining.
It's not the party in power it's politicians in general.
Once elected it's like they check their brains in at the hat closet.
Intresting fact and true Wolfscout, I am on Social Security Disablity, every year my cost of living increase is 2.5-3% never more and 1 year I onlygot 1.5% (i believe that was 2004) and yet our legislators give thmeselve on an arerage a 5.5-7.0% cost ofl iving increae, would someone please explain to my why they are entile by percent more money then I am, granted i no longer pay taxes as SSDI is not taxable but when I did paid for theirraisies, and I gurantee you this, I need money to live on far more then they do, the make more in 1 year of base salalry then I will see in 3 years
ah i'm on SSAD. tell me about cost of living increase and medicaid increases take up any fucking cost of living increase usually.
like we need half of what the .gov does.. we'd not notice if it stopped.
sighs. useless topic cause the sheeple think everything is lovely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfscout
thanks for you support on this 1 thing i cna say is those who do not live on fixed income like you and me have no fucking idea what it is like, not to mention $2.87 a gallon of gas on top of everything else
my state paid 99% of my medicine when D came in i now pay 25% outo f my pocket
I don't think prostitution should be legalized. Just because it exists, it doesn't mean that we should make it legal. Should we follow that example with drugs then, allowing all types regardless of how dangerous or addictive it is.
And tax is a fact of life. Get used to it. If your not happy about it do one of the following things:
1) Run for office and try to make a difference
2) Join a grassroot group, write a letter or do something else to make a difference
3) Move to a place with less taxes, they probably have less services there aswell
4) If all above doesn't suit you, quit whining, and accept it
Sorry, my fourth point seems kinda harsh I'll admit. But I just watch Constant Gardener now, and I've been thinking on how luck I am to be living in a western country where if I want to, I can change the system for the better, rather then worry about getting shot on my way to work like in some places in Africa.
The same reasoning can be aplied to drugs.Quote:
Originally Posted by nk_8950
The war on drugs is a failiure. It hasn't led to less addicts, only that life as an addict is more dangerous. If we admit that addicts are have a disease that need treating, not jail-time, then we're really in trouble. The war on drugs is making it harder for addicts to get help and leave their addiction, which hardly was it's goal. Since the war on drugs was initiated in the 70'ies, the quality of drugs has gone up many times. The reason for this is that with increased enforcement, profits for drug trade goes up and competition between dealers increases. The demand is the same.
Since one of my best childhood friends died from a drug overdose I've read up a lot on this. According to a bunch of Dutch and US studies the only effective thing we can do to help addicts and prevent people becoming addicted, (ie combat drugs) is to make drug clinics free and easily accesible. A junkie who wants to have drugs will always find them. What we need to do is make sure that the junkies who don't want to do drugs, can get all the help they need it getting off it. Stigmatising them as we do today isn't helping.
And lastly. There's two reasons people become addicted to anything. 1) genetic predispostion. 2) doing coke or heroin (or derivitives).
Exstacy, LSD, marijuana, alcohol etc have never in any studies ever been found to make people physically addicted. You need to have the genetic predisposition to become addicted to these, and it's a minority who are likely to carry this gene. You need two short serotonin or dopamin receptors in the ganglia or you haven't got it. These people can become addicted to anything. anything. Not necesarily a substance.
Drug enforcement is today an industry and very many people make their living off "fighting" drugs the old Nixon hard-line way. Science tells us that the only way to combat drugs is harm reduction. Any other aproach is pure religion.
Just as making drugs illegal only leads to more damage, illegal prostitution leads to more dangerous lives for prostitutes.
And on an end note. Just because we make something legal doesn't mean we remove all regulation from it.
edit: and to be perfectly clear. I'm not a drug liberal. I don't want a society where everybody can do drugs if they want to. I want a world with less drugs. And I want a world where nobody is forced into prostitution. I also believe that we should let science guide us into making this come true.
i personally feel that prostiuition should be illegalised only for those who ffer it i.e. the prostitutes themselves, a high percentage of which are assualt/rape survivors, many of whom have turned to selling themselves as a last resort due to desperate poverty and/or drug addiction. (in Glasgow, for example, 98% of prostitutes have substance abuse issues). Those who buy them, who profit from human misery, should suffer the full consequences of the law.
Completely agree with thatQuote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
Um... legal to sell but illegal to buy?
That just doesn't make sense.
In Sweden it's illegal to buy but not sell. And you are quite correct in that it makes no sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
There's a few problems here.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
Where's the link between assault/rape survivors and suffering when they sell themselves? Its implied and does not follow.
Last year a Swedish research team found that 100% of all Swedish 18 year old women had at one point been the victim of sexual assault. I'm not saying that is a good thing, only that sexual assault is very common. Saying generalised stuff about sexual assaut victims is a bit silly because it seems to cover everyone. I also think that Swedish men are probably less likely to assault a woman sexualy than other countries, since it's extremly easy to get laid here, (with concenting woman).
Ok, next problem. Women being forced into prostitution because of addiction is because of the lack of suport for drug adicts. This has nothing to do with prostitution as such. You can't blame the symptom for the sickness.
Next problem. Making it illegal to buy rather than sell is probably worse for the prostitutes. We have that in Sweden. Before they only had to worry about getting caught themselves, but now they have to worry about their customer getting caught, which means they do even riskier things than before, going to far away secluded places. Which unsurprisingly has led to them getting assaulted more than before.
I'm sorry if I sound a bit harsh now, but I'm really sick of feminists full of teary eyed opinions without any basis in reality. So we want people not to suffer. That's great and we agree so far. But that's probably where your post should have stopped.
i don't think it is, actually. Sexual victimisation rates are not generally at 100% in many demographic groups(in the UK for example, they're estimated as being about 33% of women) and when they are, i think that's cause for concern. Are survivors moving into these fields due to emotional problems from their assault? Did they develop substance abuse problems due to their assault and prostitute themselves to pay for them? Were they shunned by their community and took up prostiution due to that? Are the men who frequent prostitues more likely to be abusive? Whatever the reasons, prostitutes are a seriously damaged group and contributing to that by buying their bodies is just disgusting.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
i see that assumption, that men rape because they aren't getting sex, more than a little fallcious because it assumes that rape is primarily about sex. It isn't. It incoporates sex, sure, but it also incorporates holding down another human being and forcing yourself on them. It assumed rape is about sex when many men in existing sexual realtionships go out and rape random women. They could get consensual sex. They don't want it. They want power.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
And the answer to that is to leave things as they are or realise that most women in prostiution are there out of desperation, not choice, and need help to get out i.e. better benefits, more support in finding homes/jobs, and not men preying on them for sex when they essentailly can't say no due to their desperation?Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
i'd like to see statistics on that, but even if true, it doesn't make the law fatally flawed. it'd undoubtedly lead to fewer men using the women and those that did so could be prosecuted. If there are fewer men going out to usedesperate women for sex, demand decreases. Are you syaing it was perviosuly illegal only for the prostitute and not the client in Sweden?Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
i disagree. i'm used to such arguments but they don't sound harsh to me, just more based on a desire to come to a particular conclusion than on the evidence on display. If wanting people to understand that using a woman for sex when she's essentially sick and exploititive is tery eyed, well, why shouldn't it be, considering what these poor women are put through? They need society's help to get out of prostituition, not wishful arguments for legitimising the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
Ok, here is more problems. The percentage of women who've suffered sexual asault will off-course vary regarding where you put the limit. If the limit is set at full vaginal intercourse it'll probably be a whole lot lower than 33%.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
Your just assuming that prostitutes are a damaged group of people who wouldn't do it if they had a choice. There's quite a few very vocal prostitutes in Germany, (where it's legal) who would disagree. The only reason they don't speak up in Brittain or Sweden, is because it'll make their job more difficult.
The reason anybody would work with prostitution is off-course that it's very well paid in relation to the amount of work done.
But you made your stance pretty clear. You have a moralistic stance where you're saying prostitution is disgusting. But it's no case for anything. You might as well quote the bible.
I hope you agree that in a free society people should be free to make whatever choices they do, no matter how much other people might think it "disgusting"? As long as it isn't rubbed in their faces off-course. Scat sex is legal and is well kept indoors :)
It's a valid case and I've read plenty of books on psychoanalysis which coroborate this. But lets not get away from the issue. Just becuase rape isn't about sex, doesn't effect the issue of prostitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
Yes, but here is the logical gap. If they didn't get money from prostitution, they'd need to get it from somewhere else, right? If they're addicts and they aren't getting rehab they're fresh out of choices. I wouldn't call a man taking advantage of her predicament as preying on her. This is how capitalism work. If your needs are very high, then you need to raise the cash somehow.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
But this is all assuming most prostitutes are crack-heads. Last year I read a report on prostitution in Stockholm done by our crime prevention govornement agency. It concluded that most Stockholm prostitutes where university students, (that's grad school in USA). And yes they did it out of financial desperation. They didn't want to take loans, or work at McDonalds which is highly understandable.
Google "Felicitas Wiegmann" if you want to hear what a very vocal German prostitution proponent and prostitute has to say on the matter.
No, it has no impact what so ever on the number of men who use prostitutes. There's the same problem with drug laws. When both the buyer and seller are willing, they'll do what it takes to circumvent the law. In Iran they have the death penalty for prostitution, but it's just as prevalent there as anywhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
All numbers I have access to are in Swedish.
http://www.bra.se/
All there research is available free on pdf and easy to download. The kink is that you need to know Swedish :)
Just to be clear on this. This is a govornement agency, they're not allowed to have opinions, only publish numbers. The official Swedish govornement line is the same as yours. But it's not based on science.
I think you're being extremly judgemental without any arguments other than just opinons to back it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
From the same govorment agency I read a report on trafficking. ie forcibly taking women from where ever and forcing them to work in brothels for no money. The problem here is that it is all based on what the prostituted women say. If they tell the cops that they're forced to be there, they have everything to gain. They may get permanent visa. But if they came there by free will they'll invariably get sent back as an economic immigrant. Not to mention the social stigma. You have to be very careful when you read statistics. The ones who don't get caught we off-course hear nothing about.
I'm not saying all prostitution is great. But until I find any serious arguments against it I don't understand why we should keep it illegal. Right now prostitutes have very weak protection from the law because of it's illegal status. And all arguments I've heard against it so far are all moralistic.
edit: Just so you know. Prostitution isn't and has never been socialy acceptable in Sweden. That's why there's no movement what so ever here toward legalisation. It's not like further south in Europe. No man here would ever at a party suggest going to a prostitute. It just never happens. Not even when they're on holiday in Thailand. They might do it, but they'll never admit to it.
Actually that stat refers to any sexual abuse under the age of 18. It's from the UK Zero Tolerance project. I can link it, if you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
The rest might not be speaking out publicly, but you can't assume that if they did, they'd be talking about how wonderful it is, particularly given the conditions they work under. One "happy hooker" doesn't negate what prostituition does to women. Some might go in and come out of the industry relatively unscathed, but these can't be held up as proof that all do. See this document for more: http://www.icasa.org/uploads/prostitution.pdfQuote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
Particualrly the part which says 96% of prostitutes claimed they entered the profession because they saw no other option.
See above.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
There's a huge difference between opposing pornography based on a 2000 year old and text and supporting the illegalisation of buying sex for reasons such as these from the document above.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
68% of respondents had been raped while prostituiting.
82% had been beaten.
These prostitutes aren't hurting themselves. Those stats say a hell of a lot about the type of man that frequents prostitutes in my opinion, and society as a whole would benefit from those men not being out on the streets.
I don't anyone legal sexual practice because it's disgusting, but instead decide thse things based on whether or not harm is endemic in the act, or the act depends on human desperation and misery.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
And why does that excuse society leaving women in the position where they have to sell themselves to earn this money instead of providing them with benefits/housing/jobs/training? Our own ambivalence? That just isn't good enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
Thismust be a cultural difference. In Glasgow, the nearest city to my home, well over 90% of prostitutes had substance abuse issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
I can give you links to anti-porn accounts, but one person's testimony doesn't prove anything either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
You haven't actually provided much beyond opinion either, actually. I think we maybe reaching a stalemate here. Arguing opinion, spicially when our experiences are based on such different cultures, can only go so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
I agree, any statistics can be misleading. From both sides of the argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
What's wrong with basing you opinion on morality? I think it's immoral to exploit women in need, so it motivates my opinion. To some extent I think morality influences every ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
I wish they would: it'd tell me which men to stay WELL away from. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
MCDonalds is always hiring. There's always options. They might tell themselves that but truth is that they don't have to do it. Nobody in the west has to do jack shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
All men who go to prostitututes or just the ones who beat them? I'm just gauging your views on the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
You still haven't explained while prostitution is endemically harmful? In Sweden its legal status means that its very hard for the state to keep an eye on them. In Germany most prostitutes work in brothels where the security is very tight. If your main issue with prostitution is the number or rapes or beatings, making it legal will solve the problem, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
You're just assuming they have to sell themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
It also helps if your hometown is a huge university city. Stockholm university is massive compared to the size of Stockholm. I got surprised when I read it to. Off-course when your doing studies on something shady the statistics will always be ify. Its legal status makes it very hard.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
We have the worst subsatance abuse rehab system in Europe. No country gives less money per capita to it than us. Not by far. We have the highest mortality rate of drug adicts in all of Europe.
We also have a zero tollerance system both against drugs and prostitution. Sweden proves that moralism doesn't work. Making it illegal doesn't protect the women. The logical error here is always that stuff made illegal will stop or recede. I think it's helpful to think of a market as a powerful river. We can't stop it with laws, only limit it's damages by channeling it into less damaging areas.
Well, hers does. She was to a large part responsible of making it legal in Germany.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
I don't think Scotland and Sweden are all that different culturaly. Scotland has a Calvinist background which is Martin Luther on steroids. Same extreme moralistic foundation.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
Not morality, moralism. Ok, I'll rewrite your sentance a smidgeon and you might see what I mean with moralism.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~*crimson_flower*~
"I think it's immoral to help a women in need, so it motivates my opinion."
The same sentance but moralistically different slant. Your assuming that everybody who pays for sex are taking advantage of the prostitute. You make the sex buyer look like a monster. I just don't see it. As with any bussiness transaction it can go better or worse. I don't believe the woman is always on the losing end.
If she's on drugs she needs to raise lots of money. You haven't explained how she would do it if she didn't prostitute herself? Men on heroin steal stuff. Is that in any way better? I'd argue that it isn't safer for the woman in the least.
But this is assuming most prostitutes are on drugs. How about escorts? They don't have to fuck if they don't want to. Are they prostitutes? Or the people working at the local swingers club here. They fuck for money? In a sense. Shitty pay though :)
My point is that I know women who are sluts. Women who actually like fucking. And who aren't too picky. They just like plenty of cock. My ex was just like it. She told me that if she had been in a financial squeeze when it came to money she'd do it in a second. We even talked about how we would set it up.
I personally think you're just projecting. You assume that just because you would never sell your body for money, that no woman would do it if they didn't have to. People are different. When I was younger I've been offered money by gay men for sex, and I've been very tempted. I'm just not particularly gay, so I passed on it.
I think it comes down to how big a deal you personaly think sex is. A lot of women think its something sacred only to be given out of love. This raises the price on it for the women who don't share this view. Capitalism at work.
In my opinion, claiming a society has the right to make prositution illegal implies a degree of ownership over people's bodies that is difficult to justify with an argument of preventing a threat to the social order. Gambling and alcohol have been addressed as such, and attempts to stifle them didn't work much, and when those were reversed, and they were legalized and regulated, the damage was minimized.
And looking at it simply as an unpopular, mind damaging, corrupting vocation is just silly too; now-routine tasks like working machinery, sailing, or acting were once considered unhealthy, suicidal or unwholesome.