Prostitution

[munnki]

When the Ipswich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipswich_2006_serial_murders) murders happened a few years ago, I followed the case with some interest. The killer seemed to have quite a lot in common with the Green River (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Ridgway)killer in the United States. They preyed on prostitutes, vulnerable women in those particular societies because the illegality of their profession or its lack of protections had pushed them to the edges of towns and into anonymous, vulnerable circumstances.

In fact, prostitutes have been the favoured prey of serial killers ever since Jack the Ripper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_the_ripper) brought the profession into the modern era. Women, in general, have tended to be targets for these killers but prostitutes, in particular, have always provided easy pickings. Before he was executed, Ted Bundy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_bundy), talked about the role pornography and sexual imagery played in making him into a serial killer.

The Ipswich case made huge news in the UK. Happening close to Christmas it seemed that every day a fresh body was being found and fresh interviews with prostitutes were emerging saying how they felt threatened and endangered but still they took to the streets. One of his victims was, in fact, interviewed by the media shortly before being killed.

Which leads me to my question. Shouldn't prostitution be legal? Wouldn't the women be better protected from abusers and murderers? Wouldn't the client have better protections against STDs and AIDS? Wouldn't the women be able to ensure themselves a stable income? Why isn't prostitution legal in many Western countries and the US? Yes, I know it is, in parts, but why not in a more general way?

What are your thoughts?

It seems that only in central Europe is the industry protected and legal.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/Prostitution_in_Europe.png

Green - Prostitution legal and regulated
Blue - Prostitution legal but organized procuring illegal
Red - Prostitution illegal
Grey - No data

Sourced from here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_prostitution).


The legal status of prostitution varies from country to country, from being perfectly legal and considered a profession to being punishable by death[1]. Some jurisdictions outlaw the act of prostitution (the exchange of sexual services for money); other countries do not prohibit prostitution itself, but ban the activities typically associated with it (soliciting in a public place, operating a brothel, pimping etc), making it difficult to engage in prostitution without breaking any law; while in a few countries prostitution is legal and regulated.

[Pendaric]

What do the colours on your map represent?

Anyway, yes to all questions, provided the women are not being coerced in to the situation. Consenting adults should be able to do what they want with their bodies.

[Danhalen]

Shouldn't prostitution be legal?I see no reason why prostitution should be illegal. I don't think morality ought to be legislated. So yes, I think prostitution should be decriminalized.

Wouldn't the women be better protected from abusers and murderers?If prostitution were legal, prostitutes would probably have better protection from assault because they could legally turn to the authorities to report such crimes occurring without fear of being arrested for their job.

Wouldn't the client have better protections against STDs and AIDS?Both the client and the provider would be better protected because I'm sure the standards of such an industry would have to be regulated by the government.

Wouldn't the women be able to ensure themselves a stable income?Prostitutes would probably be able to have more control over their income if the government was regulating the industry.

Why isn't prostitution legal in many Western countries and the US? Yes, I know it is, in parts, but why not in a more general way?Here's where I go all feminist. If you look at your questions you will notice a pattern. Every time you invoke gender, in reference to prostitution, you refer to women. I think the covert sexism of the west is why prostitution is illegal. It is true that the sex industry caters mostly to men, and so it is fair to gender the conversation with a bias toward men. However, I think that a generic conversation concerning prostitution ought to take into account male prostitutes as well. The exclusion of males as prostitutes brings me to the answer of your final question. Prostitution is illegal because men tend to want to have control over sex. Making prostitution illegal is a way for men to control women's bodies. I think we also tend not to think of men (of age) as victims when they are prostitutes, but we do tend to think of women as such. This goes toward the conclusion that we inherently feel that men have some kind of control over their bodies which women lack. So, while common wisdom will tell us that prostitution is sexist against women, I think that criminalizing prostitution is a kind of subliminal sexism which seeks to keep women from taking control over their own bodies in any way they see fit.

[Anne]

I'm with you guys.

It'd be interesting to see the crime stats comparing the areas, but even with no changes, I'm with you guys.

Nevada here is the only state that has it legal, as well.

Interesting stats on crime there, vs the rest of the states.


In the year 2000 Nevada had an estimated population of 1,998,257 which ranked the state 35th in population.

For that year the State of Nevada had a total Crime Index of 4,268.6 reported incidents per 100,000 people. This ranked the state as having the 21st highest total Crime Index.

For Violent Crime Nevada had a reported incident rate of 524.2 per 100,000 people. This ranked the state as having the 15th highest occurrence for Violent Crime among the states.

For crimes against Property, the state had a reported incident rate of 3,744.4 per 100,000 people, which ranked as the state 21st highest.

Also in the year 2000 Nevada had 6.5 Murders per 100,000 people, ranking the state as having the 12th highest rate for Murder.

Nevada’s 43.0 reported Forced Rapes per 100,000 people, ranked the state 8th highest.

For Robbery, per 100,000 people, Nevada’s rate was 227.3 which ranked the state 2nd highest for Robbery.

The state also had 247.3 Aggravated Assaults for every 100,000 people, which indexed the state as having the 25th highest position for this crime among the states.

For every 100,000 people there were 877.1 Burglaries, which ranks Nevada as having the 14th highest standing among the states.

Larceny - Theft were reported 2,208.2 times per hundred thousand people in Nevada which standing is the 34th highest among the states.

Vehicle Theft occurred 659.2 times per 100,000 people, which fixed the state as having the 2nd highest for vehicle theft among the states.

source:http://www.disastercenter.com

[Eudaimonist]

Shouldn't prostitution be legal?

Yes, I take a libertarian position on that issue.

What are the experiences of those central European nations with legal prostitution?


eudaimonia,

Mark

[munnki]

Here's where I go all feminist. If you look at your questions you will notice a pattern. Every time you invoke gender, in reference to prostitution, you refer to women. I think the covert sexism of the west is why prostitution is illegal. It is true that the sex industry caters mostly to men, and so it is fair to gender the conversation with a bias toward men. However, I think that a generic conversation concerning prostitution ought to take into account male prostitutes as well. The exclusion of males as prostitutes brings me to the answer of your final question. Prostitution is illegal because men tend to want to have control over sex. Making prostitution illegal is a way for men to control women's bodies. I think we also tend not to think of men (of age) as victims when they are prostitutes, but we do tend to think of women as such. This goes toward the conclusion that we inherently feel that men have some kind of control over their bodies which women lack. So, while common wisdom will tell us that prostitution is sexist against women, I think that criminalizing prostitution is a kind of subliminal sexism which seeks to keep women from taking control over their own bodies in any way they see fit.

It's true that my op was discussing prostitution only with reference to females and interesting that I didn't think about this when I made the posting. I am aware that males work within the profession but I do, perhaps wrongly, see something of a categorical difference. I'm not sure if it's a prejudice though. Perhaps I was thinking that there is a greater likelihood of a male enacting violence on a female in the context of this profession, rather than the converse. As to the world of homosexual prostitution - I don't know enough. Certainly in the world of serial killers, the Dahmer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer) case revealed that male homosexual violence forms part of that murky underworld. There is a gender difference in this... but I don't think there is prejudice... I'm not sure.

[Danhalen]

It's true that my op was discussing prostitution only with reference to females and interesting that I didn't think about this when I made the posting. I am aware that males work within the profession but I do, perhaps wrongly, see something of a categorical difference. I'm not sure if it's a prejudice though.It is a prejudice, but there's nothing wrong with having prejudices. Some prejudices are justified, and perhaps yours is.

Perhaps I was thinking that there is a greater likelihood of a male enacting violence on a female in the context of this profession, rather than the converse.I think there is a greater likelihood of males enacting violence--in general--than women. This is a prejudice we probably both share.

As to the world of homosexual prostitution - I don't know enough. Certainly in the world of serial killers, the Dahmer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer) case revealed that male homosexual violence forms part of that murky underworld. There is a gender difference in this... but I don't think there is prejudice... I'm not sure.Dahmer grew up practically down the street from where I live. We heard way too much about that guy. I think the serial killers as examples may be skewing things a bit. No matter how you slice the data up, serial killers are always the exception to the rule. Prostitution, whether gay or straight, always carries some risk that prostitutes may be the victims of violence because they must make themselves vulnerable to an unknown entity in a private environment.

[Anne]

I think there is a greater likelihood of males enacting violence--in general--than women. This is a prejudice we probably both share.

Aren't most patrons of prostitutes male, regardless of the gender of the worker?

[munnki]

Sure... it's a much more tenuous link than the more general but less final violence that a woman working as a prostitute might encounter - but there are links between the two. Serial killers and murderers will always exist on the extreme end of the continuum but there's even the case of the 'first' female serial killer, Aileen Wuornos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Wuornos), who herself was involved in the industry and a victim of abuse within it. So yes, I accept the criticisms... but I find the link interesting...

[Anne]

I like the 'first' in quotes. ;)

Yeah, most female serial killers are not the type we think of (Dahmer) but more Angels of Mercy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_of_Mercy_%28serial_killer%29) style killers.

They'll prey on the old and sick over the disadvantaged and poor.

[Christina]

I don't disagree with anything here but it's interesting to me to look at it from the opposite side. What reasons could there be to keep prostitution illegal other than the control that Danhalen mentions or religious prudes forcing their moral values on others? I can't think of any that make sense.

[Anne]

Good question.

Well, my dad's answer to everything like this is always make it legal and tax the hell out of it.

[Danhalen]

I don't disagree with anything here but it's interesting to me to look at it from the opposite side. What reasons could there be to keep prostitution illegal other than the control that Danhalen mentions or religious prudes forcing their moral values on others? I can't think of any that make sense.Considering that western religions are overwhelmingly patriarchal in nature, I'm not sure the control issue is separate from the religious prude issue.

[Danhalen]

I think there is a greater likelihood of males enacting violence--in general--than women. This is a prejudice we probably both share.

Aren't most patrons of prostitutes male, regardless of the gender of the worker?I can't say that I know it is a fact, but I think you are correct.

[Danhalen]

So yes, I accept the criticisms... but I find the link interesting...I like you links too.

[DMB]

If all aspects of the sex industry are legalised, what kinds of controls and regulations would you propose? Many people working as prostitutes are marginalised even without taking account of their work. There is considerable exploitation of minors of both sexes and a lot of cross-border trafficking of young women. What sort of protection ought to be in place?

[Greatest I am]

Recognizing that many prostitutes, about 1/3 are there because of abuse in the home, as part of the legislation legalizing prostitution, I would like to see a public trial and law suit attached to each of these abused children before they can be licensed.

This would help to bring down the numbers of prostitutes that are basically forced into the profession.

It would also send a clear message to fathers to stop doing their own children and to the mothers, to stop ignoring abuse and turning on their own children.

I see prostitution as the lowest form of slavery but cannot see myself voting against those that have already been and continue to be abused by society.

Regards
DL

[munnki]

Greatest, I miss you saying 'Ta ta' - can you continue that? Good point though, but saying that, I think that states which allow for regulation of the industry are the ones most likely to put in place procedures which look at the backgrounds of the candidates. The kind of tests you propose are somewhat futuristic perhaps but I think Germany for example ensures access to psychiatrists for prostitutes as well as ensuring that they are protected, providing regular STD/AIDS tests and ensuring that they pay taxes which might piss em off somewhat but it also lets them know that they are included. Sending messages of exclusion to already excluded people can't really be a good thing, methinks.

[Greatest I am]

Greatest, I miss you saying 'Ta ta' - can you continue that? Good point though, but saying that, I think that states which allow for regulation of the industry are the ones most likely to put in place procedures which look at the backgrounds of the candidates. The kind of tests you propose are somewhat futuristic perhaps but I think Germany for example ensures access to psychiatrists for prostitutes as well as ensuring that they are protected, providing regular STD/AIDS tests and ensuring that they pay taxes which might piss em off somewhat but it also lets them know that they are included. Sending messages of exclusion to already excluded people can't really be a good thing, methinks.

You would be right.

Doctors and shrinks are good but a lawyer is more useful in this case if it is a moral message that you are trying to send to all parents who abuse their children and force them into the streets.

I will try to maintain my proper sign off here but I am forgetful.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Angra Mainyu]

Here's where I go all feminist. If you look at your questions you will notice a pattern. Every time you invoke gender, in reference to prostitution, you refer to women. I think the covert sexism of the west is why prostitution is illegal. It is true that the sex industry caters mostly to men, and so it is fair to gender the conversation with a bias toward men. However, I think that a generic conversation concerning prostitution ought to take into account male prostitutes as well. The exclusion of males as prostitutes brings me to the answer of your final question. Prostitution is illegal because men tend to want to have control over sex. Making prostitution illegal is a way for men to control women's bodies. I think we also tend not to think of men (of age) as victims when they are prostitutes, but we do tend to think of women as such. This goes toward the conclusion that we inherently feel that men have some kind of control over their bodies which women lack. So, while common wisdom will tell us that prostitution is sexist against women, I think that criminalizing prostitution is a kind of subliminal sexism which seeks to keep women from taking control over their own bodies in any way they see fit.
I'm not sure that that applies to countries like Sweden, Norway and Iceland, where paying for sex is a crime, but getting paid is not.

Many feminists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_prostitution#Outlawing_of_buying _sexual_services) are in (http://sisyphe.org/spip.php?article1424) favor (http://www.fcap.btik.com/) of that kind of legislation.

[His Noodly Appendage]

Prostitution is perfectly legal here in Australia. I can name you half a dozen openly-advertised brothels within walking distance. You can find them in the frickin' Yellow Pages (http://www.yellowpages.com.au/search/postCategorySearch.do?headingCode=18058&sortByDetail=true&includeSurroundingSuburbs=false&sortByAlphabetical=false&bookId=1&businessType=escorts&sortByClosestMatch=false&areaId=1054&sortByDistance=false&stateId=1&autoExpansionAllowed=true&safeLocationClue=sydney&currentLetter=&locationClue=sydney&locationText=Greater+Sydney+NSW), ffs.

Perfectly sane and sensible. The business and the workers are protected and regulated, just like any other industry. OHS regulations, annual leave, the works. Hell, there's even a Sex Worker's Union (http://www.scarletalliance.org.au/).

I wouldn't have it any other way.

[Eudaimonist]

I wouldn't have it any other way.

How do Australian women in general feel about it?


eudaimonia,

Mark

[Eudaimonist]

If all aspects of the sex industry are legalised, what kinds of controls and regulations would you propose?

Few, if any. The kinds of laws that could apply to anyone (contract law, common law, civil rights, etc) seem sufficient.

I would not impose special taxes on prostitution. Government prostitutes itself out to special interests enough already, I don't want to see it become the head pimp eager for more tax revenues from prostitution.


eudaimonia,

Mark

[Octavia]

Prostitution is perfectly legal here in Australia. I can name you half a dozen openly-advertised brothels within walking distance. You can find them in the frickin' Yellow Pages (http://www.yellowpages.com.au/search/postCategorySearch.do?headingCode=18058&sortByDetail=true&includeSurroundingSuburbs=false&sortByAlphabetical=false&bookId=1&businessType=escorts&sortByClosestMatch=false&areaId=1054&sortByDistance=false&stateId=1&autoExpansionAllowed=true&safeLocationClue=sydney&currentLetter=&locationClue=sydney&locationText=Greater+Sydney+NSW), ffs.

Perfectly sane and sensible. The business and the workers are protected and regulated, just like any other industry. OHS regulations, annual leave, the works. Hell, there's even a Sex Worker's Union (http://www.scarletalliance.org.au/).

I wouldn't have it any other way.

It's the same in NZ.

[Danhalen]

I'm not sure that that applies to countries like Sweden, Norway and Iceland, where paying for sex is a crime, but getting paid is not.

Many feminists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_prostitution#Outlawing_of_buying _sexual_services) are in (http://sisyphe.org/spip.php?article1424) favor (http://www.fcap.btik.com/) of that kind of legislation.Thanks for the links. That's very interesting.

[David B]

Don't get it.

The idea that paying for sex is violence against women who want to sell it seems to me rather like saying that paying for vegetables is violence against greengrocers.

David

Da

[munnki]

Sweden's legislation on prostitution, in my view, is effectively useless in that it seems to me it will simply move prostitution back into the underworld. With the exchange between client and server being made illegal one-way - it's really no different, given that these exchanges will occur, than making the whole process illegal. All the law does is recognize the gender imbalance in the transaction but in doing so it seems to prevent the transaction from taking place safely.

I suppose what I mean is this. Prostitution isn't going anywhere. Or perhaps I can't say that - I'll rephrase. It's unlikely that the prostitution will cease to exist in the future and therefore it needs to be legislated for in ways which recognize that it isn't going anywhere. As such, the laws needs to describe the transaction, as it actually occurs, and then regulate that transaction with maximal protections applied. The protections are two-way and not single-gendered. If I happened to catch AIDS from a prostitute, no matter how unethical you find the act, I hope you wouldn't wish death upon me. Similarly if I happened to get robbed during the experience. I don't mention the huge array of crimes that can be visited upon a female during the transaction because they are listed above and, I would suspect, are in the majority as opposed to crimes against the John. But the point still stands.

The feminist argument alluded to above says that all transactions in prostitution are 'rape' but that is a hopelessly radical and unhelpful point of view to take, especially if one has to legislate for it. The fact is that there do exist, in all likelihood, women who are prepared to take money for sex - and therefore not all transactions in prostitution are rape. Furthermore there is clear and documented evidence of women working willingly in the pornographic industry (which I'll accept is a somewhat different game - but, to me, working in porn is simply working in prostitution with better protections - somebody is watching but money is still changing hands). In countries which legislate for prostitution there are women who work in the field by choice and who are not drug addicts and who have unions etc... This does not coincide with all of these women feeling that they are victims of rape - the hat does not fit.

My view is that if law is to be of any practical use at all it needs to take into account what actually happens in society as well as what model the society is built on. Otherwise you have a massive and unhelpful gap between the law and what is actually done. To give an example from UK copyright law, you cannot legally purchase a cd in the UK and then copy it onto your iPhone or iPod - it's illegal. It's worth asking what purpose a law like this serves given that tens of thousands of people could suddenly find themselves paying fines or in prison should such a law ever be applied? Returning to the point, if you look at the soundbites from a reform website (http://www.prostitutionreform.co.uk/) (and, of course, statistics are not available for these sorts of issues!) a clear rise in the number of working girls in the UK is evident. On top of that we get to read grisly stories of trafficking, importing, slavery, etc... much of which would be entirely unnecessary should proper reforms and protections be put in place.

Our not doing that is a clear example of how a society will lie to itself, even with harmful results, in order to keep up a certain image of how things are.


Recent articles in the Times and the BBC have suggested that the use of prostitutes in the UK has doubled over the last ten years. At the same time, the numbers of women being trafficked from Eastern Europe, Africa and the Far East and being held in sexual slavery in the UK has dramatically increased....

Currently in the UK, prostitution is not illegal however the laws serve to make providing sex in exchange for money difficult and dangerous. Soliciting (advertising sexual services), streetwalking and brothels (where more than one woman sells sex in an apartment) are illegal. Kerb crawling is illegal in most of the UK but different laws apply in Scotland. These laws are currently under review and a draft bill is in the process of consultation. In all of the UK, paying for sex with a woman is not illegal. These laws firmly place the criminality of prostitution on the women. Why does the law criminalise the supply of sexual services but not the demand? With other illegal activities such as drugs, both the supply and the demand are criminalised.

These laws firmly fail women who have been trafficked into the UK or any woman who has been coerced or forced to some extent into prostitution. If they are caught in a brothel they have committed an offence under the law and may be given a jail sentence, or more normally a trafficked woman is deported back to her country of origin where she is often met by traffickers. She may be trafficked to a new destination so that the nightmare continues.

[Greatest I am]

Prostitution is perfectly legal here in Australia. I can name you half a dozen openly-advertised brothels within walking distance. You can find them in the frickin' Yellow Pages (http://www.yellowpages.com.au/search/postCategorySearch.do?headingCode=18058&sortByDetail=true&includeSurroundingSuburbs=false&sortByAlphabetical=false&bookId=1&businessType=escorts&sortByClosestMatch=false&areaId=1054&sortByDistance=false&stateId=1&autoExpansionAllowed=true&safeLocationClue=sydney&currentLetter=&locationClue=sydney&locationText=Greater+Sydney+NSW), ffs.

Perfectly sane and sensible. The business and the workers are protected and regulated, just like any other industry. OHS regulations, annual leave, the works. Hell, there's even a Sex Worker's Union (http://www.scarletalliance.org.au/).

I wouldn't have it any other way.

Yep. Nothing is better to help us foster respect for humans than the power to buy one.

Would you like your daughter to be in that business?
Would you avail yourself of her services?

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

Good point. I'll have to remember that next time I ask a waiter for a drink.

'Buying people' is not the same as 'paying for a service rendered willingly'.

[Worldtraveller]

Good point. I'll have to remember that next time I ask a waiter for a drink.

'Buying people' is not the same as 'paying for a service rendered willingly'.
Aww, gee, don't get in the way of the faux outrage, it's fun to watch. :)

Seriously, having spent a bit over a year in Germany (Hamburg, home to the second largest red light district in Europe), I can say that legalizing would be the way to go.

For those who are against legalizing it, can you explain a real difference between prostitution and any manual labor type job (many of which have even higher risk factors) one gets paid to do?

Hell, most of us would have sex for free. Being paid for it would be icing. :D

[Greatest I am]

Good point. I'll have to remember that next time I ask a waiter for a drink.

'Buying people' is not the same as 'paying for a service rendered willingly'.

I have a brother who has no morals and uses and abuses prostitutes on a regular basis.

I have asked him if he would like his daughters to be prostitutes and he said that he would not mind.

I created a scenario for him that had one daughter as a dentist and the other daughter as a prostitute.

He said that he would used the services of the dentist daughter but, thank God he still has some sense, because he did decline to use his prostitute daughter.

There is hope for everyone.

Strange that fathers do not mind screwing someone else's daughter but balk at others using their daughters the same way.

A double standard created in their own minds to hide their depravity.

Men know of this double standard but ignore it to follow their dicks instead of leading them.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Danhalen]

Would you like your daughter to be in that business?
Would you avail yourself of her services?Since I have sons, I'd prefer they were prostitutes rather than work for Halliburton. To ask if someone would pay for sex with his or her own child is ridiculous. Would you have free sex with your daughter?

[Greatest I am]

Good point. I'll have to remember that next time I ask a waiter for a drink.

'Buying people' is not the same as 'paying for a service rendered willingly'.
Aww, gee, don't get in the way of the faux outrage, it's fun to watch. :)

Seriously, having spent a bit over a year in Germany (Hamburg, home to the second largest red light district in Europe), I can say that legalizing would be the way to go.

For those who are against legalizing it, can you explain a real difference between prostitution and any manual labor type job (many of which have even higher risk factors) one gets paid to do?

Hell, most of us would have sex for free. Being paid for it would be icing. :D

I too would legalize but unlike you, I would do it so as not to abuse those that have already been abused.

You are a good example of someone thinking with their dicks.

Would you use the services of your own daughter?


Ta ta
Jailbird

[Daynna]

Every woman is SOMEONE'S daughter. Ban sex with women!

[munnki]

Strange that fathers do not mind screwing someone else's daughter but balk at others using their daughters the same way.

It isn't strange at all, Greatest. No stranger than the fact that people are protective about their own children but less so than those of others. Given the number of people we interact with over time - the majority of those will not be family members. Therefore we should not expect other people to behave as if they are family and we are brothers/sisters.

We can have a utopian conversation and say things like 'wouldn't that be nice' and we can have meetings with/interactions with people that are brilliant, positive, loving..etc... but when we are discussing issues in the actually-existing world and as they are really done - it helps to regard people in terms of their real behaviour rather than by using judgments of what we think they should be. So even if we say, "wouldn't it be great if there was no prostitution", the only response is, "well, there is - what are we going to do about it?" And my argument to the response is listed in my posting above.

[Greatest I am]

Would you like your daughter to be in that business?
Would you avail yourself of her services?Since I have sons, I'd prefer they were prostitutes rather than work for Halliburton. To ask if someone would pay for sex with his or her own child is ridiculous. Would you have free sex with your daughter?

Why is that ridiculous?

If it is just business then why not support your own kin?

You would if she was a dentist. Why not if she is a prostitute?
Would you let her go hungry while you screw some other man's daughter?

What is the difference? A dick is a dick.

BTW. Nothing like wanting the best for your boys.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

Every woman is SOMEONE'S daughter. Ban sex with women!

Another example of a talking dick.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

Strange that fathers do not mind screwing someone else's daughter but balk at others using their daughters the same way.

It isn't strange at all, Greatest. No stranger than the fact that people are protective about their own children but less so than those of others. Given the number of people we interact with over time - the majority of those will not be family members. Therefore we should not expect other people to behave as if they are family and we are brothers/sisters.

We can have a utopian conversation and say things like 'wouldn't that be nice' and we can have meetings with/interactions with people that are brilliant, positive, loving..etc... but when we are discussing issues in the actually-existing world and as they are really done - it helps to regard people in terms of their real behaviour rather than by using judgments of what we think they should be. So even if we say, "wouldn't it be great if there was no prostitution", the only response is, "well, there is - what are we going to do about it?" And my argument to the response is listed in my posting above.

As I said above, I would not vote to abuse the abused any more than they already have been and would legalize it but that does not mean that I should put on the blinders and not recognize prostitution as the most degrading form of --work--for humans.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Danhalen]

Why is that ridiculous?

If it is just business then why not support your own kin?It's ridiculous because most people have no desire to have sex with their own children. We, as a species, tend to desire to spread our genes as far and wide as possible. Having sex with your own child is counter-productive to that end.

You would if she was a dentist. Why not if she is a prostitute?First of all, I am not attracted to people who share genes with me. Secondly, I do not think I can be aroused if I am paying for sex. It's not an industry I would use. I'm just not interested, and my wife's libido is more than sufficient. Just like I don't, and won't, own a gun, but I have no problems with people who do own guns.

Would you let her go hungry while you screw some other man's daughter?No. I'd give her some food. I'm already screwing some other man's daughter anyway. She's my wife.

What is the difference? A dick is a dick.There is a biological difference as I have already stated.

Since you feel that it's all the same, and a dick is just a dick, would you have sex with your daughter if she were not asking payment for services rendered? After all, you wouldn't have any problems with it if she were someone else's daughter.

[munnki]

...should put on the blinders and not recognize prostitution as the most degrading form of --work--for humans.


I can think of far more degrading jobs than being a prostitute. In fact, I'm marginally offended that you think that it is the lowest form of job. Military commander, priest, politician, ... I can think of hundreds of professions worse than the oldest one.... Why should a woman offering sex for money be the worst of professions?

[Greatest I am]

Danhalen

How many Johns go to a prostitute to sped there genes by impregnating them?
Give your head a shake instead of your dick.

If most people did not desire sex with there own children, the number of prostitutes would decline by 30%.

Your wife’s libido is sufficient for you but what if yours was not up to what she wanted. Would you encourage her to go and get what she needs for pay?

Ta at
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

...should put on the blinders and not recognize prostitution as the most degrading form of --work--for humans.


I can think of far more degrading jobs than being a prostitute. In fact, I'm marginally offended that you think that it is the lowest form of job. Military commander, priest, politician, ... I can think of hundreds of professions worse than the oldest one.... Why should a woman offering sex for money be the worst of professions?

Because if your daughter, you would use her in any other profession and, I hope would not, if she were a prostitute.

Am I right here and do you see the diference?

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Danhalen]

How many Johns go to a prostitute to sped there genes by impregnating them?The biological desire to have sex is brought on by a biological desire to spread your genes. It is a subconscious desire. Most people don't know about that, and even more don't think about it.

If most people did not desire sex with there own children, the number of prostitutes would decline by 30%.That is simply an absurd claim which didn't even merit this much of a response.

Your wife’s libido is sufficient for you but what if yours was not up to what she wanted. Would you encourage her to go and get what she needs for pay?Nope. There are biological reasons for that as well as psychological.

I have answered your questions. Now you answer mine. Since you assert that sex is just sex, and there is no difference between having sex with one man's daughter or an other's, would you have sex with your daughter if she was not taking payment for a service rendered?

[munnki]

Greatest,
We're talking about the real world. A world that is, indeed, infinite but the things we know about this world come from and through investigation. One of the pieces of evidence produced through such investigation is that people don't treat each other generally like brothers and sisters (whatever the hell that might mean given the variety of familial relationships and their differences), nor are they wholly evil to each other either, human relationships are complex, context-dependent, culturally-dependent and indeed dependent on a wide array of factors. The question, should X lie with a prostitute or not is a question of morality and will have a variety of answers depending on the judgment of the individual - it is a subjective question. The question how many Xs sleep with prostitutes is statistically measurable or, at least, quantifiable to some degree - it is an objective question - true for more than one or many people, indeed, for all people provided the data is reliable etc....

So let's say we've established that people do sleep with prostitutes - irrespective of the subjective judgment of the observer. In otherwords, they're gonna fuck regardless of what you think. Then what should we, observing this phenomenon, do about it.

Be aware that if your reply is to do with the morality of the act rather than the legislating for it - I may have to say 'meh' in my next post and then ignore you.

As to my comment above, I would rather, on any planet you choose, have a daughter who would sell her body for sex than have her ordering troops into war, lying to communities for a living or preaching bullshit to people and furthering ignorance. There's no shame in charging for sex...but, god damn, there is to spreading murder, fear and inequality.

Blah blah,
Munnki

[Greatest I am]

How many Johns go to a prostitute to sped there genes by impregnating them?The biological desire to have sex is brought on by a biological desire to spread your genes. It is a subconscious desire. Most people don't know about that, and even more don't think about it.

If most people did not desire sex with there own children, the number of prostitutes would decline by 30%.That is simply an absurd claim which didn't even merit this much of a response.

B S.
What % of prostitutes are there because of abuse in the home by fathers and other friends and family? You do not like my number so let's see what your research comes up with.

Your wife’s libido is sufficient for you but what if yours was not up to what she wanted. Would you encourage her to go and get what she needs for pay?Nope. There are biological reasons for that as well as psychological.

I did not think so. A double standard.

I have answered your questions. Now you answer mine. Since you assert that sex is just sex, and there is no difference between having sex with one man's daughter or an other's, would you have sex with your daughter if she was not taking payment for a service rendered?

I did not say that sex was just sex. If I did, I would not be taking the stance that I do. Show the context.

I would not have sex with my daughter regardless of conditions. I would also not want her to be a prostitute.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

Greatest,
We're talking about the real world. A world that is, indeed, infinite but the things we know about this world come from and through investigation. One of the pieces of evidence produced through such investigation is that people don't treat each other generally like brothers and sisters (whatever the hell that might mean given the variety of familial relationships and their differences), nor are they wholly evil to each other either, human relationships are complex, context-dependent, culturally-dependent and indeed dependent on a wide array of factors. The question, should X lie with a prostitute or not is a question of morality and will have a variety of answers depending on the judgment of the individual - it is a subjective question. The question how many Xs sleep with prostitutes is statistically measurable or, at least, quantifiable to some degree - it is an objective question - true for more than one or many people, indeed, for all people provided the data is reliable etc....

So let's say we've established that people do sleep with prostitutes - irrespective of the subjective judgment of the observer. In otherwords, they're gonna fuck regardless of what you think. Then what should we, observing this phenomenon, do about it.

Blah blah,
Munnki

Nothing.

If it is consenting adults.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

I'm having issues with the 'use' left and right. Sex is not 'using' unless you allow it to be. Which can be fun. ;)

Or it's abuse.

Which is completely different.

[Danhalen]

B S.
What % of prostitutes are there because of abuse in the home by fathers and other friends and family? You do not like my number so let's see what your research comes up with.I won't do research for a claim you made. As far as I can tell, you pulled that number from your ass.

I did not think so. A double standard.I'm glad your opinion is worth more than scientific research (http://runews.rockefeller.edu/index.php?page=engine&id=352).

By the way, that's simply the first link I pulled up on a Google search. There's plenty of evidence out there to support my claim.

I did not say that sex was just sex. If I did, I would not be taking the stance that I do. Show the context.Your post (http://secularcafe.org/showthread.php?p=96664#post96664) is the context. Now, before you start claiming that I cannot attribute that stance to you because I'm taking you out of context, consider that you are providing a premise for my position and I am simply holding you to the same premise.

You are claiming that if I am OK with prostitution, then I am OK having sex with my prostitute child. That simply does not follow. If it does follow, then it also follows that you would have sex with your child as long as your child was not charging for it. That I am OK with prostitution does not entail that I am OK with incest.

I would not have sex with my daughter regardless of conditions. I would also not want her to be a prostitute.Why wouldn't you have sex with your daughter if she isn't charging? If it were consensual, what would be the problem? What makes it immoral? Isn't consensual and loving sex morally acceptable (as long as no one is being charged)? Besides, if you aren't doing it, someone else is going to. So it may as well be you giving her the good love.

[Greatest I am]

B S.
What % of prostitutes are there because of abuse in the home by fathers and other friends and family? You do not like my number so let's see what your research comes up with.I won't do research for a claim you made. As far as I can tell, you pulled that number from your ass.

I did not think so. A double standard.I'm glad your opinion is worth more than scientific research (http://runews.rockefeller.edu/index.php?page=engine&id=352).

By the way, that's simply the first link I pulled up on a Google search. There's plenty of evidence out there to support my claim.

I did not say that sex was just sex. If I did, I would not be taking the stance that I do. Show the context.Your post (http://secularcafe.org/showthread.php?p=96664#post96664) is the context. Now, before you start claiming that I cannot attribute that stance to you because I'm taking you out of context, consider that you are providing a premise for my position and I am simply holding you to the same premise.

You are claiming that if I am OK with prostitution, then I am OK having sex with my prostitute child. That simply does not follow. If it does follow, then it also follows that you would have sex with your child as long as your child was not charging for it. That I am OK with prostitution does not entail that I am OK with incest.

I would not have sex with my daughter regardless of conditions. I would also not want her to be a prostitute.Why wouldn't you have sex with your daughter if she isn't charging? If it were consensual, what would be the problem? What makes it immoral? Isn't consensual and loving sex morally acceptable (as long as no one is being charged)? Besides, if you aren't doing it, someone else is going to. So it may as well be you giving her the good love.

I resign here.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Alethias]

I resign here.

Ta ta
JailbirdI would just point out, Greatest I am, that you are the one that brought up the whole "What if it was your daughter" question in post #28 in this thread in an Answer to HNA, and you've used it in multiple ways since.

I think the answers you've gotten are reasonable answers. It seems to me that you are conflating the issue of incest with the morality of selling sex. They are related but different issues. Mixing them together confuses things instead of bringing about clarity.

[Anne]

Isn't there some code about doing surgery on your own kin? Or is that an urban legend?

[Daynna]

Every woman is SOMEONE'S daughter. Ban sex with women!

Another example of a talking dick.

Ta ta
Jailbird

You sure do like dick.

[Worldtraveller]

I too would legalize but unlike you, I would do it so as not to abuse those that have already been abused.

You are a good example of someone thinking with their dicks.

Would you use the services of your own daughter?


Ta ta
Jailbird
For someone who claims to be a xian, you sure are a judgemental prick.

Oh wait, that's redundant.

To address your strawman, no, I wouldn't have sex with any child of mine (although I don't have kids), but:
1) If it were legal, , I would use the services of your daughter.
2) If it were legal, any children of mine, either gender, would be able to work in whatever fashion they chose.

You are good example of someone who doesn't think at all.

[Worldtraveller]

I resign here.

Ta ta
JailbirdI would just point out, Greatest I am, that you are the one that brought up the whole "What if it was your daughter" question in post #28 in this thread in an Answer to HNA, and you've used it in multiple ways since.

I think the answers you've gotten are reasonable answers. It seems to me that you are conflating the issue of incest with the morality of selling sex. They are related but different issues. Mixing them together confuses things instead of bringing about clarity.
And his retreating shows that he's stupid and cowardly.

[Greatest I am]

I resign here.

Ta ta
JailbirdI would just point out, Greatest I am, that you are the one that brought up the whole "What if it was your daughter" question in post #28 in this thread in an Answer to HNA, and you've used it in multiple ways since.

I think the answers you've gotten are reasonable answers. It seems to me that you are conflating the issue of incest with the morality of selling sex. They are related but different issues. Mixing them together confuses things instead of bringing about clarity.

True to a certain extent. Incest is still a large contributing factor to prostitution.

I still resign from someone who has to be told why incest is evil.

Ta ta
Jailbird.

[Greatest I am]

I too would legalize but unlike you, I would do it so as not to abuse those that have already been abused.

You are a good example of someone thinking with their dicks.

Would you use the services of your own daughter?


Ta ta
Jailbird
For someone who claims to be a xian, you sure are a judgemental prick.

.


I do not claim to be a Christian and do I notice you judging me here?
The pot calling the kettle black.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Worldtraveller]

True to a certain extent. Incest is still a large contributing factor to prostitution.
Evidence for this assertion?

[Greatest I am]

True to a certain extent. Incest is still a large contributing factor to prostitution.
Evidence for this assertion?

If I need to supply such then you know nothing of the issue.

Google any information on the subject and teach yourself. I did.
The Canadian Royal commission on prostitution is a good starting point.

To think that incest an d abuse in the home is not a part of the supply side of prostitution is to walk with blinders on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd7M5uCkAMA&feature=PlayList&p=49D990CEF92A7CFE&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=92

Just in case you have lazy fingers.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

oh, ffs. gridfire for the chobo.

child prostitution is not and never will be legal prostitution. It's sex slavery/abuse.

[Danhalen]

I still resign from someone who has to be told why incest is evil.I have provided reasons why I would not commit incest. Given your assertion that being OK with prostitution means being OK with incest, it is up to you to provide a reason for incest not being OK if prostitution is not OK.

[Greatest I am]

oh, ffs. gridfire for the chobo.

child prostitution is not and never will be legal prostitution. It's sex slavery/abuse.

Perhaps but prostitution will always be a haven for children abused in the home.

If you look above, some do not care about age. The younger the better.

It, like many, just closes it's eyes to the supply side of fresh meat for the ranks of prostitutes.

Nice system.
NOT.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

I still resign from someone who has to be told why incest is evil.I have provided reasons why I would not commit incest. Given your assertion that being OK with prostitution means being OK with incest, .

I did not make such an assertion.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

You have said that anyone ok with prostitution would also be ok with incest.

And making it legal would allow law enforcement to cut down on the illegal kinds.

Good system, that actually puts criminals in jail. Yes.

[Greatest I am]

You have said that anyone ok with prostitution would also be ok with incest.

B S .

Show where I said this so that I can retract it quickly or explain the context.


And making it legal would allow law enforcement to cut down on the illegal kinds.

This is an assumption but it may not make an ass out of you.

I do not think there is any data to prove this though.

It is logical to assume that if more are on a legal menu then fewer will eat from the illegal one.

Good system, that actually puts criminals in jail. Yes.

I hope you are right.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

could you then explain your repeated question:

Would you use the services of your own daughter?


if not equating it with incest?

[Greatest I am]

could you then explain your repeated question:

Would you use the services of your own daughter?


if not equating it with incest?

I do equate prostitution with incest.

Even hardened John's know the difference.

I do not say that to legalize prostitution is to believe in incest.

I asked that question because some do not mind being with other peoples daughters but have a double standard for using the services of their own daughters even as they say that they would not mind their daughters being prostitutes. They are lying to themselves by thinking or saying that it is just another job.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[munnki]

Greatest I am, can you provide some documented evidence which provides a clear, evidenced link between incest and use of prostitutes. If in fact, as you say, some have no issue with sleeping with the daughters of others but will sleep with prostitutes - then that seems to me a clear proof that you believe the opposite to be the case i.e. that people will happily sleep with a prostitute provided they are not within the same family.

Moral assertions are not the same as assertions of fact. For example, I can say 'wouldn't it be nice if people didn't sleep with their own daughers' and I'm making a moral assertion. However, if I say, 'between 10% - 15% of a given population have experienced incest' and then define incest as 'any sexual activity between close relatives (often within the immediate family) irrespective of the ages of the participants and irrespective of their consent, that is illegal, socially taboo or contrary to a religious norm.' and then I add something like this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest). I am making a statement of fact and providing a source.

Ah but, you say, facts are contestable and context-dependant. Well, even if I accepted that, which in my dark moments I might. This is why we provide sources. So that the location from which the fact and/or set of facts can be disputed and debated.

Simple moral assertions, however poetic, are only useful as the precursor to or following point from statements of fact. Otherwise conversations tend to be rather dull series of personalized statements.

So, can you provide clear evidence to the link between the use of prostitutes and incestual sex? And then explain how you would use that link to legislate for, or not legislate for, the evidenced existence of prostitution? After that if you wouldn't mind explaining how people shunning sex with their kin but seeking sex with prostitutes fit in to your theory which seems to state just the opposite?

[Anne]

What's bugging me is the inherent 'sex is disgraceful to women' in this thread.

[munnki]

What's bugging me is the inherent 'sex is disgraceful to women' in this thread.

I hope you're not picking that up from my posts...

[Worldtraveller]

What's bugging me is the inherent 'sex is disgraceful to women' in this thread.
Only if yer not doin' it right, and that applies equally to both genders. ;)

[Anne]

No munnki. My timing makes it look that way.

It's the inherent belief that it's bad to have sex with a woman, how you'd want to avoid having your own daughters have sex (although I assume it's ok to 'use' their mom in that way'), and that women couldn't possibly want sex, and think getting paid for it is pretty damn cool.

I got none of that from your posts. At all. No sarcasm.

[Goodchild]

The older I get the more I realize that any realistic hope I ever have of sex with an asian woman lies in going to Nevada. Thank Atheismo for prostitution or I wouldn't even have that one shred of hope ;)

[munnki]

Sure... well anybody who's ever have decent and unselfish sex with a woman is in little doubt as to whether they enjoy it or not. As to whether women would enjoy getting paid for sex well I'd imagine there are women who feel that way. Here's a random article on such (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/256234/4_reasons_women_become_porn_stars.html) entitled '4 Reasons Women Become Porn Stars' which seems to argue as reasonably as anything else on the subject.


Search for Money
The porn business is a very lucrative industry. This is another reason why many women choose to become porn stars. In fact, money is one of the most common reasons people work in porn. Adult film stars like Jill Kelly and Jenna Jameson have millions of dollars. Their paycheck might not look like that of any newcomer. However, women do make a significant amount of money by performing in adult movies. It is not unheard of for a porn actress to earn a few thousand dollars for one day of work.

Nymphomaniac
This may be one of the most odd and unhealthy reasons why women become porn stars. However, many women do indeed enter the porn business because they have excessive sexual desires. This can be both exciting and harmful depending on the circumstances. The rise in STDs has probably tripled in the porn industry. Putting that aside, there are tons of women who enjoy working in porn movies. They get much satisfaction out of their interactions. To these individuals, the work itself is a great advantage of being a porn star.


No doubt a link between nymphomania and incest will emerge somewhere. I'd search for that in google only I'm not sure if I want the Feds reading my emails for the rest of my life.

[Anne]

In order for prostitution to be degrading, sex has to be degrading.

Otherwise, it's just a service for cash.

And there's a long slippery slope there about women who fuck for presents, now, isn't there? Only those whores are ok. And before you start thinking gold diggers, think 'housewife', who fucks to get a roof over her head.

[phands]

The older I get the more I realize that any realistic hope I ever have of sex with an asian woman lies in going to Nevada. Thank Atheismo for prostitution or I wouldn't even have that one shred of hope ;)

Just go to Kuala Lumpur. I was in a 5 star hotel there, and in the room was the usual mini-bar, tea, coffee, biscuits, soft drinks, peanuts, candy, 12 pack of condoms and arouser spray! I was shocked enough to ask the concierge if this was normal. He said yes : it is expected that western men will bring prostitutes back to the rooms, so they make sure it is as safe as possible (and just possible, if the spray is anything to go by)!

Before that, we had asked the concierge where to go for something to eat and a few drinks. He recommended a place called the Beach Club. We duly went there to find it was a brothel. That's their impression of western businessmen.

I have to confess that I chickened out and ran away. So much for being a man of the world and taking everything in my stride :confused:

Sex over there is just a business, and just plain survival for many of the people involved. Overall, it was tawdry and tedious, and made me disappointed and sad for Malaysia.

[munnki]

A similar situation obtains in Thailand and it is complex - not amenable to simple judgments. One of my wife's good clients at her gym was a prostitute, she became one of our good friends. Her life was by no means easy - but the complexity of it didn't seem to differ all that greatly from any other working person. She simply enjoyed sex. I spent some time with her and actually went on retreat with her for a couple of days to a monastery (don't fear atheists - it was a buddhist yoga retreat - no sky-daddy weirdnesses)...

On the other hand, there was also a reality of brutal clients, trafficking, etc... to contend with for many others and it would have been impossible to know as a client whether a place was decent to its workers or not. What the 'on-the-ground' conditions were.

We did go (myself and my wife) to a ping-pong show in Thailand. I have to say the drinks were triple the normal price and the place was pretty dingy. She was more amused by the whole thing than I was. I just felt embarrassed. Saying that, I have no objection to watching a beautiful naked woman dance or similar. It's just watching a woman shoot ping-pong balls or opening a beer bottle from her vagina is not arousing for me. Needless to say we didn't stay long and apart from a few drunken nights out I didn't spend all that much time in Thailand in the red light districts. There were more interesting things to do.

Personally I've always felt that the best part of good sex is that you don't have to pay for it. It's the thrill of the hunt and mutual satisfaction that I've always found the big turn-on. Saying that... I am getting older.

In my opinion it's complex but regulation would help. Making prostitution illegal in Thailand, for anybody who knows Bangkok, is like making marijuana illegal in Jamaica. I mean... you can do it - but.. then there's reality...

[Greatest I am]

Danhalen

I admit, some of your questions are difficult to answer because much of the answer is a moral issue and that is always different to each person. My perspective to date has been as a male and father. I would like to change that perspective to that of the child. Male or female. This may be a more productive stance for us to get some progress.

Having said this, I would say that our morals are tied to some extent to our feelings.

Let me try to engage yours while answering some questions.


Firstly, let me ask, do you believe that reciprocity is fair play?
I do.

If so then what is good for both male and female children should be good for you.


Place yourself in the shoes of a son whose father decides to use for sex.

If a male, would you like your father to approach you, at whatever age, and sodomize you?
If a female, would you like your father to use whatever orifice he chooses to use?

Would you be consenting or are you being coerced?
How do you see this situation?

State what age you give yourself as the receiver of this sexual attention and what you think your response would be?
What kind of feelings are you having while daddy pumps away?

I ask the same to all here.

Ta at
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VASroE3qZw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd7M5uCkAMA&feature=PlayList&p=49D990CEF92A7CFE&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=92

I do not want to move the discussion away from morality to statistical analysis but will offer an overview.

If any want to find true and current stats then I would suggest that you google for them because depending on the country, they can vary dramatically.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

Danhalen

I admit, some of your questions are difficult to answer because much of the answer is a moral issue and that is always different to each person. My perspective to date has been as a male and father. I would like to change that perspective to that of the child. Male or female. This may be a more productive stance for us to get some progress.

Having said this, I would say that our morals are tied to some extent to our feelings.

Let me try to engage yours while answering some questions.


Firstly, let me ask, do you believe that reciprocity is fair play?
I do.

If so then what is good for both male and female children should be good for you.


Place yourself in the shoes of a son whose father decides to use for sex.

If a male, would you like your father to approach you, at whatever age, and sodomize you?
If a female, would you like your father to use whatever orifice he chooses to use?

Would you be consenting or are you being coerced?
How do you see this situation?

State what age you give yourself as the receiver of this sexual attention and what you think your response would be?
What kind of feelings are you having while daddy pumps away?

I ask the same to all here.

Ta at
Jailbird

Which has what to do with legalizing prostitution?

[munnki]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VASroE3qZw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd7M5uCkAMA&feature=PlayList&p=49D990CEF92A7CFE&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=92

I do not want to move the discussion away from morality to statistical analysis but will offer an overview.

If any want to find true and current stats then I would suggest that you google for them because depending on the country, they can vary dramatically.

Ta ta
Jailbird

This discussion started out as an analysis and not a moral discussion. The move away was the move to discussing the morality of the situation. Don't get me wrong - there are plenty of really problematic areas to discuss here - but the op is pretty clearly analytic rather than moral. It is the sense of moral outrage that has produced a situation where a) prostitution is illegal or incorrectly regulated in many countries b) people still use prostitutes regularly c) prostitutes are at a far higher risk in countries which do not regulate the industry. Therefore, moral outrage is a real problem in this discussion since it doesn't solve an actually existing problem in any kind of constructive way. It is the difference between saying "100,000 people get involved in car accidents every year in the UK - therefore cars are shocking and evil" - and saying 'how can we regulate and deal with the way people drive in order to produce safer roads and less accidents'.

Besides, the position of moral outrage on this issue is also a lazy position. It requires no effort to simply be 'shocked' at something but it requires a great deal of mental energy to think through the ramifications of a problem with respect to how a variety of people feel and the impact it has on differing sectors of a community. Moral outrage, as well as being lazy, also provides no real solutions it simply says 'This is outrageous'.

[Danhalen]

Firstly, let me ask, do you believe that reciprocity is fair play?
I do.

If so then what is good for both male and female children should be good for you.

Place yourself in the shoes of a son whose father decides to use for sex.

If a male, would you like your father to approach you, at whatever age, and sodomize you?
If a female, would you like your father to use whatever orifice he chooses to use?

Would you be consenting or are you being coerced?
How do you see this situation?

State what age you give yourself as the receiver of this sexual attention and what you think your response would be?
What kind of feelings are you having while daddy pumps away?I may respond to these questions after you have explained how pedophilia, incest and rape are correlated to 'of age', legal and consensual prostitution.

[Greatest I am]

Danhalen

I admit, some of your questions are difficult to answer because much of the answer is a moral issue and that is always different to each person. My perspective to date has been as a male and father. I would like to change that perspective to that of the child. Male or female. This may be a more productive stance for us to get some progress.

Having said this, I would say that our morals are tied to some extent to our feelings.

Let me try to engage yours while answering some questions.


Firstly, let me ask, do you believe that reciprocity is fair play?
I do.

If so then what is good for both male and female children should be good for you.


Place yourself in the shoes of a son whose father decides to use for sex.

If a male, would you like your father to approach you, at whatever age, and sodomize you?
If a female, would you like your father to use whatever orifice he chooses to use?

Would you be consenting or are you being coerced?
How do you see this situation?

State what age you give yourself as the receiver of this sexual attention and what you think your response would be?
What kind of feelings are you having while daddy pumps away?

I ask the same to all here.

Ta at
Jailbird

Which has what to do with legalizing prostitution?

Patience, one thing at a time. I was speaking to a direct question.
How it ties in is that about 1/3 of prostitute are produced by this type of what I call abuse and some call just good sexual practices.

I invite you to also give an opinion on how you would feel if you were the child in the scenario above.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[munnki]

Patience, one thing at a time. I was speaking to a direct question.
How it ties in is that about 1/3 of prostitute are produced by this type of what I call abuse and some call just good sexual practices.

I invite you to also give an opinion on how you would feel if you were the child in the scenario above.

Ta ta
Jailbird

a) Can you source where you got the quoted fact in bold above?
b) Saying that 1/3 of all prostitutes are produced by abuse is very different to saying that 100% of all prostitutes are the product of incest which is what you intimated in comments above.
c) Asking somebody how they would feel if they were abused is a ridiculous question. It's either the same as the question 'so you think abuse is good?' which is a ridiculous question or it's asking somebody to try to imagine what it's like to be abused for which ample testimony and evidence exists.
d) If the facts above could be agreed upon then surely regulation would be the way to fix the problem.
e) You will not fix the problem of abuse by making prostitution illegal. While I'm not going to say you will make it worse. I will say you fix abuse by addressing it. Child abuse - by regulating for abuse and examining its causes. Adult abuse - in probably the same way.

Your arguments are not tying together, Greatest, can you try and link each of your ideas and source your claims.

[Greatest I am]

Firstly, let me ask, do you believe that reciprocity is fair play?
I do.

If so then what is good for both male and female children should be good for you.

Place yourself in the shoes of a son whose father decides to use for sex.

If a male, would you like your father to approach you, at whatever age, and sodomize you?
If a female, would you like your father to use whatever orifice he chooses to use?

Would you be consenting or are you being coerced?
How do you see this situation?

State what age you give yourself as the receiver of this sexual attention and what you think your response would be?
What kind of feelings are you having while daddy pumps away?I may respond to these questions after you have explained how pedophilia, incest and rape are correlated to 'of age', legal and consensual prostitution.

I speak to one of your questions and you come up with more questions before the other is dealt with???

I indicated above that I could explain or answer better if we had a scenario to work with. The links I have placed speak to your second series of questions if you would like to check them.

Would you like to proceed with the scenario that I put.
I assure you that all your questions can be answered but lets do this systematically for more coherent responses on my part instead of hopping around from issue to issue.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

Danhalen

I admit, some of your questions are difficult to answer because much of the answer is a moral issue and that is always different to each person. My perspective to date has been as a male and father. I would like to change that perspective to that of the child. Male or female. This may be a more productive stance for us to get some progress.

Having said this, I would say that our morals are tied to some extent to our feelings.

Let me try to engage yours while answering some questions.


Firstly, let me ask, do you believe that reciprocity is fair play?
I do.

If so then what is good for both male and female children should be good for you.


Place yourself in the shoes of a son whose father decides to use for sex.

If a male, would you like your father to approach you, at whatever age, and sodomize you?
If a female, would you like your father to use whatever orifice he chooses to use?

Would you be consenting or are you being coerced?
How do you see this situation?

State what age you give yourself as the receiver of this sexual attention and what you think your response would be?
What kind of feelings are you having while daddy pumps away?

I ask the same to all here.

Ta at
Jailbird

Which has what to do with legalizing prostitution?

Patience, one thing at a time. I was speaking to a direct question.
How it ties in is that about 1/3 of prostitute are produced by this type of what I call abuse and some call just good sexual practices.

I invite you to also give an opinion on how you would feel if you were the child in the scenario above.

Ta ta
Jailbird

Who?

[Greatest I am]

Patience, one thing at a time. I was speaking to a direct question.
How it ties in is that about 1/3 of prostitute are produced by this type of what I call abuse and some call just good sexual practices.

I invite you to also give an opinion on how you would feel if you were the child in the scenario above.

Ta ta
Jailbird

a) Can you source where you got the quoted fact in bold above?
b) Saying that 1/3 of all prostitutes are produced by abuse is very different to saying that 100% of all prostitutes are the product of incest which is what you intimated in comments above.
c) Asking somebody how they would feel if they were abused is a ridiculous question. It's either the same as the question 'so you think abuse is good?' which is a ridiculous question or it's asking somebody to try to imagine what it's like to be abused for which ample testimony and evidence exists.
d) If the facts above could be agreed upon then surely regulation would be the way to fix the problem.
e) You will not fix the problem of abuse by making prostitution illegal. While I'm not going to say you will make it worse. I will say you fix abuse by addressing it. Child abuse - by regulating for abuse and examining its causes. Adult abuse - in probably the same way.

Your arguments are not tying together, Greatest, can you try and link each of your ideas and source your claims.

If I write 1/3, I do not see how this intimated 3/3.

As I stated before, I will not waste my time on statistics when my main focus is to morals.

You want current #s. As stated they are different in every country. I am not a mind reader in terms of knowing your focus or location.
be it 30% or 1%, I do not care because it will not change the moral take that I give.
This is a complicated issue and if any here think that I can cover all aspects well without some form of order, which is what I am asking for then, then we waste our time.

Note how, even without stats, Danhalen and I cannot seem to get going because we are jumping all over and reciprocity is not being honored.

If questions are only answered with more question then we gain nothing.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[munnki]

I did warn you.

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/53/CNR_meh.jpg

[Anne]

Didn't he just die?

[Greatest I am]

source your claims.

There goes the worth of anecdotal knowledge.

Pity.

That precludes anything new.

Go ahead and rehash.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

oh, sorry--- Charles Nelson Reilly died in May of 2007.

It just felt like recently.

[stoutyoungladd]

While perhaps not a valued academic source, it is widely available and easily accessible. Just wondering, have you guys checked Wikipedia at all as an answer to some of your questions? I'll try to answer one.

"Why isn't prostitution legal in many Western countries and the US?".

It appears that prostitution was widely legal in the United States, prior to the early 1900's. Wikipedia credits the Women's Christian Temperance Union with a reversal in that trend. Apparently, this began with women as part of a "social purity movement".

The social purity movement, were:

"A loose network of educated lay and professional white, middle-class, evangelical Christians, social purists were intent on eradicating prostitution and the double standard of morality. The movement became synonymous, however, with the moral regulation of all non-reproductive sexual activity. It was directed mainly by social purity feminists in organizations like the Salvation Army, the Moral and Social Reform Council of Canada, and the Canadian Purity Education Association. Blaming male sexual vice for racial, national, and imperial degeneration, such feminists essentialized women as sexually passive ‘mothers of the race’. ".

In bold I think is your "why".

I especially enjoyed the Wikipedia article regarding the Middle Ages, because it points out that Xians were not always this way:

"Although all forms of sexual activity outside of marriage were regarded as sinful by the Roman Catholic Church, prostitution was tolerated because it was held to prevent the greater evils of rape, sodomy, and masturbation (McCall, 1979). Augustine of Hippo held that: "If you expel prostitution from society, you will unsettle everything on account of lusts". The general tolerance of prostitution was for the most part reluctant, and many canonists urged prostitutes to reform."

Just so you know, I may go to Church and be a religious person "of a kind", but I am also in favor of legalizing prostitution in this country (U.S.A.) I agree with you guys that it would be better for all involved.

[stoutyoungladd]

I wanted to say sorry btw, I didn't realize there were many pages to this discussion, and that was meant as a reply to page one on this thread. I am new here....I will learn soon enough. :)

[munnki]

I wanted to say sorry btw, I didn't realize there were many pages to this discussion, and that was meant as a reply to page one on this thread. I am new here....I will learn soon enough. :)

Nothing to apologize for. You said some interesting things and you sourced them. You also don't have to apologize for your beliefs - although you may have to defend them in here, from time to time. Welcome to secular cafe.

;)

[Danhalen]

Note how, even without stats, Danhalen and I cannot seem to get going because we are jumping all over and reciprocity is not being honored.

If questions are only answered with more question then we gain nothing.That's not the case. You are making assertions without supporting them. You keep equivocating prostitution with rape, pedophilia and incest and when I ask you to explain why you are doing that you ask me more questions. I don't agree with your position. Instead of leading me to your conclusion by getting me to answer a formula of questions just draw a map from your observations to your conclusions and let me see if I agree with your reasoning.

[Greatest I am]

Note how, even without stats, Danhalen and I cannot seem to get going because we are jumping all over and reciprocity is not being honored.

If questions are only answered with more question then we gain nothing.That's not the case. You are making assertions without supporting them. You keep equivocating prostitution with rape, pedophilia and incest and when I ask you to explain why you are doing that you ask me more questions. I don't agree with your position. Instead of leading me to your conclusion by getting me to answer a formula of questions just draw a map from your observations to your conclusions and let me see if I agree with your reasoning.

I assert that incest is inappropriate sexual behavior for a number of reasons.

Medical reasons. Physical as well as mental. For both the parent and child.

Social reasons as incest is generally frowned upon. The parent is therefore placing stigma on a child that does not generally choose it and thus victimizes the child.


If you were a child, you would not like that. Do you think any child would?

This situation as well as others help facilitate the slide for these children to prostitution. There self esteem is damaged.

How much of the above is rape, abuse, mental abuse, pedophilia, or whatever, depends on you. Non incestuous rape, the criminal type, does not generally contribute to prostitution.

How old is a child a child before they become citizens?

If a victim of your own parent, at what age can you say no?
When you did, would you feel good about you?

Ta at
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

While perhaps not a valued academic source, it is widely available and easily accessible. Just wondering, have you guys checked Wikipedia at all as an answer to some of your questions? I'll try to answer one.

"Why isn't prostitution legal in many Western countries and the US?".

It appears that prostitution was widely legal in the United States, prior to the early 1900's. Wikipedia credits the Women's Christian Temperance Union with a reversal in that trend. Apparently, this began with women as part of a "social purity movement".

The social purity movement, were:

"A loose network of educated lay and professional white, middle-class, evangelical Christians, social purists were intent on eradicating prostitution and the double standard of morality. The movement became synonymous, however, with the moral regulation of all non-reproductive sexual activity. It was directed mainly by social purity feminists in organizations like the Salvation Army, the Moral and Social Reform Council of Canada, and the Canadian Purity Education Association. Blaming male sexual vice for racial, national, and imperial degeneration, such feminists essentialized women as sexually passive ‘mothers of the race’. ".

In bold I think is your "why".

I especially enjoyed the Wikipedia article regarding the Middle Ages, because it points out that Xians were not always this way:

"Although all forms of sexual activity outside of marriage were regarded as sinful by the Roman Catholic Church, prostitution was tolerated because it was held to prevent the greater evils of rape, sodomy, and masturbation (McCall, 1979). Augustine of Hippo held that: "If you expel prostitution from society, you will unsettle everything on account of lusts". The general tolerance of prostitution was for the most part reluctant, and many canonists urged prostitutes to reform."

Just so you know, I may go to Church and be a religious person "of a kind", but I am also in favor of legalizing prostitution in this country (U.S.A.) I agree with you guys that it would be better for all involved.

We would vote the same way.

You are right on in saying that prostitution was basically legal in the past.

I would add to that, that it never quite became an enforced law in many states.
Semi legal, so to speak.

Where I grew up, every Church was said to have a key club and coming from a rough past, I can tell you that we have not gone to a system today that adds dignity to man.

Look at society again, for the first time.

Ta at
Jailbird

[munnki]

Interesting survey in the guardian today about the reasons (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jan/15/why-men-use-prostitutes) why men use prostitutes.


'I don't get anything out of sex with prostitutes except for a bad feeling," says Ben. An apparently average, thirtysomething, middle-class man, Ben had taken an extended lunchbreak from his job in advertising to talk about his experiences of buying sex. Shy and slightly nervous, he told me, "I am hoping that talking about it might help me work out why I do it."

[Oolon Colluphid]

[...]
Skip to the end... :p :D
Which leads me to my question.
And about time...
Shouldn't prostitution be legal?
Yes.


Next question.

Oh okay...

I look at it this way: if one defines prostitution purely in terms of selling sex, then it can be pigeonholed as something different, out of the ordinary, to be controlled differently.

But if you think of it in terms of the selling of your time and physical abilites / talents, doing for reward something you would not, other things being equal, do, then it becomes plainly just a subset of, well, loads of social interactions.

Some folks may love their jobs enough to do them for free; most of us do them because we have to, to pay the bills, to eat, etc (and it's just lucky if we don't actually hate them). But rather than say that I prostitute myself -- my physical attributes and abilities -- in a poxy office for 37 hours a week, it's better to think in terms of some women -- those with certain physical attributes and abilities -- working at a trade that involves them, not filing or tip-tapping a keyboard (say), but laying on their backs while a string of saddoes fumble with them.

Now, obviously the caveat is no coercion. As long as it is a woman's free choice -- free, that is, to the same extent as doing any other possibly unpleasant job because you need the money is a free choice -- then good luck to them.

Strikes me that it's not called the oldest profession for nothing. It's the free market at play, demand leading to supply. If there were no demand, prostitutes would have to find other employment. So having their employment be illegal seems ludicrous: as with drugs (or alcohol under Prohibition, or books under a dictatorship, etc), it'll just go underground, where it becomes more dangerous for all concerned.

Legalise it, regulate it, and tax it. Simple.

Where does one draw the line between 'prostitution' and a woman who marries a man for money?

[Oolon Colluphid]

I assert that incest is inappropriate sexual behavior for a number of reasons.

Medical reasons. Physical as well as mental. For both the parent and child.

Social reasons as incest is generally frowned upon. The parent is therefore placing stigma on a child that does not generally choose it and thus victimizes the child.


If you were a child, you would not like that. Do you think any child would?
Incest =/ interfamilial pederasty.

Ta ta, Oolon

[munnki]

Where does one draw the line between 'prostitution' and a woman who marries a man for money?

The latter is way more expensive and time-consuming.

;)

[Oolon Colluphid]

The latter is way more expensive and time-consuming.

;)

:notworthy:

Seems a fair bet that, for instance, Henry VIII's last few wives didn't marry him for his svelt good looks and charm. And sex was definitely on the cards, seeing as how much he wanted a little Henry IX. So in what way were they not a variety of prostitute?

I could get evolutionary at this point too: love and all that malarkey may come into it as an ad hoc bolt-on (a Johnny-come-lately, as it were), but females have been having sex with males (and vice versa) for a good half a billion years for one reason alone: what they get out of it. We humans just have an extra layer of complicatedness.

[Bane]

Where does one draw the line between 'prostitution' and a woman who marries a man for money?

Uh....they're both hookers? :D

[munnki]

I'm thinking we should ask this guy...

http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffarth/TigerWoods_450x400.jpg

[Anne]

Post 74 dammit!

[Greatest I am]

[...]
Skip to the end... :p :D
Which leads me to my question.
And about time...
Shouldn't prostitution be legal?
Yes.


Next question.

Oh okay...

I look at it this way: if one defines prostitution purely in terms of selling sex, then it can be pigeonholed as something different, out of the ordinary, to be controlled differently.

But if you think of it in terms of the selling of your time and physical abilites / talents, doing for reward something you would not, other things being equal, do, then it becomes plainly just a subset of, well, loads of social interactions.

Some folks may love their jobs enough to do them for free; most of us do them because we have to, to pay the bills, to eat, etc (and it's just lucky if we don't actually hate them). But rather than say that I prostitute myself -- my physical attributes and abilities -- in a poxy office for 37 hours a week, it's better to think in terms of some women -- those with certain physical attributes and abilities -- working at a trade that involves them, not filing or tip-tapping a keyboard (say), but laying on their backs while a string of saddoes fumble with them.

Now, obviously the caveat is no coercion. As long as it is a woman's free choice -- free, that is, to the same extent as doing any other possibly unpleasant job because you need the money is a free choice -- then good luck to them.

Strikes me that it's not called the oldest profession for nothing. It's the free market at play, demand leading to supply. If there were no demand, prostitutes would have to find other employment. So having their employment be illegal seems ludicrous: as with drugs (or alcohol under Prohibition, or books under a dictatorship, etc), it'll just go underground, where it becomes more dangerous for all concerned.

Legalise it, regulate it, and tax it. Simple.

Where does one draw the line between 'prostitution' and a woman who marries a man for money?

We call that a different name but the morality is the same.

No dignity.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

I assert that incest is inappropriate sexual behavior for a number of reasons.

Medical reasons. Physical as well as mental. For both the parent and child.

Social reasons as incest is generally frowned upon. The parent is therefore placing stigma on a child that does not generally choose it and thus victimizes the child.


If you were a child, you would not like that. Do you think any child would?
Incest =/ interfamilial pederasty.

Ta ta, Oolon

Ignoring the females?

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Oolon Colluphid]

Incest =/ interfamilial pederasty.

Ignoring the females?
Heh. I usually do the smart-arse gig around here, thanks.

Should have said paedophilia. I was letting my Ancient Greek* get in the way of English usage. Both words have pais, 'child', at the front; while eros is the physical act of love-making, I see that pederasty is usually used for specifically homosexual relations (derived, no doubt, from the Athenian erastes-eromenos relationship). But I was thinking of sex in general, not 'love'. Paedophilia is more literally 'love of children', the more spiritual variety. If not, Philadelphia must be chock-full with rampant incestual relationships.

*Ancient, as in, I last used it regularly in 1989 ;)

Anyway, enough about my dodgy dictionary and your dodge of the point. You said child, "placing stigma on a child", "victimizes the child", etc.

Which kind of suggested, well, children. Sub-adult humans.

Sex with sub-adults is pederasty (sensu Oolon) or paedophilia, irrespective of the adult's relationship (familial, or merely species) with the 'child'. And is widely regarded as wrong, not least because the child, by virtue of being a child, is unable to give informed consent.

Which leaves what I said intact: incest is not the same thing as interfamilial child sex. (Clue: adult brothers and sisters having sex would also be incest.)

So, suggest you quit throwing out red herrings into already turbid waters.

[Nontoxic]

What a fascinating discussion, I am so glad I joined SC.
I have always thought prostitution should be legalized. It's a contract, just like the purchase of anything else, a mutual agreement. There is no reason why this shouldn't be recognized as such, with legal protections for both parties. I do not see it as a threat to marriage, quite the opposite. If a man eats at a restaurant, is that offensive to his wife that cooks his meals? I don't think so.
Porn and incest are not directly pertinent to this discussion, however, I do believe porn can lead to a lack of intimacy. Sex is a performance, rather than an expression of feelings. Perhaps there is a time and place for both.
Women, being more emotional, leads me to conclude the majority of clients would be men. On the other hand, many high end prostitutes talk about men paying to simply talk, a therapeutic session, more or less.

[Greatest I am]

What a fascinating discussion, I am so glad I joined SC.
I have always thought prostitution should be legalized. It's a contract, just like the purchase of anything else, a mutual agreement. There is no reason why this shouldn't be recognized as such, with legal protections for both parties. I do not see it as a threat to marriage, quite the opposite. If a man eats at a restaurant, is that offensive to his wife that cooks his meals? I don't think so.
Porn and incest are not directly pertinent to this discussion, however, I do believe porn can lead to a lack of intimacy. Sex is a performance, rather than an expression of feelings. Perhaps there is a time and place for both.
Women, being more emotional, leads me to conclude the majority of clients would be men. On the other hand, many high end prostitutes talk about men paying to simply talk, a therapeutic session, more or less.

Yep. Sex is like a good meal.

Idiot.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Nontoxic]

What a fascinating discussion, I am so glad I joined SC.
I have always thought prostitution should be legalized. It's a contract, just like the purchase of anything else, a mutual agreement. There is no reason why this shouldn't be recognized as such, with legal protections for both parties. I do not see it as a threat to marriage, quite the opposite. If a man eats at a restaurant, is that offensive to his wife that cooks his meals? I don't think so.
Porn and incest are not directly pertinent to this discussion, however, I do believe porn can lead to a lack of intimacy. Sex is a performance, rather than an expression of feelings. Perhaps there is a time and place for both.
Women, being more emotional, leads me to conclude the majority of clients would be men. On the other hand, many high end prostitutes talk about men paying to simply talk, a therapeutic session, more or less.

Yep. Sex is like a good meal.

Idiot.

Ta ta
Jailbird
you twisted what I said, nerd

[Bane]

GIA, you know, it would be nice if you'd use logic that actually worked. :p Right now, your argument makes as much sense as "Cats don't hate water because they lick themselves clean".

[Greatest I am]

What a fascinating discussion, I am so glad I joined SC.
I have always thought prostitution should be legalized. It's a contract, just like the purchase of anything else, a mutual agreement. There is no reason why this shouldn't be recognized as such, with legal protections for both parties. I do not see it as a threat to marriage, quite the opposite. If a man eats at a restaurant, is that offensive to his wife that cooks his meals? I don't think so.
Porn and incest are not directly pertinent to this discussion, however, I do believe porn can lead to a lack of intimacy. Sex is a performance, rather than an expression of feelings. Perhaps there is a time and place for both.
Women, being more emotional, leads me to conclude the majority of clients would be men. On the other hand, many high end prostitutes talk about men paying to simply talk, a therapeutic session, more or less.

Yep. Sex is like a good meal.

Idiot.

Ta ta
Jailbird
you twisted what I said, nerd

If that was the case, a rebuttal would have been quick.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

GIA, you know, it would be nice if you'd use logic that actually worked. :p Right now, your argument makes as much sense as "Cats don't hate water because they lick themselves clean".

Are you familiar to the stepping stone effect that is applied to the use of drugs?

The same effect applies to our children and sex. In terms of a growth curve is concerned, latest or oldest is best. The younger the first assault or abuse the more damage is done in the long run.


What is hard about that logic trail?

What other point can I speak to?

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Haswell]

Sorry to come so late to the party but it seems in the countries where Prostitution is legalised(yes I capitalised 'Prostitution' Lets hear it for those hard working girls) the sytem works quite well.

If legalising Prostitution only did one this; that is to stop the exploitation of women by Pimps and dealers etc, then it is worthwhile and desirable. These systems provide regula health checks which makes it safer for the girsl and the clients. The girls either wean of drug dependency or never turn to it.

As George Carlin used to say, "Sex is not illegal. Selling things is not illegal. Why should selling sex be illegal?".

Prostitutes have always, will always, provide a necessary service, especially to married men who's wives idea of 'Kinky' means leaving the light on.

Now where's that credit card?......

[Faerie]

[...]
Skip to the end... :p :D
Which leads me to my question.
And about time...
Shouldn't prostitution be legal?
Yes.


Next question.

Oh okay...

I look at it this way: if one defines prostitution purely in terms of selling sex, then it can be pigeonholed as something different, out of the ordinary, to be controlled differently.

But if you think of it in terms of the selling of your time and physical abilites / talents, doing for reward something you would not, other things being equal, do, then it becomes plainly just a subset of, well, loads of social interactions.

Some folks may love their jobs enough to do them for free; most of us do them because we have to, to pay the bills, to eat, etc (and it's just lucky if we don't actually hate them). But rather than say that I prostitute myself -- my physical attributes and abilities -- in a poxy office for 37 hours a week, it's better to think in terms of some women -- those with certain physical attributes and abilities -- working at a trade that involves them, not filing or tip-tapping a keyboard (say), but laying on their backs while a string of saddoes fumble with them.

Now, obviously the caveat is no coercion. As long as it is a woman's free choice -- free, that is, to the same extent as doing any other possibly unpleasant job because you need the money is a free choice -- then good luck to them.

Strikes me that it's not called the oldest profession for nothing. It's the free market at play, demand leading to supply. If there were no demand, prostitutes would have to find other employment. So having their employment be illegal seems ludicrous: as with drugs (or alcohol under Prohibition, or books under a dictatorship, etc), it'll just go underground, where it becomes more dangerous for all concerned.

Legalise it, regulate it, and tax it. Simple.

Where does one draw the line between 'prostitution' and a woman who marries a man for money?

We call that a different name but the morality is the same.

No dignity.

Ta ta
Jailbird

No dignity? There is dignity in a woman doing a job to feed herself and her children. If that job happens to be prostitution, who are YOU to judge her?

[Oolon Colluphid]

No dignity? There is dignity in a woman doing a job to feed herself and her children. If that job happens to be prostitution, who are YOU to judge her?
My bet's on a woman's place being in the home.



I agree, meself. But I'm not unenlightened: I don't want my wife chained to a sink 24 hours a day.


Chain her to the bed for 12...


:evil:

[Bane]

GIA, you know, it would be nice if you'd use logic that actually worked. :p Right now, your argument makes as much sense as "Cats don't hate water because they lick themselves clean".

Are you familiar to the stepping stone effect that is applied to the use of drugs?

The same effect applies to our children and sex. In terms of a growth curve is concerned, latest or oldest is best. The younger the first assault or abuse the more damage is done in the long run.


What is hard about that logic trail?

What other point can I speak to?

Ta ta
Jailbird

It is a non-sequitur. Accusing people of incestuous desires because they disagree with you is just an ad hominem that doesn't even make much sense. In fact, your argument is completely incoherent, and I've tried to ask for clarity, and since I am not getting that, good day to you! :)

[Greatest I am]

[...]
Skip to the end... :p :D
Which leads me to my question.
And about time...
Shouldn't prostitution be legal?
Yes.


Next question.

Oh okay...

I look at it this way: if one defines prostitution purely in terms of selling sex, then it can be pigeonholed as something different, out of the ordinary, to be controlled differently.

But if you think of it in terms of the selling of your time and physical abilites / talents, doing for reward something you would not, other things being equal, do, then it becomes plainly just a subset of, well, loads of social interactions.

Some folks may love their jobs enough to do them for free; most of us do them because we have to, to pay the bills, to eat, etc (and it's just lucky if we don't actually hate them). But rather than say that I prostitute myself -- my physical attributes and abilities -- in a poxy office for 37 hours a week, it's better to think in terms of some women -- those with certain physical attributes and abilities -- working at a trade that involves them, not filing or tip-tapping a keyboard (say), but laying on their backs while a string of saddoes fumble with them.

Now, obviously the caveat is no coercion. As long as it is a woman's free choice -- free, that is, to the same extent as doing any other possibly unpleasant job because you need the money is a free choice -- then good luck to them.

Strikes me that it's not called the oldest profession for nothing. It's the free market at play, demand leading to supply. If there were no demand, prostitutes would have to find other employment. So having their employment be illegal seems ludicrous: as with drugs (or alcohol under Prohibition, or books under a dictatorship, etc), it'll just go underground, where it becomes more dangerous for all concerned.

Legalise it, regulate it, and tax it. Simple.

Where does one draw the line between 'prostitution' and a woman who marries a man for money?

We call that a different name but the morality is the same.

No dignity.

Ta ta
Jailbird

No dignity? There is dignity in a woman doing a job to feed herself and her children. If that job happens to be prostitution, who are YOU to judge her?

Who are you to judge my judgment?

Do we not all use our judgments constantly?

Yours says that she has dignity on her back and I think otherwise.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

GIA, you know, it would be nice if you'd use logic that actually worked. :p Right now, your argument makes as much sense as "Cats don't hate water because they lick themselves clean".

Are you familiar to the stepping stone effect that is applied to the use of drugs?

The same effect applies to our children and sex. In terms of a growth curve is concerned, latest or oldest is best. The younger the first assault or abuse the more damage is done in the long run.


What is hard about that logic trail?

What other point can I speak to?

Ta ta
Jailbird

It is a non-sequitur. Accusing people of incestuous desires because they disagree with you is just an ad hominem that doesn't even make much sense. In fact, your argument is completely incoherent, and I've tried to ask for clarity, and since I am not getting that, good day to you! :)

That is an accusation that I have not made. If so show where.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Nontoxic]

If I may intrude - Greatest, if it was legalized, children would not be part of it. The age would be up to the State. I don't see what the involvement the federal gov't should have at all.
Since it's illegal and underground, there is much more possibility of that occurring. And child abuse is against the law, now.

[Anne]

If I may intrude - Greatest, if it was legalized, children would not be part of it. The age would be up to the State. I don't see what the involvement the federal gov't should have at all.
Since it's illegal and underground, there is much more possibility of that occurring. And child abuse is against the law, now.

oh goodness.

QFT.

[Nontoxic]

If I may intrude - Greatest, if it was legalized, children would not be part of it. The age would be up to the State. I don't see what the involvement the federal gov't should have at all.
Since it's illegal and underground, there is much more possibility of that occurring. And child abuse is against the law, now.

oh goodness.

QFT.
I forget what that means, pray tell.

[His Noodly Appendage]

quoted for truth

[Oolon Colluphid]

That is, bears repeating.

Like ursines with dyspepsia.

[Bane]

GIA, you know, it would be nice if you'd use logic that actually worked. :p Right now, your argument makes as much sense as "Cats don't hate water because they lick themselves clean".

Are you familiar to the stepping stone effect that is applied to the use of drugs?

The same effect applies to our children and sex. In terms of a growth curve is concerned, latest or oldest is best. The younger the first assault or abuse the more damage is done in the long run.


What is hard about that logic trail?

What other point can I speak to?

Ta ta
Jailbird

It is a non-sequitur. Accusing people of incestuous desires because they disagree with you is just an ad hominem that doesn't even make much sense. In fact, your argument is completely incoherent, and I've tried to ask for clarity, and since I am not getting that, good day to you! :)

That is an accusation that I have not made. If so show where.

Ta ta
Jailbird
:rolleyes: OK, you can't remember what you've been going on about for the last few pages. Asking someone if they'd sleep with their relative if that person happened to be a prostitute, well.....that's along the lines of "Have you stopped beating your wife?", a loaded question. An ad hominem if I ever saw one ;)

I hope that jogs your memory. If it doesn't, well, at least we know it isn't lupus [/House reference]

[Haswell]

Isn't it legal in Vegas? Does it not work in Vegas?

[Greatest I am]

If I may intrude - Greatest, if it was legalized, children would not be part of it. The age would be up to the State. I don't see what the involvement the federal gov't should have at all.
Since it's illegal and underground, there is much more possibility of that occurring. And child abuse is against the law, now.

Depending on where in the world you live, child abuse laws are just un-enforced laws and therefore just lip service to their population.

We in the west do better but not by much.

If you think that child prostitution would end with legal prostitution you would be wrong.
Things would likely improve yes but it will likely always be with us.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

If I may intrude - Greatest, if it was legalized, children would not be part of it. The age would be up to the State. I don't see what the involvement the federal gov't should have at all.
Since it's illegal and underground, there is much more possibility of that occurring. And child abuse is against the law, now.

Depending on where in the world you live, child abuse laws are just un-enforced laws and therefore just lip service to their population.

We in the west do better but not by much.

If you think that child prostitution would end with legal prostitution you would be wrong.
Things would likely improve yes but it will likely always be with us.

Ta ta
Jailbird

uh, did you just throw in the towel here?

[Greatest I am]

If I may intrude - Greatest, if it was legalized, children would not be part of it. The age would be up to the State. I don't see what the involvement the federal gov't should have at all.
Since it's illegal and underground, there is much more possibility of that occurring. And child abuse is against the law, now.

Depending on where in the world you live, child abuse laws are just un-enforced laws and therefore just lip service to their population.

We in the west do better but not by much.

If you think that child prostitution would end with legal prostitution you would be wrong.
Things would likely improve yes but it will likely always be with us.

Ta ta
Jailbird

uh, did you just throw in the towel here?

Hell no.

Recognizing a possible negative reality or possibility does not mean that that reality should not be fought.
murder will also always be with us. Should we legalize that because we cannot obliterate it completely? No.

Prostitution is still the lowest form of slavery.

For evil to grow, all good men need do is nothing.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Bane]

Any idea, GIA, how seriously it's taken when a child is raped in this country?

Put it this way: paedophiles become pretty much unemployable. Being on the sex offenders' registry=death sentence for your career. You have to declare previous convictions to employers IIRC and I don't think anyone'd really want to employ a sex offender....

I would hardly call that "lip service". Offences against the vulnerable are taken extremely seriously here.

[Anne]

did you miss that you said:
Things would likely improve yes

That's not recognizing a negative at all.

[Greatest I am]

Any idea, GIA, how seriously it's taken when a child is raped in this country?

Put it this way: paedophiles become pretty much unemployable. Being on the sex offenders' registry=death sentence for your career. You have to declare previous convictions to employers IIRC and I don't think anyone'd really want to employ a sex offender....

I would hardly call that "lip service". Offences against the vulnerable are taken extremely seriously here.

When reported and acted upon sure.

Any idea how many cases are not reported because the wife does not want to believe or is too insecure to act?

Many.

My own wife was not believed when she complained to her father of a rape by the local priest and my own sister was raped by my own father.

Am I an un-common case?
No.

Do open your eyes to just how depraved many of us are.


Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

did you miss that you said:
Things would likely improve yes

That's not recognizing a negative at all.

An improved negative is still a negative.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Nontoxic]

If I may intrude - Greatest, if it was legalized, children would not be part of it. The age would be up to the State. I don't see what the involvement the federal gov't should have at all.
Since it's illegal and underground, there is much more possibility of that occurring. And child abuse is against the law, now.

Depending on where in the world you live, child abuse laws are just un-enforced laws and therefore just lip service to their population.

We in the west do better but not by much.

If you think that child prostitution would end with legal prostitution you would be wrong.
Things would likely improve yes but it will likely always be with us.

Ta ta
Jailbird

uh, did you just throw in the towel here?

Hell no.

Recognizing a possible negative reality or possibility does not mean that that reality should not be fought.
murder will also always be with us. Should we legalize that because we cannot obliterate it completely? No.

Prostitution is still the lowest form of slavery.

For evil to grow, all good men need do is nothing.

Ta ta
Jailbird

Prostitution is not slavery, if the female is willingly selling her service in exchange for payment. You do it every day in your job, and I wouldn't call you a slave.

[Bane]

Any idea, GIA, how seriously it's taken when a child is raped in this country?

Put it this way: paedophiles become pretty much unemployable. Being on the sex offenders' registry=death sentence for your career. You have to declare previous convictions to employers IIRC and I don't think anyone'd really want to employ a sex offender....

I would hardly call that "lip service". Offences against the vulnerable are taken extremely seriously here.

When reported and acted upon sure.

Any idea how many cases are not reported because the wife does not want to believe or is too insecure to act?

Many.

My own wife was not believed when she complained to her father of a rape by the local priest and my own sister was raped by my own father.

Am I an un-common case?
No.

Do open your eyes to just how depraved many of us are.


Ta ta
Jailbird

Huh? Seriously, are you drunk or high? I really don't know what you just said!

You may as well have asked "Is Dave there?" for all the sense I could make of that. :D

[Greatest I am]

If I may intrude - Greatest, if it was legalized, children would not be part of it. The age would be up to the State. I don't see what the involvement the federal gov't should have at all.
Since it's illegal and underground, there is much more possibility of that occurring. And child abuse is against the law, now.

Depending on where in the world you live, child abuse laws are just un-enforced laws and therefore just lip service to their population.

We in the west do better but not by much.

If you think that child prostitution would end with legal prostitution you would be wrong.
Things would likely improve yes but it will likely always be with us.

Ta ta
Jailbird

uh, did you just throw in the towel here?

Hell no.

Recognizing a possible negative reality or possibility does not mean that that reality should not be fought.
murder will also always be with us. Should we legalize that because we cannot obliterate it completely? No.

Prostitution is still the lowest form of slavery.

For evil to grow, all good men need do is nothing.

Ta ta
Jailbird

Prostitution is not slavery, if the female is willingly selling her service in exchange for payment. You do it every day in your job, and I wouldn't call you a slave.

Yep, some with no idea of what dignity or morality is, will see prostitution as just another job.

Strange though that these same people will use their offsprings, who have other jobs or services that the parent will use, but prostitutes who just work at their jobs, will not be a choice of their parents for that particular service.

Double fucking standards in two ways you might say.

If you think it just a job then we should have our employment offices rewrite their standards.

Would you call up the service where your child works as a prostitute or would you choose some other service provider.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

Any idea, GIA, how seriously it's taken when a child is raped in this country?

Put it this way: paedophiles become pretty much unemployable. Being on the sex offenders' registry=death sentence for your career. You have to declare previous convictions to employers IIRC and I don't think anyone'd really want to employ a sex offender....

I would hardly call that "lip service". Offences against the vulnerable are taken extremely seriously here.

When reported and acted upon sure.

Any idea how many cases are not reported because the wife does not want to believe or is too insecure to act?

Many.

My own wife was not believed when she complained to her father of a rape by the local priest and my own sister was raped by my own father.

Am I an un-common case?
No.

Do open your eyes to just how depraved many of us are.


Ta ta
Jailbird

Huh? Seriously, are you drunk or high? I really don't know what you just said!

You may as well have asked "Is Dave there?" for all the sense I could make of that. :D

Try one word at a time.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Anne]

did you miss that you said:
Things would likely improve yes

That's not recognizing a negative at all.

An improved negative is still a negative.

Ta ta
Jailbird

But less so. And that's all we can ever hope for. Making the status quo better.

Even a single victim less would be worth it, if there is no net loss.

[Octavia]

Yep, some with no idea of what dignity or morality is, will see prostitution as just another job.


Dignity has no relation to legality, though, does it? For example, I find many reality tv shows undignified in the extreme, but that doesn't mean that they should be made illegal, or that people should be prevented from making money off them.

Dignity isn't necessarily related to morality either, is it? One could make money by being a circus clown and having cream pies thrown in one's face all day long. I find very little dignity in that (though I'm likely to laugh at it), but I wouldn't call the clown immoral because of it.

Dignity can't really be used as a reason to tar any career choice as illegal or immoral, as it's entirely subjective.

Also, you're skating on thin ice by insinuating that those who disagree with you are immoral. An easy response - equally facile - would be to call you immoral, as you want to deprive prostitutes (men and women both) of the protection the law can give them. After all, you're arguing in preference of a system where abusive pimps flourish over one where they don't. But pointing that out wouldn't get us anywhere now, would it?

[Bane]

No, it wouldn't. In the words of Alistair of Dragon Age:Origins, "Somebody's been drinking" :D

[DMB]

There is a big movement of prostitutes from eastern Europe into western Europe. See this story:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6999209.ece

[Greatest I am]

Yep, some with no idea of what dignity or morality is, will see prostitution as just another job.


Dignity has no relation to legality, though, does it? For example, I find many reality tv shows undignified in the extreme, but that doesn't mean that they should be made illegal, or that people should be prevented from making money off them.

Dignity isn't necessarily related to morality either, is it? One could make money by being a circus clown and having cream pies thrown in one's face all day long. I find very little dignity in that (though I'm likely to laugh at it), but I wouldn't call the clown immoral because of it.

Dignity can't really be used as a reason to tar any career choice as illegal or immoral, as it's entirely subjective.

Also, you're skating on thin ice by insinuating that those who disagree with you are immoral. An easy response - equally facile - would be to call you immoral, as you want to deprive prostitutes (men and women both) of the protection the law can give them. After all, you're arguing in preference of a system where abusive pimps flourish over one where they don't. But pointing that out wouldn't get us anywhere now, would it?

Sure it would.

It would allow me to remind you that I would legalize prostitution as I see many prostitutes as victims of society and to abuse them even more with punitive laws would be just more societal abuse.

That does not mean that I think such a law adds dignity to those involved and to society as a whole.

As to my moral position of prostitution, I am eager to be challenged.

I have shown why I think it immoral but have yet to hear why it is moral.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Bane]

OK, first let me explain a few things before I tell you more about my position:
In the UK, as far as I know, lawyers cannot represent their relatives in court, and doctors cannot treat their relatives--these are just examples to show that if your relative is a professional of some sort, you can't really avail yourself of their services.

Now, my position on prostitution is that it should be seen as a therapeutic service (and since professionals can't have family as clients, your argument about having sex with one's relatives is debunked anyway). I wouldn't say it was degrading if it was legal and regulated, but as it is now, I wouldn't want anyone I loved doing that. It's only a "problem" because of the circumstances.

[Greatest I am]

OK, first let me explain a few things before I tell you more about my position:
In the UK, as far as I know, lawyers cannot represent their relatives in court, and doctors cannot treat their relatives--these are just examples to show that if your relative is a professional of some sort, you can't really avail yourself of their services.

Now, my position on prostitution is that it should be seen as a therapeutic service (and since professionals can't have family as clients, your argument about having sex with one's relatives is debunked anyway). I wouldn't say it was degrading if it was legal and regulated, but as it is now, I wouldn't want anyone I loved doing that. It's only a "problem" because of the circumstances.

LOL.

Prostitution is a therapeutic service.

All John then are in need of therapy.

Then all prostitutes should wear white caps and gowns like nurses.
Right?

I see the use of prostitutes as just as degrading for the Johns as it is for the hooker.

I will have to see them as degrading themselves due to being sick.

Thanks for this.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Bane]

While they're welcome to dress up as nurses, I never said they should do so all the time :p

I see there's no point arguing with someone who is unable to change their mind. So, I really am done with this thread now.

[Preno]

did you miss that you said:
Things would likely improve yes

That's not recognizing a negative at all.

An improved negative is still a negative.:facepalm:

[Octavia]

I have shown why I think it immoral but have yet to hear why it is moral.


For me, morality comes down to one basic thing: are you hurting anybody else against their will, or trampling on their rights? Murder and rape, to take two obvious instances, are immoral because they cause harm and infringe on another's rights.

I have difficulty saying the same thing when it comes to prostitution. In legalised prostitution, for example, a transaction takes place between two consenting adults. Neither is forced to take part, they both do it of their own free will. It may well be undignified, to use your perspective, but no-one is actually getting hurt. No-one's rights are being abused.

What grounds then can I use to claim prostitution as immoral? There are cases where it is immoral - child prostitution (where the child cannot give consent) and cases of forced prostitution (where the adult is not free to give consent) but between consenting adults? I don't see it, and your argument has thus far given me no reason to change my mind.

In fact, if you'll forgive me saying so, your argument seems primarily based on "I don't like it" which is fine, of course - I'm not arguing that you have to like it, or find it dignified, or any of that. But "I don't like it" and "It's not dignified" is no good reason to proclaim something immoral or deserving of illegality.

[Greatest I am]

I have shown why I think it immoral but have yet to hear why it is moral.


For me, morality comes down to one basic thing: are you hurting anybody else against their will, or trampling on their rights? Murder and rape, to take two obvious instances, are immoral because they cause harm and infringe on another's rights.

I have difficulty saying the same thing when it comes to prostitution. In legalised prostitution, for example, a transaction takes place between two consenting adults. Neither is forced to take part, they both do it of their own free will. It may well be undignified, to use your perspective, but no-one is actually getting hurt. No-one's rights are being abused.

What grounds then can I use to claim prostitution as immoral? There are cases where it is immoral - child prostitution (where the child cannot give consent) and cases of forced prostitution (where the adult is not free to give consent) but between consenting adults? I don't see it, and your argument has thus far given me no reason to change my mind.

In fact, if you'll forgive me saying so, your argument seems primarily based on "I don't like it" which is fine, of course - I'm not arguing that you have to like it, or find it dignified, or any of that. But "I don't like it" and "It's not dignified" is no good reason to proclaim something immoral or deserving of illegality.

We are close in thinking as I have NOT advocated illegality.

The harm I see in prostitution is based more on the social aspect of it.
If man is to be a social animal then he must make the efforts to train himself to be social.
He does not do so if all he needs do is hand over a few bucks for the rewards of being social instead of his becoming more social.
In other words, in many cases, prostitution inadvertently promotes unsociability.
This is not good for any man that seeks dignity within his society.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Haswell]

What is unsociable about having sex that is between willing agreed participants? Or is it the exchange of money thta gets your panties in a bunch?

[Preno]

The harm I see in prostitution is based more on the social aspect of it.
If man is to be a social animal then he must make the efforts to train himself to be social.
He does not do so if all he needs do is hand over a few bucks for the rewards of being social instead of his becoming more social.If your main motivation for "being social" is the prospect of having sex, then you probably haven't been socialized very well, hth.

[Greatest I am]

What is unsociable about having sex that is between willing agreed participants? Or is it the exchange of money thta gets your panties in a bunch?

A sociable person should be able to enter a bar for instance and be able to communicate well enough and be socially adept enough to come out with someone who wants to be with him for himself. this is socialization in my view.
To walk in and be so gauche in social skills that all he can do is buy companionship from a hooker is to admit to not being of personal unpaid for value.

One should pity such.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

The harm I see in prostitution is based more on the social aspect of it.
If man is to be a social animal then he must make the efforts to train himself to be social.
He does not do so if all he needs do is hand over a few bucks for the rewards of being social instead of his becoming more social.If your main motivation for "being social" is the prospect of having sex, then you probably haven't been socialized very well, hth.

If that was then you would be right.

That is not my main motivator.

Was it yours?

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Nontoxic]

GIA, perhaps another way of looking at it is this. If you are so worried about the children, many prostitutes are choosing this profession as a means of providing for their children. So, by keeping it illegal, you are harming the children. Locking up mom, and taking the kids away, because you don't like her choices, isn't right either.
Legalize it, monitor the brothels, and tax them as a legitimate business. Everybody wins. Poor, ugly, fat guys deserve love too. Then there are the ones that don't want a "relationship, or to lead anyone on. They just want to get laid.

[Haswell]

What is unsociable about having sex that is between willing agreed participants? Or is it the exchange of money thta gets your panties in a bunch?

A sociable person should be able to enter a bar for instance and be able to communicate well enough and be socially adept enough to come out with someone who wants to be with him for himself. this is socialization in my view.
To walk in and be so gauche in social skills that all he can do is buy companionship from a hooker is to admit to not being of personal unpaid for value.

One should pity such.

Ta ta
Jailbird

Who says men (or women) who pay for Hookers are gauche in social skills? If you want a drink with someone ; fine. If you want a conversation; fine. If you want a fuck; then why go through all the time and expense of buying someone drinks and food all night on the offchance you might get laid?

I think you need to self examine yourself (but not too much or you'll go blind) and your attitude towards sex. I have had sex with people I have never socialised with (much) I have also had sex with someone I have cared for deeply. I found the episodes remarkably similar.

But to say paying for sex is only for those that cannot socialise is preposterous. Most of us pay for sex. The married ones. Every day. Emotionally and financially.

[Octavia]

The harm I see in prostitution is based more on the social aspect of it.
If man is to be a social animal then he must make the efforts to train himself to be social.
He does not do so if all he needs do is hand over a few bucks for the rewards of being social instead of his becoming more social.
In other words, in many cases, prostitution inadvertently promotes unsociability.
This is not good for any man that seeks dignity within his society.

Ta ta
Jailbird

You're conflating capability with compulsion. While I agree that it is a general good for people to be better socialised, it doesn't necessarily follow that increased socialisation is the best option at all times, in all circumstances. Try practising your social skills in the reading room of the British Library, for instance, and you'll find that it isn't appreciated.

One can be perfectly capable of adequate or above-average social interaction, and yet choose not to exhibit that behaviour because it isn't always suitable or necessary.

Besides, there are many other ways to be unsociable. I can assure you that I spend more time reading than even the most devoted prostitute-goer spends with their paid partner. It could be argued that I'm being far more unsociable - after all, there's another person involved in the latter case, so it's by definition more sociable than me on my lonesome. And I could increase my sociability by never picking up another book and spending all that suddenly free time at the pub... but I'm not going to. Sociability is a worthy thing, but it's not the be all and end all of human activity.

[Oolon Colluphid]

GIA:

1) Is all sex is degrading? Y / N

2) Is sex between consenting adults immoral? Y / N

3) Is a woman who marries a rich man, mainly for his money / status / the chance of her having a much cushier life / etc, not implicitly consenting to have sex with him? Y / N

4) Is the situation in (3) immoral? Y / N

5) Is a man who spends heaps of money wining and dining a woman in the hope of getting laid acting immorally? Y / N

If your answer to any of those is Yes, please explain.

If your answers to all of those are No, please explain what makes prostitution immoral.

[Greatest I am]

GIA, perhaps another way of looking at it is this. If you are so worried about the children, many prostitutes are choosing this profession as a means of providing for their children. So, by keeping it illegal, you are harming the children. Locking up mom, and taking the kids away, because you don't like her choices, isn't right either.
Legalize it, monitor the brothels, and tax them as a legitimate business. Everybody wins. Poor, ugly, fat guys deserve love too. Then there are the ones that don't want a "relationship, or to lead anyone on. They just want to get laid.

Let me reiterate again for the 10th time.

I do not believe that prostitution should be illegal.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

What is unsociable about having sex that is between willing agreed participants? Or is it the exchange of money thta gets your panties in a bunch?

A sociable person should be able to enter a bar for instance and be able to communicate well enough and be socially adept enough to come out with someone who wants to be with him for himself. this is socialization in my view.
To walk in and be so gauche in social skills that all he can do is buy companionship from a hooker is to admit to not being of personal unpaid for value.

One should pity such.

Ta ta
Jailbird

Who says men (or women) who pay for Hookers are gauche in social skills? If you want a drink with someone ; fine. If you want a conversation; fine. If you want a fuck; then why go through all the time and expense of buying someone drinks and food all night on the offchance you might get laid?

I think you need to self examine yourself (but not too much or you'll go blind) and your attitude towards sex. I have had sex with people I have never socialised with (much) I have also had sex with someone I have cared for deeply. I found the episodes remarkably similar.

But to say paying for sex is only for those that cannot socialise is preposterous. Most of us pay for sex. The married ones. Every day. Emotionally and financially.

You ask me to self examine while you think that sex with someone you love is the same as with a hooker. " I found the episodes remarkably similar".

You must just fuck your wife instead of making love.
Good respect there I see.

What do they say about a log in your eye.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

GIA:

1) Is all sex is degrading? Y / N

Too stupid of a question to answer.


2) Is sex between consenting adults immoral? Y / N

Same answer if for pleasure and not profit.

3) Is a woman who marries a rich man, mainly for his money / status / the chance of her having a much cushier life / etc, not implicitly consenting to have sex with him? Y / N

A person should mary for love of the other person, not love of money.


4) Is the situation in (3) immoral? Y / N

The question was poorly stated but I think the answer is yes, that is immoral.

5) Is a man who spends heaps of money wining and dining a woman in the hope of getting laid acting immorally? Y / N

Yes. He is being dishonest unless he tells her that all he wants is sex.

If your answer to any of those is Yes, please explain.

If your answers to all of those are No, please explain what makes prostitution immoral.

It is immoral because it is demeaning to all involved and damages the dignity of all.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Haswell]

You ask me to self examine while you think that sex with someone you love is the same as with a hooker. " I found the episodes remarkably similar".

You must just fuck your wife instead of making love.
Good respect there I see.

What do they say about a log in your eye.

Ta ta
Jailbird

No I did not. I meant have a wank and chill out. Just like everyone else is telling you to do. I said sex with someone you know or do not know is remarkably similar.

Sometimes a fuck is just a fuck and if you prefer twee expression like 'making love' to just having 'sex' ten it gives us a great insight into the way you think.

How does one 'make' love btw?

I have no idea about what you mean about a log in my eye. You seem more preoccupied with getting wood.


Prostitution is said to be the second oldest profession. It has been here for millennia and will be here as long as humans want sex. So suck it up and don't be so sanctimonious. Some people cannot, for whatever reason or another, give vent to their very natural urges and drives. I'm thinking the severely disabled for one. Those who cannot 'socialise'. Who do you think you are to deny them this right that others can enjoy freely?

[Deadlokd]

For a forum filled with smart people you all seem rather dense when it comes to prostitution. Okay, now that I've offended you all with my second post here, allow me to explain. :D

Reading between the lines of all your posts I get the sense that you think that prostitutes have just made one career choice amongst many. As if all prostitutes had as much of an opportunity to go to college or secretarial school. And they left school, weighed up their options and decided against becoming a dentist in favour of becoming a prostitute. Ask yourselves this; all things being equal, would you trade your current career in IT, law, medicine, whatever field you are in, for a career as a prostitute?

The reality is that no decision is made in a vacuum. Women who become prostitutes do not have the same opportunities as you. One study found that 80% of prostitutes were abused as children (http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/ma?f=102206974.html). And some of those victims couldn't identify it as abuse because it was "consensual". Children cannot consent. Prostitutes do not have the same oportunities as the general populace. There are sexual abuse issues, substance abuse issues, low self-esteem and fear. The article about the Eastern European women fleeing to the West highlighted that. The woman used as an example is hooked on heroin. How many secretaries or PAs do you know that are hooked on heroin or meth? And use it just to get through their day?

A study of Korean prostitutes (http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/gw/Cmd?linkVars=SessionID%3D1001251848220890540616100 1%26BROWSER_STATE%3DGMResults%26ORBagentPort%3D146 10%26GM2K_FORM%3DGMResults%26LAST_HIDDEN_TIMESTAMP %3D1264463303355%26UserSearchText%3Dchild%2Babuse% 2Band%2Bprostitution%26sb_action%3DExpand%2BItem%2 B%253A%2B5%26HIDDEN_TIMESTAMP%3D1264463316838) found they are more likely to suffer post traumatic stress disorder than a control sample from the general population. A different study of street workers in Sydney (http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/gw/Cmd?linkVars=SessionID%3D1001251848220890540616100 1%26BROWSER_STATE%3DGMResults%26ORBagentPort%3D146 10%26GM2K_FORM%3DGMResults%26LAST_HIDDEN_TIMESTAMP %3D1264463303355%26UserSearchText%3Dchild%2Babuse% 2Band%2Bprostitution%26sb_action%3DExpand%2BItem%2 B%253A%2B8%26HIDDEN_TIMESTAMP%3D1264463316838) (remember Sydney? Prostitution is legal there) found a large numer of them came from a background of child sexual abuse and substance abuse. Most prostitutes suffer violence as part of their job. Far more in fact than any other job path.

Most prostitutes are not Julia Roberts. Most prostitutes do not meet Richard Gere and get million dollar necklaces. Most prostitutes in brothels have to service around ten men a shift. On the street the number is far higher. In legal brothels in Australia the prostitute only gets 50% of the fee, the brothel owner gets the other 50%. With those kind of profits it is no surprise that organised crime has taken hold and illegal brothels are thriving. Asian women are being imported to order. (http://www.friends-partners.org/lists/stop-traffic/1999/0370.html)

Just as a quick aside, DavidB's point on page two was highly offensive;

The idea that paying for sex is violence against women who want to sell it seems to me rather like saying that paying for vegetables is violence against greengrocers.

Equating women with vegetables is offensive and unhelpful to the discussion. Violence comes in many forms. It isn't just physical violence, although many prostitutes suffer that too, up to 82% of them. (http://womensissues.about.com/od/rapesexualassault/a/Wuornos.htm) It is mental and psychological abuse too. Prostitution is not about consensual sex. A woman that goes to a club anmd picks up a man to have sex with, has exercised control over her sexual choices. She can have sex and go back and pick up three more men and the choices are all hers. Prostitutes do not have that option. Once you introduce money into the equation choice goes out the window. It is no longer a consensual transaction. Most prostitutes would not willingly have sex with their clients if they met them in a club. So, once you remove the consensual aspect what you have is psychological abuse and violence. Are there prostitutes that get sexual pleasure from every sexual encounter they have on a shift? Ten, twelve, twenty? I doubt it. And if they aren't enjoying the encounter then it isn't a consensual sexual relationship.

Moving on to the point about marriage. If your marriage is such that you are "paying" for sex then get a fucking divorce. I am married and we have a sexual partnership. Neither of us have a sense of paying for sex. Because we respect each other and come together willingly. If you feel that your wife is only having sex with you because you "pay" her, then move on. It's a completely asinine point and shouldn't have been brought up.

So what is the answer? We, as a society, will probably never get rid of child abuse, so we have instead to pick up the pieces. Until "illegal" substances are legalised, regulated and controlled we will have people who will sink to the lowest common denominator to feed their habit. The best answer I have seen comes from Sweden.

In 1999 Sweden changed their laws from legal prostitution to partly legal prostitution. It was not illegal to sell yourself for sex but it was illegal to puchase someone for sex. As well as this Sweden implemented a wide social strategy to help prostitutes leave the industry. The results speak for themselves (http://www.justicewomen.com/cj_sweden.html). Since implementation two thirds of prostitutes in Stockholm have disappeared and the number of johns has dropped by 80%. Human trafficking into Sweden has diminished drastically, only 200-400 compared to 15 000-17 000 in Finland. The reason that Sweden was able to pass such legislation is that 50% of Swedens parliament are women. As such they have dismissed much of the old patriarchal way of thinking, the way that is so evident in this thread. That women use their vaginas as currency all the time, whether on the street, in a brothel, in marriage or with a rich older man. And if women use their vaginas as currency then it is okay for men to purchase at will. Because she wants to so it is okay.

Anyway, I've probably alienated enough of you for one day. :) But i'm cool with that. As long as people believe the purchasing of women is fine and dandy I will piss you off.

[Bane]

I'm also sure there are men who would like to be paid to have sex with women ;) If it's something one likes doing (and doesn't actually cause harm) then getting paid for it would be all the better!

If it were possible for me to be a courtesan, I actually would do it. :) It's not the same as being a submissive :p

[Preno]

Prostitution is not about consensual sex. A woman that goes to a club anmd picks up a man to have sex with, has exercised control over her sexual choices. She can have sex and go back and pick up three more men and the choices are all hers. Prostitutes do not have that option. Once you introduce money into the equation choice goes out the window. It is no longer a consensual transaction. Most prostitutes would not willingly have sex with their clients if they met them in a club.And most dustman don't willingly empty dustbins in their free time.
So, once you remove the consensual aspect what you have is psychological abuse and violence. Are there prostitutes that get sexual pleasure from every sexual encounter they have on a shift? Ten, twelve, twenty? I doubt it. And if they aren't enjoying the encounter then it isn't a consensual sexual relationship.No, that's not what consensual means.

The first half of your post was sensible, but the rest is pretty retarded.

[Deadlokd]

There is a far cry from using your hands to empty a bin to having men use your vagina.

[Preno]

So? Your argument should specify what that difference consists in. As it stands, it obviously doesn't work. You haven't provided any positive reasons for why the fact that "most prostitutes would not willingly have sex with their clients if they met them in a club" should be relevant.

[munnki]

I thought what you had to say made a lot of sense Deadkold and it was well-sourced - some of this thread has been dominated with moral assertions rather than demonstrated articles/statistics.

Yes, I'm a teacher and though I hate aspects of my job and have my bad days - I wouldn't compare it to having to suck a series of nasty and different cocks on a daily basis. It's only like that, in fact, on the two days a year when the local conservative party mp pops in to look around with his cronies. Joking aside - I'm sure it is or at least can be a difficult job - and, yes, perhaps what Sweden has done is a way to deal with it.

What I think patently hasn't worked is illegalizing it and hoping it will go away. Thinking about how it can be dealt with positively does not have to mean doing things which will encourage it. History equally shows that prostitution isn't going anywhere - and I think accepting that and recognizing how many men do use prostitutes will take us many steps down the road to thinking about how we can positively regulate (if that's the correct word) this unique industry (again if that's the right word)...

I think what I mean to say is... I certainly do not have the answer to what will work...but I'm clear on some of the approaches that don't work. Interesting stuff...

[Deadlokd]

So? Your argument should specify what that difference consists in. As it stands, it obviously doesn't work. You haven't provided any positive reasons for why the fact that "most prostitutes would not willingly have sex with their clients if they met them in a club" should be relevant.

It is very relevant. You only have to look at the number of women who left the industry in Sweden to realise how much they must have enjoyed it. At the end of the day it isn't up to us to place a value on what prostitutes do. It is up to them. And the fact that 60% of prostitutes in Sweden availed themselves of the opportunity to exit the industry is telling. I can't think of another industry that is as dangerous to the people in it. Look at how many women get diagnosed with PTSD.

I think where people differ on this topic is the value they place on a vagina. Ask any woman, their vagina is inextricably linked to self. They aren't just selling their vaginas they're selling themselves. Teachers aren't selling themselves, they're selling knowledge, lawyers ditto, doctors ditto. Labourers are selling their hands and the knowledge on how to use them. I have spoken to ex-strippers and prostitutes and for them it isn't that simple. They are selling themselves. I think Greatest I Am had a very good point. In a very real sense it is human slavery because you are buying people.

I have a few feminist friends who can explain all this far better than I. I'll invite them here.

Munnki, my opposition to prostitution is moral too, I can just bring up data to show what prostitutes think about their own industry. Unlike some people in this thread who's responses are along the lines of "hur, I'd like to be paid for having sex..." Of course you would, now would you like to be paid for having sex with twenty men in a night, any one of which could beat you, rob you or rape you? Men you wouldn't look at otherwise. Bane said she'd like to be a courtesan. Great, but a courtesan is a very small subset of prostitution. A courtesan may exercise some choice with her clients. I assure you that the average prosttute does not have that luxury. Prostitution is not Pretty Woman, it is a degrading, dirty industry that most women would escape if they could.

[Angra Mainyu]

Deadlokd,

You make some good points about the exploitation of prostitutes, but Preno's objection was to your characterization of sex as non-consensual based on the lack of enjoyment by one of the parties, not to your claim that most of them do not enjoy it.

On a different note, I see you also mentioned strippers (I suppose, female strippers). Do you think the transaction is also non consensual in those cases? How about male prostitutes, and male strippers?

More generally, how about porn?

Suppose someone poses naked, or makes a movie where he or she strips, and then sells the pictures/movie for money?

Here, money is involved as well, and the person in question wouldn't do it without the money. Do you consider that that's non-consensual, either?

[Deadlokd]

Deadlokd,

You make some good points about the exploitation of prostitutes, but Preno's objection was to your characterization of sex as non-consensual based on the lack of enjoyment by one of the parties, not to your claim that most of them do not enjoy it.

On a different note, I see you also mentioned strippers (I suppose, female strippers). Do you think the transaction is also non consensual in those cases? How about male prostitutes, and male strippers?

More generally, how about porn?

Suppose someone poses naked, or makes a movie where he or she strips, and then sells the pictures/movie for money?

Here, money is involved as well, and the person in question wouldn't do it without the money. Do you consider that that's non-consensual, either?

Again, no decision is made in a vacuum. So when it comes to strippers and porn many of the things that drive a woman to prostitution apply there as well. Next time you, or anyone here, is perusing porn look at the women's eyes. Not at the whole facial expression, just the eyes. Ask yourself just how much she is enjoying it? This does not apply to all women in porn, I'm sure that some genuinely like it, but again, not all decisions are made in a vacuum. Mosty women in porn were abused as children, most have learnt that the only way to be accepted by men is to be useful to men.

I saw Preno's point but I thought that he missed mine. The average prostitute, worldwide, does not have the luxury to choose her sexual partners. They must, pardon the awful pun, take on all comers.What makes sex consensual is that both parties choose freely to take the other as a partner for however long. Once you introduce money, and more specifically what the money is needed for, into the equation you no longer have a consensual relationship. A woman with substance abuse issues does not have the luxury of picking and choosing her partners. A woman with a pimp or in a brothel has even less choice. By no stretch of the imagination are they consensual relationships.

I haven't read enough about male prostitutes/strippers but again I doubt if they had the option to go to med school. I used to live next door to a man named Alex. He was nice, but extremely troubled. He didn't handle his homosexuality that well. His parents, specifically his father, wouldn't have helped there. He was also slightly mentally ill. Because of his own self-esteem issues, substance abuse issues and general skittiness he was unable to get a 'normal' job. In the end he fell back to the only thing he knew how to do. He bought a wig and some women's clothes and he went and sold himself on the street corner. Given a different set of circumstances he would have worked in a shop, or gone to university, but he couldn't. He didn't like being a prostitute, but he had nothing else. So maybe there are strong parallels between women and men prostitutes.

We all like to exercise free will over our sexual choices. And it's hard to believe that people don't get that luxury. If you have used prostitutes it helps to sleep better at night if you believe that they want to do it. That they would have sex with you if they met you in a club. But that's their job. Most of them though just don't like it.

[Deadlokd]

Just another point, but an important one. Most consumers of porn and prostitution, heterosexual and homosexual, are men. Why is that do you think?

[Angra Mainyu]

Again, no decision is made in a vacuum. So when it comes to strippers and porn many of the things that drive a woman to prostitution apply there as well. Next time you, or anyone here, is perusing porn look at the women's eyes. Not at the whole facial expression, just the eyes. Ask yourself just how much she is enjoying it?
Well, I'm not exactly an expert on porn :devil: , and I'm not saying I watch it, but just for the sake of speculation, maybe it's fairly obvious when a person doing porn has an orgasm, and and when they're faking it.

Also, even not having an orgasm does not imply no enjoyment at all - and, again, the difference may be easy to spot.

Perhaps (but pure speculation), someone could suggest that most men doing any porn scene enjoy it, whereas women usually don't, but there are specific niches where they usually do.

That said, Preno's objection was to your apparently equating "not having sexual pleasure" with "non consensual relationship".

Suppose someone performs for a camera on the internet, and gets paid for it. Maybe she won't enjoy it, but then again, neither will those who clear public toilets.


This does not apply to all women in porn, I'm sure that some genuinely like it, but again, not all decisions are made in a vacuum. Mosty women in porn were abused as children, most have learnt that the only way to be accepted by men is to be useful to men.
1) Do you have evidence that most women in (legal) porn were abused as children?

2) Do you think it's the same for men?

In any case, you seem to be focusing on porn involving men having sex with women, whereas my question was more general, and included other options (e.g., only men, only women, solos, etc.).



I saw Preno's point but I thought that he missed mine. The average prostitute, worldwide, does not have the luxury to choose her sexual partners. They must, pardon the awful pun, take on all comers.
I think Preno probably saw that point, since he said the first half of your argument was sensible.

I saw your point.

But you seem to have missed Preno's, and some of my questions about it as well.


What makes sex consensual is that both parties choose freely to take the other as a partner for however long.
I disagree.

If person A1 and person A2, both competent adults, agree to have sex for the fun of it - not for however long, but just that time -, that's consensual.

And the same goes for persons A1, A2, A3, ..., A12, if they want to have an orgy.



Once you introduce money, and more specifically what the money is needed for, into the equation you no longer have a consensual relationship.
Why not?

Suppose someone poses naked, or makes a movie where he or she strips, and then sells the pictures/movie for money?

If they sell the pictures/movie, where was the non-consensual part of it?

Suppose we're talking about men. Would you still think it's non-consensual?



A woman with substance abuse issues does not have the luxury of picking and choosing her partners.
Probably not.

A man with substance abuse may be on the same boat, even though he'll probably do derive sexual pleasure from many sexual acts (some things are hard faking), though not all.

So, it seems it depends on the case.


A woman with a pimp or in a brothel has even less choice.
With a pimp, probably right.

In a brothel, if it's legal and well-regulated, that's not so clear. It depends on the regulations. Probably the same would apply to a man.

On the other hand, that does not apply to porn in general, or to strippers (those who are stripping, not having sex).


I haven't read enough about male prostitutes/strippers but again I doubt if they had the option to go to med school.
Probably not, especially for prostitutes (strippers are not the same). But then again, those cleaning latrines probably didn't have that option, either.

That does not mean that male strippers can't pick their sexual partners, or that male porn performers don't derive sexual pleasure from it.

As for male prostitutes, I think that that's usually worse for them; as for sexual pleasure, that depends on what they're asked to do, what they're willing to do, and the particular individual.


I used to live next door to a man named Alex. He was nice, but extremely troubled. He didn't handle his homosexuality that well. His parents, specifically his father, wouldn't have helped there. He was also slightly mentally ill. Because of his own self-esteem issues, substance abuse issues and general skittiness he was unable to get a 'normal' job. In the end he fell back to the only thing he knew how to do. He bought a wig and some women's clothes and he went and sold himself on the street corner. Given a different set of circumstances he would have worked in a shop, or gone to university, but he couldn't. He didn't like being a prostitute, but he had nothing else. So maybe there are strong parallels between women and men prostitutes.
Yes, in that particular case, and probably most cases of male prostitutes, they would choose to go to college instead. The same goes for those cleaning public toilets.

Do you think most male prostitutes would choose cleaning public toilets instead of being a prostitute?

Do you think most female prostitutes would?

Do you think most people doing porn (men or women) would choose cleaning public toilets instead of doing porn?


We all like to exercise free will over our sexual choices. And it's hard to believe that people don't get that luxury. If you have used prostitutes it helps to sleep better at night if you believe that they want to do it. That they would have sex with you if they met you in a club. But that's their job. Most of them though just don't like it.
Of course, it's clear that prostitutes would probably not have sex with their clients for the fun of it (but then, neither would young, attractive people marry old, unattractive people, in most cases, if the latter weren't rich; that doesn't mean that the old, rich person should be punished, or that the other one is actually suffering).

That does not mean that they're suffering - that depends on the case -, but someone who does not have a strong capability for self-delusion will probably realize that if they have sex with a prostitute, the prostitute may well be suffering even if she pretends to enjoy it (and in that case, I think it's immoral to do it; it's more complicated with male prostitutes, who might be more likely to enjoy the sex even if they suffer later, etc.; I don't know), and even if the (female) prostitute isn't suffering, at least she's probably not deriving sexual pleasure from the act (which wouldn't mean the act is immoral, but it's kind of bad for the client's self-esteem).

So, overall, and without being able to tell whether the other person is suffering, it find it wrong to have sex with a prostitute - and, perhaps, having sex with a prostitute may be pretty bad for the ego of the client...unless he's very good at self-delusion, or has very little ego...then again, it seems to me that most people are very good at self-delusion; there may be other exceptions I suppose.

On the other hand, good regulations can reduce the risk of suffering, so it's not a clear-cut matter, and porn and strippers aren't the same as prostitution - and it seems that "they don't enjoy it" is not the same as "the act is not consensual", nor does it imply it (though it may be an indication which should be considered alongside others, on a case by case basis, it's not decisive).

[Angra Mainyu]

Just another point, but an important one. Most consumers of porn and prostitution, heterosexual and homosexual, are men. Why is that do you think?
I'm not remotely an expert, but evolutionary considerations make that result unsurprising. I could mention some possibilities.

First, a woman who wants sex can go to a bar or club and find many men willing to have causal sex with her for the fun of it. The opposite isn't true.

In fact, there are many men who cannot find any woman who would be willing to have sex with them, whereas not nearly as many women are in the same situation.

Second, it may well be that men are, overall, more interested in having sex (which does not mean they actually have more sex than women (not counting masturbation); they may only rarely get what they want), with as many partners as they can find.

[Deadlokd]

Just another point, but an important one. Most consumers of porn and prostitution, heterosexual and homosexual, are men. Why is that do you think?
I'm not remotely an expert, but evolutionary considerations make that result unsurprising. I could mention some possibilities.

First, a woman who wants sex can go to a bar or club and find many men willing to have causal sex with her for the fun of it. The opposite isn't true.

In fact, there are many men who cannot find any woman who would be willing to have sex with them, whereas not nearly as many women are in the same situation.

Second, it may well be that men are, overall, more interested in having sex (which does not mean they actually have more sex than women (not counting masturbation); they may only rarely get what they want), with as many partners as they can find.

Thank you for making my point for me. So the women that men for pay for sex wouldn't ordinarily engage with them. I already said that. Second, men want to have sex with lots of women but women don't want to have sex with lots of men. So when a prostitute is having sex with lots of men she must be doing it against her will, therefore it is not consensual.

I'll come back later and deal with some of your other post.

[Haswell]

Just another point, but an important one. Most consumers of porn and prostitution, heterosexual and homosexual, are men. Why is that do you think?


Probably because the male desire for sex is different to the female desire for sex. You might like to know that within the Porn industry, an entire sub industry of Porn specifically for women has risen up(stop sniggering at the back Tomkins)

Such porn tends to be made by women and includes scenes of what might be deemed 'tenderness', rarely shows any close ups and certainly no money shots. This may or may not reflect female needs but it sure as hell is lucrative. Plus, I think, more and more women, if blogs are anything to go by, are finding that they want to share the full blown porn (if you'll pardon the expression).

Why do more men seek prostitutes than women? Ordinary sex does not come free; there is always a price to pay. Perhaps some men prefer the actual price. Certainly there are a lot of men who take great pleasure in paying for it. Its part of the fantasy but slipping the Missus a few quid for on demand sex would probably be met with less than enthusiasm and probably something sharp.

[Deadlokd]

Okay, very quickly, I led up to and explained the non-consensual aspect of pornography. Most prostitutes do not have the same opportunities as other women. Most prostitutes come from an abused childhood. 80% in fact. It's in my first post in this thread with a source. A lot of prostitutes have substance abuse issues and if they didn't when they started, then they will soon. This is not the same background as someone going to Harvard. Or should I say it is statistically unlikely that someone that was abused as a child, has low self-esteem and abuses alcohol or drugs would go to Harvard.

So when we take it as granted that women who become prostitutes are already fractured and probably need hundreds of dollars a day to feed their addiction then the 'consensual' aspect goes out the window. These women do not start at the same point as you or me. We have a long way to go before we 'choose' to work the streets.

I've cleaned toilets. I made quite a good living cleaning toilets. It isn't that onerous a job. I would definitely choose that over prostituting myself. Would male and female prostitutes choose cleaning toilets over prostitution? I don't know. I've never asked the question. Can a heroin addict feed their habit on a cleaners wage? No, probably not.

As I have said at the end of the day it is irrelevant what I think. I have linked to studies showing the negative effect prostitution has on women. I have shown one country that offered a way out and 60% of women took it. I would like to see other countries follow Sweden's lead. Support women totally rather than impose anachronistic patriarchal rules upon them. Support women from abusive homes, help them to regain their self-esteem. Stop human trafficking. Did you se the numbers for Finland? 15 000-17 000 women trafficked in a year. That's ridiculous. And that is just one country. Oh well, I'm off to have dinner.

[Deadlokd]

Ordinary sex does not come free; there is always a price to pay.

You keep saying that. That does not make it true. I have had sex many times without a pricetag. Just for the sheer joy of sex. I do not pay my wife for sex. In any form. It is a bizarre assertion.

[Angra Mainyu]

Thank you for making my point for me. So the women that men for pay for sex wouldn't ordinarily engage with them.
If by "ordinarily" you mean "for the fun of it" (which is what I was saying), then I agree.

Also, when young, attractive people marry old, unattractive rich people, many (probably most) of the marriages in question would not take place if the old, unattractive people were not rich - and at least the women in many (probably most) such marriages would not have sex with the man they're marrying just for the fun of it.

Also, people who clean public toilets would almost certainly not do it for the fun of it.


Second, men want to have sex with lots of women but women don't want to have sex with lots of men.
I'm talking "in general".

There are some men who don't want to have sex for fun with any women, but with other men. And there are some women who want to have sex for fun with other women. And there are some men who don't want much sex (in both frequency and variety of partners), and some women who do. And there is a long etc.

You asked my opinion about why most consumers of porn and prostitution are men. I gave you my opinion, but I didn't mean to say that those were exceptionless rules, but the most common cases.


So when a prostitute is having sex with lots of men she must be doing it against her will, therefore it is not consensual.
No, this is a non-sequitur.

First, there are women who do want to have sex for fun with lots of men.

Second, most prostitutes are probably not those women, which does not mean that those prostitutes who don't want to have sex for fun with men are not consensually having sex for money with those men: they don't want the sex, the want the money, but they give the sex to get the money.

But then again, people who clean public toilets don't want to clean public toilets for fun. They don't want to clean them at all (usually), but they want to get paid, so they do the cleaning in order to get paid.

And, many other people doing their jobs aren't doing those jobs for fun: they're doing them for money: they don't want to do the job, but they want the money, so they do the job to get the money. But that does not mean it's not consensual.

And in the case of porn and strippers, well, I already addressed those cases, so I'll refer you to my previous post.

That's not to say that most prostitutes are willingly having sex with their clients. In fact, you brought up some interesting points against that.

But your claim that if they don't want to have sex for fun - if they wouldn't do it for fun, or just for fun -, then the sex is not consensual, is unsupported, and apparently false.

[Haswell]

You keep saying that. That does not make it true. I have had sex many times without a pricetag. Just for the sheer joy of sex. I do not pay my wife for sex. In any form. It is a bizarre assertion.


You don't seem to understand humour much.

Sexual reproduction is considered very 'pricey' in evolutionary terms. Lighten up mate.

[Deadlokd]

Sorry Angra, your point doesn't follow. If women are not entering a sexual relationship on an equal footing as the man then it is at best coercion, at worst non-consensual. The majority of female prostitutes (and note that I am saying the majority, not all) are prostitutes because that is all they have to support their families, habit, self esteem, what have you. They need that money, the johns have that money. They have not entered the contract at the same level. I'm sorry to say that Julia Roberts is not a good representation of an average prostitute. And again I'm dealing with the domestic women who 'choose' to be prostitutes. I'm not talking about the millions of women trafficked for sex worldwide. As Sweden discovered if you give women the option and the resources to escape the trade 60% of them will.

There is also a big difference between cleaning toilets and selling your body. Don't take my word on it, read what actual prostitutes say. Here (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_17_43/ai_n18645535/) for example. From what I have read and heard you cannot equate prostitution with any other career, no matter how degrading.

You also seem to want to bring up women who marry for money. Okay, I'll see those women who marry for money and raise you millions more who marry for love. Statistically women who marry for money are only in the majority on daytime soaps and particularly bad moves.

Haswell, sorry for missing the humour. I am capable of it, I just can't find that much in this topic.

[Angra Mainyu]

Sorry Angra, your point doesn't follow. If women are not entering a sexual relationship on an equal footing as the man then it is at best coercion, at worst non-consensual.

Who said anything about equal footing?

My point is that from "person A would not have sex with person B just for fun", it does not follow "If person A has sex with person B, then it's non-consensual".

If a young, attractive woman marries an octogenarian millionaire, in order to inherit a ton of money, was she coerced, or is it non-consensual?


The majority of female prostitutes (and note that I am saying the majority, not all) are prostitutes because that is all they have to support their families, habit, self esteem, what have you. They need that money, the johns have that money.
Possibly. Probably. But that's not what I question.


They have not entered the contract at the same level.
And neither has the person who cleans toilets, or works for McDonald's, or almost everyone.

I'm sorry to say that Julia Roberts is not a good representation of an average prostitute.
No need to be sorry, but no need to say it, either. It's obvious.


And again I'm dealing with the domestic women who 'choose' to be prostitutes. I'm not talking about the millions of women trafficked for sex worldwide. As Sweden discovered if you give women the option and the resources to escape the trade 60% of them will.
Well, given that the criminalized hiring them, it's not as if they were in a good position to keep making a living out of it. Add that to the funding provided by the government, and it's understandable that they found a better choice.

But again, that's beside the point Preno brought up and that I've been explaining. I think I'll have to leave it to Preno - maybe he can make the point in a way that you find more persuasive. I concede I can't.


There is also a big difference between cleaning toilets and selling your body. Don't take my word on it, read what actual prostitutes say. Here for example. From what I have read and heard you cannot equate prostitution with any other career, no matter how degrading.

So, are you saying that all men and women in prostitution would prefer to clean toilets instead?

Do you think the same applies to all male and female strippers? All men and women doing porn?

That seems implausible.

And besides, that is not the point.



You also seem to want to bring up women who marry for money. Okay, I'll see those women who marry for money and raise you millions more who marry for love. Statistically women who marry for money are only in the majority on daytime soaps and particularly bad moves.
That's not at all the point. The point is that women who marry for money wouldn't want to have sex with their rich husbands just for the fun of it. Furthermore, they probably don't have fun having sex with them. Would you say, then, that their sex with their husbands is non-consensual?

[Deadlokd]

Can you please explain to me then if person A would not, under normal equal circumstances, have sex with person B but does for money how that is consensual. Put it this way. Drug and alcohol addiction, as an example, is often used in a courtroom as a defense. It follows that the person is of diminished mental capacity while intoxicated or suffering a habit. People of diminished mental capacity cannot enter a contract, whether for a car or for some fun consensual sex.

Look at it this way. Is consent black and white?

[Haswell]

Haswell, sorry for missing the humour. I am capable of it, I just can't find that much in this topic.

Thats OK. I was making jokes about sex; not about prostitution. That's serious business one way or the other.

I for one never lose sight of the fact that 99% of women in prostitution are not there as a career choice.

[munnki]

Yeah... I think of my marriage less as a payment for sex than a mutual agreement and mutual system of support. You could trivialize it to 'payment for sex' I suppose but that seems like a pretty hardcore game of semantics to me. We both provide certain services to each other - support, labour, sex...etc... and so I would tend to think of it much more as an arrangement based on emotional and physical barter. Of course, day to day, one doesn't think about it in such a cold way - but if driven to compare it to a business arrangement it's much more complex than a simple transaction or similar. I suspect this is true of any relatively successful relationship...

[Angra Mainyu]

Can you please explain to me then if person A would not, under normal equal circumstances, have sex with person B but does for money how that is consensual.

I can only repeat the points, since I can't make it any more clear.

My point is that from "person A would not have sex with person B just for fun", it does not follow "If person A has sex with person B, then it's non-consensual".

Suppose a young, attractive woman marries an octogenarian millionaire, in order to inherit a ton of money, and she has sex with him. Is it non-consensual?

Put it this way. Drug and alcohol addiction, as an example, is often used in a courtroom as a defense. It follows that the person is of diminished mental capacity while intoxicated or suffering a habit. People of diminished mental capacity cannot enter a contract, whether for a car or for some fun consensual sex.
1) That would be beside the point.

2) Are you saying that sex with a drug addict is never consensual, even if it's for fun?


Look at it this way. Is consent black and white?
Not sure what that means, but please keep in mind that now I'm only replying to defend my posts.

As I said, I don't think I can make the point any clearer. I did what I could. Perhaps, Preno can make his point in a way that can persuade you, but I have to recognize I can't.

[The AntiChris]

Can you please explain to me then if person A would not, under normal equal circumstances, have sex with person B but does for money how that is consensual.Are you saying that if someone would not, under normal circumstances, do my gardening for me but does if I pay them money they are not doing it consensually?

And if you say that gardening and sex are not comparable, then the issue here is not lack of consent, it must be some other reason.

Chris

[Deadlokd]

Can you please explain to me then if person A would not, under normal equal circumstances, have sex with person B but does for money how that is consensual.

I can only repeat the points, since I can't make it any more clear.

My point is that from "person A would not have sex with person B just for fun", it does not follow "If person A has sex with person B, then it's non-consensual".

Suppose a young, attractive woman marries an octogenarian millionaire, in order to inherit a ton of money, and she has sex with him. Is it non-consensual?

Put it this way. Drug and alcohol addiction, as an example, is often used in a courtroom as a defense. It follows that the person is of diminished mental capacity while intoxicated or suffering a habit. People of diminished mental capacity cannot enter a contract, whether for a car or for some fun consensual sex.
1) That would be beside the point.

2) Are you saying that sex with a drug addict is never consensual, even if it's for fun?


Look at it this way. Is consent black and white?
Not sure what that means, but please keep in mind that now I'm only replying to defend my posts.

As I said, I don't think I can make the point any clearer. I did what I could. Perhaps, Preno can make his point in a way that can persuade you, but I have to recognize I can't.

Alright we seem to be talking past each other without reaching a middle. I led into the issue of consent by outlining the reasons why many women become prostitutes. I then discussed how the issue of consent becomes murky, at best, when there are so many mitigating factors. My question regarding consent is very relevant and I'd like you to answer it. Is consent a black and white issue? Can coercion be a factor? Did you know that up to 87% of prostitutes are raped?

I like Sweden's answer for another reason. Legalising prostitution, for worker and client normalises the sexualisation of women. It normalises the perception that some women are just holes, there for a man's pleasure. I don't want my daughters (I have three, one is on the verge of becoming a woman herself) living in a country where that is the perception.

Again you have brought up the woman marrying the rich man for money. The main difference I can see there is that she is marrying one man for money, not having sex with many men every night for money. Would I call the marrying woman a prostitute? No, but I would wish that she had the same opportunities as men to become rich without having to marry for it.

Again we come back to no decision being made in a vacuum. Unfortunately women do not have true equality yet. Women are denied the means of production that men take for granted. I myself am that luckiest of creatures, I am a white middle-aged man. I will never have to make those kind of hard decisions.

Can you please explain to me then if person A would not, under normal equal circumstances, have sex with person B but does for money how that is consensual.Are you saying that if someone would not, under normal circumstances, do my gardening for me but does if I pay them money they are not doing it consensually?

And if you say that gardening and sex are not comparable, then the issue here is not lack of consent, it must be some other reason.

Chris

Umm, gardening and prostitution (we're talking about prostitution here) are not comparable. I have already mentioned that there are no other industries comparable to the sex industry, even gardening. Can you clear your point up for me please?

ETA: Sorry Angra, I forgot to answer your question. Yes you can have consensual sex with an addict as long as you aren't holding something over her, for example, money to buy her next hit. When that gets introduced into the equation at the very least we have coercion.

[The AntiChris]

Can you please explain to me then if person A would not, under normal equal circumstances, have sex with person B but does for money how that is consensual.Are you saying that if someone would not, under normal circumstances, do my gardening for me but does if I pay them money they are not doing it consensually?

And if you say that gardening and sex are not comparable, then the issue here is not lack of consent, it must be some other reason.

Chris

Umm, gardening and prostitution (we're talking about prostitution here) are not comparable. I have already mentioned that there are no other industries comparable to the sex industry, even gardening. Can you clear your point up for me please?By showing that the criteria you use for determining consent do not hold for other activities, we have shown that your notion of non-consent is mistaken and we have therefore eliminated non-consent as a valid objection to uncoerced prostitution.

When you respond that prostitution and other activities are not comparable, you're simply demonstrating that your objection to prostitution lies elsewhere and not with any issue of non-consent.

Chris

[Deadlokd]

Actually I would have said that if you think sex is like gardening then you're doing it wrong.

I have a lot of problems with prostitution. You could have just asked me and I would have told you. For ex-prostitutes the issue of consent is a big one. For me it is the normalisation of women as sex objects to be used at a man's whim, for the overwhelming instances of rape within the industry, of beatings, of murder. It is the trafficking of people for the purpose of sex.

From everything I have read and heard there are very few instances of uncoerced sex in prostitution. There is always a reason beyond pleasure for the prostitutes. If there wasn't they wouldn't charge. The money is the coercion.

It's a hard mindset to challenge, I know, I had to do it too. But once you read about the experiences of actual prostitutes you learn what a soul destroying industry it is.

Pornography we can take to a different thread if someone wants to start it but stripping is only one step removed from prostitution.

[Angra Mainyu]

Alright we seem to be talking past each other without reaching a middle.
Not exactly. I understand what you say. But you don't seem to understand what I say.



I led into the issue of consent by outlining the reasons why many women become prostitutes. I then discussed how the issue of consent becomes murky, at best, when there are so many mitigating factors. My question regarding consent is very relevant and I'd like you to answer it. Is consent a black and white issue? Can coercion be a factor? Did you know that up to 87% of prostitutes are raped?
The question is not relevant to the point Preno (and the I) was trying to make, and I've already stated my position, anyway.

I understand that many prostitutes are coerced. I understand others aren't directly threatened, but they still have to work as prostitutes to get enough money for drugs, etc. I agree that having sex with a prostitute without knowing whether she's been coerced, or is otherwise suffering, is immoral.

So, that would be a reason to ban hiring prostitutes. It would also be a reason for strict regulations. There is more than one option, and the pros and cons should be taken into consideration.

As I pointed out, it was your position about consent that is mistaken in a number of ways. But I don't know how to make my points more clear, and you didn't get them before, so I'll have to leave it at that.



I like Sweden's answer for another reason. Legalising prostitution, for worker and client normalises the sexualisation of women. It normalises the perception that some women are just holes, there for a man's pleasure. I don't want my daughters (I have three, one is on the verge of becoming a woman herself) living in a country where that is the perception.
But based on your posts, you would seem to be willing to impose that criteria on porn and strippers as well - and, again, I'm not sure why you only focus on women. Would you ban it for men too?

The cons in this case are the fact that it just bans a number of activities, and the question is whether the ban is justified. In the case of prostitution, there is a stronger case, as coercion may be more likely, but still regulations could work too, without being overly restrictive of people's ability to make contracts.



Again you have brought up the woman marrying the rich man for money. The main difference I can see there is that she is marrying one man for money, not having sex with many men every night for money. Would I call the marrying woman a prostitute? No, but I would wish that she had the same opportunities as men to become rich without having to marry for it.
Most men do not have opportunities to become rich, and neither do most women. But that's not the point. The point is that even though she's marrying him and having sex with him for money, not for fun - and she wouldn't have sex with him for fun -, and she probably does not enjoy sex with him, nonetheless the sexual relationship is consensual.


From everything I have read and heard there are very few instances of uncoerced sex in prostitution. There is always a reason beyond pleasure for the prostitutes. If there wasn't they wouldn't charge. The money is the coercion.
No, that's the error. Prostitutes aren't having sex for pleasure, but for money. The same goes for the gold digger in my example. But that does not imply that they're coerced coerced.

It's true that there are plenty of cases in which prostitutes are being coerced by someone else, or are in a position in which they have little option, so they're suffering with having sex with a client. But the point is that "Person A has sex with person B for money" does not imply "Person A is being coerced into having sex with person B".

[His Noodly Appendage]

I talk to idiots all fucking day, because I need the money. I sure as fuck don't want to, but it beats being homeless.

We must criminalize tech support! Ban it! Ban it!

God, what a fucking stupid argument.

[Oolon Colluphid]

There is a far cry from using your hands to empty a bin to having men use your vagina.
Yes, I'm a teacher and though I hate aspects of my job and have my bad days - I wouldn't compare it to having to suck a series of nasty and different cocks on a daily basis.
... etc.

Well, there's nice jobs and nasty jobs; there's those who get to choose what job they do and those who have no choice but to take whatever they can find.

It's a fine luxury to be able to pick your career, and even better when, having been able to choose, you enjoy it (most of the time).

But a luxury is what it is. It is, as someone has said, a far cry from what... many? ... most? ... nearly all? ... people throughout history have been able to do. Who, given any other opportunity to put food in their mouths, would work twenty hours a week at t'mill for tuppence a month and then 'ave to lick loom clean wi' their tongues? As it were.

Western societies may (sometimes) aspire to be meritocracies, but they still are not fully so, and historically, you worked at what you could, regardless of whether you'd choose to do so 'all things being equal'.

And that's the point. All things are not equal, and hence, people do jobs they don't much want to, because the alternative is worse. If the best job opportunity the bit of society you are in offers is emptying bins, you do that. If you put food in your mouth by putting cocks in your mouth, you do that.

In short, apart from the Bertie Woosters and the retired rich, we are all constrained, to a greater or lesser extent, in what we have to do to make ends meet; some lucky and with a choice, some less lucky and with fewer choices. We are all prostitutes, selling our time, bodies and minds for money. It's just that some have to resort to actual prostitution. It's a shit job, but someone's gotta do it.

[Oolon Colluphid]

Pornography we can take to a different thread if someone wants to start it but stripping is only one step removed from prostitution.
And wallpaper stripping is just another step. Some people do that for pleasure, too, but the bloke we had decorate our front room last year sure as shit wouldn't have done it for free.

[Deadlokd]

Just quickly before I head off to bed. I focus on women because women make up the large majority of sex workers. Because the majority of victims are women and because women have traditionally not been held up as equals, sexually or anywhere else.

I still have no idea what you and Preno are aiming at. Do prostitutes give consent to have sex with strangers for money. Yes. Was that decision made from a place of equality with the john. No. Is there a reason that woman is having sex with that man. Yes, because he paid her money. Would she otherwise have sex with him. No, therefore the money is the coercion.

There's an interesting thread at RnR chronicling the exploits of a man called rlogan who went to the Phillipines and bought himself a wife. Lira, his wife, was coerced through financial reward for her and her family in the Phillipines. Does that equate to your woman marrying a rich man for money? Is that a problem for you? Do you consider it prostitution?

[Oolon Colluphid]

There is always a reason beyond pleasure for the prostitutes. If there wasn't they wouldn't charge. The money is the coercion.

And thus I am coerced to run pensions estimates.

:rolleyes:

[Deadlokd]

I talk to idiots all fucking day, because I need the money. I sure as fuck don't want to, but it beats being homeless.

We must criminalize tech support! Ban it! Ban it!

God, what a fucking stupid argument.

Yes HNA, tech support = prostitution.

To fully understand why prostitution is not just "another job" you really need to read some survivor stories. I'll find some for you tomorrow, or alternatively try www.google.com .

[Oolon Colluphid]

Do prostitutes give consent to have sex with strangers for money. Yes. Was that decision made from a place of equality with the john. No. Is there a reason that woman is having sex with that man. Yes, because he paid her money. Would she otherwise have sex with him. No, therefore the money is the coercion.

Do I give consent to sort out people's local government service histories for money? Yes. Was that decision made from a place of equality with the county council? No (because they have employment, and I need a job). Is there a reason that I am working at a crappy local government job? Yes, because they pay me money. Would I otherwise give two shits about doing this job? No.

Therefore the money is the coercion.

:rolleyes: :bang:

[Oolon Colluphid]

To fully understand why prostitution is not just "another job" you really need to read some survivor stories. I'll find some for you tomorrow, or alternatively try www.google.com .
Who said it was just another job?

An argument might be made that it's one of the shittest ever*. Doesn't mean it's not a job. Something people do, that they would not otherwise do, because other people want them to do it and will pay them for their time and effort.


ETA:

* Though in terms of effort put in and life expectancy, something like 19th Century coal mining probably pees all over it.

[His Noodly Appendage]

No, oolon, peeing all over costs you extra.

[Faerie]

No, oolon, peeing all over costs you extra.

*snigger*

[Angra Mainyu]

I still have no idea what you and Preno are aiming at. Do prostitutes give consent to have sex with strangers for money. Yes. Was that decision made from a place of equality with the john. No. Is there a reason that woman is having sex with that man. Yes, because he paid her money. Would she otherwise have sex with him. No, therefore the money is the coercion.
It's the "therefore, the money is the coercion" that is the error. The conclusion is "the money is the motive".

Previously, you were saying that there was no consent because of the money. Now, you're saying that there is consent but coercion, which is difficult for me to understand, but in any case, the error remains the same: from "Person A does has sex with person B for money, not for fun", it does not follow "Person A is being coerced into having sex with person B".

If you're saying that it's the different in bargaining power that makes the transaction coercive, then that does not seem to be particularly different from the case of poor people's being hired to do all sorts of jobs by richer people/companies.

The usual solution in those cases is protection for workers, not a ban on hiring them - essentially, it's a ban on hiring them unless certain conditions are met.

Some activities require stricter regulations and protections than others.

If the claim is that sex for money is never consensual, that's not true. If the claim is that still prostitution is always oppressive for the prostitute, I guess that's possible, but some argument other than "she's doing it for money" would be required to support such claim.

[Oolon Colluphid]

If the claim is that still prostitution is always oppressive for the prostitute, I guess that's possible

Belle de Jour (writer)

[munnki]

Oolon, I think the argument is one of generality rather than absolution. So, in general, prostitution is oppressive rather than always. My instinct tells me that this might be the case but I'm going to watch the toing and froing here for a while and see what emerges.

[His Noodly Appendage]

Deadlokd, here's the thing.

You want to argue that prostitution is a shitty, shitty job, go ahead. Few will disagree.

You want to argue that it should be banned because it's a shitty, shitty job... most of us will tell you to go boil your head. If it's a less-shitty alternative than the others open to people, who the hell are you to deny it to them? Is that White Man's Burden getting too heavy for you, there? Tell you what. You don't like it, you get out there and provide better alternatives first, instead of forcing people into worse ones. And when a lare percentage of them refuse to take you up on your oh so gracious offer, what will be your justification then?

But if you want to argue that it must be coercion, unlike every single other kind of paid employment or business venture in the world, simply because it's a shitty, shitty job... all of us here are going to laugh in your face. There's simply no connection between the two.

Stupid claims are one thing. But stupid arguments... ah, that's something else. Nobody's going to cut you a millimetre of slack for those.

[Angra Mainyu]

If the claim is that still prostitution is always oppressive for the prostitute, I guess that's possible

Belle de Jour (writer)
Thanks; I'm reasonably familiar with her case. I didn't read the book, though watched the TV show based on it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Diary_of_a_Call_Girl).

Then again, I know there's been a lot of criticism - it was accused of portraying prostitution in a glamorous manner that does not correspond to reality, so preferred to ask Deadlokd to present his case if he thinks it's always oppressive (my impression so far given the evidence is that prostitution is usually oppressive, but not always so), or at least that it can't be made non-oppressive as a general activity (even if there are some exceptions), so it's better to ban paying for sex altogether.

[Angra Mainyu]

Oolon, I think the argument is one of generality rather than absolution. So, in general, prostitution is oppressive rather than always. My instinct tells me that this might be the case but I'm going to watch the toing and froing here for a while and see what emerges.
Yes, it might be the case that prostitution is usually oppressive. So was (is) working on mines, for instance.

The issue is whether it's better to ban the activity altogether (or, to be precise, paying for it), or to put strict regulations to make it usually not oppressive - and impose punishments when those rules are broken, or more precisely, under which conditions it's better to go for one alternative, and under which conditions it's better to go for the other.

For instance, there are costs related to imposing either measure (regulation or ban), and social side effects, so it's really unclear to me.

[Oolon Colluphid]

so it's better to ban paying for sex altogether.
I doubt it could be done.

Indeed, it's banned -- as in, illegal -- in many places. Doesn't seem to stop it.

But even if simple payment could be eliminated, people would just find a way around the ban. Barter, gifts, having to bleed the radiators and put up shelves... as I said earlier, evolutionarily, sex has always been paid for (think bower birds); it's just the money bit that's recent.

[Greatest I am]

You ask me to self examine while you think that sex with someone you love is the same as with a hooker. " I found the episodes remarkably similar".

You must just fuck your wife instead of making love.
Good respect there I see.

What do they say about a log in your eye.

Ta ta
Jailbird

No I did not. I meant have a wank and chill out. Just like everyone else is telling you to do. I said sex with someone you know or do not know is remarkably similar.

Sometimes a fuck is just a fuck and if you prefer twee expression like 'making love' to just having 'sex' ten it gives us a great insight into the way you think.

How does one 'make' love btw?

I have no idea about what you mean about a log in my eye. You seem more preoccupied with getting wood.


Prostitution is said to be the second oldest profession. It has been here for millennia and will be here as long as humans want sex. So suck it up and don't be so sanctimonious. Some people cannot, for whatever reason or another, give vent to their very natural urges and drives. I'm thinking the severely disabled for one. Those who cannot 'socialise'. Who do you think you are to deny them this right that others can enjoy freely?

Enjoy freely??

When was the last time you saw a hooker give it away?

I do pity one who cannot differentiate fucking and making love. Perhaps you have been paying for it too long.

Regards
DL

[Angra Mainyu]

so it's better to ban paying for sex altogether.
I doubt it could be done.

Indeed, it's banned -- as in, illegal -- in many places. Doesn't seem to stop it.

But even if simple payment could be eliminated, people would just find a way around the ban. Barter, gifts, having to bleed the radiators and put up shelves... as I said earlier, evolutionarily, sex has always been paid for (think bower birds); it's just the money bit that's recent.
I'm not sure about that - I mean, about the lack of effectiveness; pay for sex is old, though from an evolutionary perspective, females may have had more of a choice regarding which gifts to accept than prostitutes in usual conditions today, so if coercion can't be avoided by strict regulations, a ban may be an alternative.

Based on the statistics, the ban seems to be working fairly well in Sweden, in terms of effectiveness in achieving its goal. It's not making prostitution disappear completely, but it's reducing it considerably.

[Greatest I am]

.

I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one here with any kind of thinking ability and able to see the big picture.

Welcome to a good mind.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

Just another point, but an important one. Most consumers of porn and prostitution, heterosexual and homosexual, are men. Why is that do you think?

It is because men live in a fantasy world and women live in the real one.

Those men are special Johns, not just the run of the mill Johns. Their dicks are so, so special.

Many men today also have no conception of DIGNITY.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

You keep saying that. That does not make it true. I have had sex many times without a pricetag. Just for the sheer joy of sex. I do not pay my wife for sex. In any form. It is a bizarre assertion.


You don't seem to understand humour much.

Sexual reproduction is considered very 'pricey' in evolutionary terms. .

This is true but since when does buying a prostitute have anything to do with reproduction.

She is not in any way paid to reproduce.
She is there to sell her body parts for a short time only.

She sells friction, not her womb.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

I talk to idiots all fucking day, because I need the money. I sure as fuck don't want to, but it beats being homeless.

We must criminalize tech support! Ban it! Ban it!

God, what a fucking stupid argument.

We are all slaves to the systems we live in. Some slaves are in a better position than their other fellow slaves.

I see a big difference in a female I T person/slave using her mouth to talk to stupid people and perhaps have a chance to smarten them up and a prostitute mouthing her clients and having 0 effect in smartening them up.

See the difference or would you see you mouthing that other way the same as what you do now?

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

so it's better to ban paying for sex altogether.
I doubt it could be done.

Indeed, it's banned -- as in, illegal -- in many places. Doesn't seem to stop it.

But even if simple payment could be eliminated, people would just find a way around the ban. Barter, gifts, having to bleed the radiators and put up shelves... as I said earlier, evolutionarily, sex has always been paid for (think bower birds); it's just the money bit that's recent.

In the animal world, it is not sex that the animal is paying for. it is reproduction that they work for.

Prostitution has nothing to do with reproduction and bower birds do not have to wear rubber.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Deadlokd]

Well this sure got some magic didn't it?

First off, I have never advocated baning it. That is impractical at best. I am advocating a system like Sweden's, which is best for the women working in the industry. Which leads immediately to your asinine point Noodle. In a system like Sweden's the support is there for prostitutes to leave the industry and get training in a different area. So I personally wouldn't have to provide that.

Second, these comparisons of prostitution to tech support, wallpapaer hangers etc. are really pissing me off. Tell you what Noodle and Oolon, when rape, beatings and murder become a distinct possibilty every time you go to work then you can start drawing parallels. When you're getting sodomised twenty times a night then you can draw parallels 'til the cows come home.

Noodle, you seem to be arguing on the side of women in the industry, saying that if that's all they have then let them have it. It sounds very liberal and empowering until you think about what you are enabling. Oolon, you just seem to be saying that paying for sex is an evolutionary thing and we will never be able to ban prostitution. Well, no. Paying for sex is a gross misrepresentation. Trying to attract a mate to pass our genes on would be more accurate. And while we can't ban prostitution outright and give women a hand up we can make it more difficult and quit enabling a dangerous system.

This issue of consent and coercion to do a "job" only seems ludicrous when you apply it to say, tech support. When you apply it to a fundamental right of ours, to enjoy sex and to be able to choose our own partners, then it makes more sense.

[Preno]

Okay, very quickly, I led up to and explained the non-consensual aspect of pornography. Most prostitutes do not have the same opportunities as other women. Most prostitutes come from an abused childhood. 80% in fact. It's in my first post in this thread with a source. A lot of prostitutes have substance abuse issues and if they didn't when they started, then they will soon. This is not the same background as someone going to Harvard. Or should I say it is statistically unlikely that someone that was abused as a child, has low self-esteem and abuses alcohol or drugs would go to Harvard. That's a valid argument. The assertion that since they wouldn't do it if it weren't for the money, that makes it non-consensual, however, is idiotic.

[Deadlokd]

Okay, very quickly, I led up to and explained the non-consensual aspect of pornography. Most prostitutes do not have the same opportunities as other women. Most prostitutes come from an abused childhood. 80% in fact. It's in my first post in this thread with a source. A lot of prostitutes have substance abuse issues and if they didn't when they started, then they will soon. This is not the same background as someone going to Harvard. Or should I say it is statistically unlikely that someone that was abused as a child, has low self-esteem and abuses alcohol or drugs would go to Harvard. That's a valid argument. The assertion that since they wouldn't do it if it weren't for the money, that makes it non-consensual, however, is idiotic.

I'm trying to find another word to do the job of non-consensual so everyone is happy but I can't. What do you think? If you have to bribe a woman at a bar with shitloads of dollars to have sex with you what would you call it?

[Preno]

Uh, prostitution.

[His Noodly Appendage]

Consensual.

[His Noodly Appendage]

Non-consensual: Have sex with me, and I will not hurt you / take something away from you.

Consensual: Have sex with me, and I will give you something.

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm with you guys.

It'd be interesting to see the crime stats comparing the areas, but even with no changes, I'm with you guys.

Nevada here is the only state that has it legal, as well.

Interesting stats on crime there, vs the rest of the states.

Note that Nevada crime stats are rather misleading.

The problem is we are a major tourist destination--our actual population is substantially above the number of people living here. Thus our crime numbers will be too high.

The number of drunk, gambling tourists raises it even more for offenses like pickpocketing. The security cameras provide good safety against acts of violence but they don't stop the pickpockets and all the tourists attract them.


(And when looking at crime data here, beware of fools who look at the number of crimes the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department deals with vs the population of Las Vegas. Most of "Las Vegas" is not actually in Las Vegas.)

[Vampyroteuthis]

Consensual: Have sex with me, and I will give you something.

Herpes? :evil:

[Daynna]

I would say there are many jobs that exist today that the employee would not do if he/she were not undereducated and/or poor. Have you ever worked in fast food?

[Loren Pechtel]

Recognizing that many prostitutes, about 1/3 are there because of abuse in the home, as part of the legislation legalizing prostitution, I would like to see a public trial and law suit attached to each of these abused children before they can be licensed.

This would help to bring down the numbers of prostitutes that are basically forced into the profession.

I'd come at it differently. I'd like to see any prospective prostitutes have to spend a few hours with a shrink who looks at why they are doing it and if there is any evidence of coercion. The license is only granted if they are doing it of their own free will.

[Loren Pechtel]

Prostitution is perfectly legal here in Australia. I can name you half a dozen openly-advertised brothels within walking distance. You can find them in the frickin' Yellow Pages (http://www.yellowpages.com.au/search/postCategorySearch.do?headingCode=18058&sortByDetail=true&includeSurroundingSuburbs=false&sortByAlphabetical=false&bookId=1&businessType=escorts&sortByClosestMatch=false&areaId=1054&sortByDistance=false&stateId=1&autoExpansionAllowed=true&safeLocationClue=sydney&currentLetter=&locationClue=sydney&locationText=Greater+Sydney+NSW), ffs.

I wouldn't have thought there would be the demand for half a dozen in walking distance.

[Loren Pechtel]

I created a scenario for him that had one daughter as a dentist and the other daughter as a prostitute.

He said that he would used the services of the dentist daughter but, thank God he still has some sense, because he did decline to use his prostitute daughter.

There is hope for everyone.

Strange that fathers do not mind screwing someone else's daughter but balk at others using their daughters the same way.

A double standard created in their own minds to hide their depravity.

Men know of this double standard but ignore it to follow their dicks instead of leading them.

Ta ta
Jailbird

You're forgetting that using the services of his own daughter would be incest. Thus you aren't showing a double standard at all.

[His Noodly Appendage]

Deadlokd: You can show a quantitative difference between prostitution and <random other job>, but you can't show a qualitative one. Until you can do that, there's no reason that a different set of premises should apply to your argument.

P1: A is true
P2: If A, then B
C: B

Adding "P3: But A is super-extremely mega-true!" does nothing to change the conclusion. If you want to assert ~B, you have to make a valid argument for why a different P2 applies to large values of A.

You have not done this.

[Loren Pechtel]

Sorry to come so late to the party but it seems in the countries where Prostitution is legalised(yes I capitalised 'Prostitution' Lets hear it for those hard working girls) the sytem works quite well.

Why should it be capitalized? We don't capitalize other professions.

If legalising Prostitution only did one this; that is to stop the exploitation of women by Pimps and dealers etc, then it is worthwhile and desirable. These systems provide regula health checks which makes it safer for the girsl and the clients. The girls either wean of drug dependency or never turn to it.

Agreed. Legalize it and the problems will go way down.

[Loren Pechtel]

What is unsociable about having sex that is between willing agreed participants? Or is it the exchange of money thta gets your panties in a bunch?

A sociable person should be able to enter a bar for instance and be able to communicate well enough and be socially adept enough to come out with someone who wants to be with him for himself. this is socialization in my view.
To walk in and be so gauche in social skills that all he can do is buy companionship from a hooker is to admit to not being of personal unpaid for value.

One should pity such.

What about those of us who don't drink?

And pitying those who lack the social skills doesn't address the issue. If they're on the autism spectrum they probably can't learn them, period.

[Loren Pechtel]

Isn't it legal in Vegas? Does it not work in Vegas?

A common misunderstanding.

It's legal just across the county line to either the north or the west but not here.

Since condoms were mandated in the 80's there hasn't been a confirmed case of a customer contracting anything. The other problems seem to be pretty minor for the most part, certainly less than with the illegal ones in town.

[His Noodly Appendage]

Deadlokd seems to be equivocating on 'unwanted'. Prostitutes don't have sex because they want to (and often do despite the fact that they don't want to), unwanted sex is rape, therefore prostitution is rape.

However, it's equally true to say that unwanted labour is slavery. I don't fix computers because I want to (and often do despite the fact that I don't want to), therefore I am a slave.

Sorry, but no. No matter *how* shitty my job might be, that doesn't make it slavery. Even if it were slogging through hip-deep mud in a platinum mine. And it doesn't matter how much I need the money, either. If I walk into it of my own free will, and I'm free to walk out again with no consequnces beyond my original situation, that's not slavery, it's not rape, and it's not coercion.

For it to be any of those things, you need to shanghai me, actively prevent me from refusing or leaving, or threaten/punish me with a fate more dire than simply not havoc the job. (though even that is broad; ever heard of "contracts"?)

[His Noodly Appendage]

Oh, and the word you're looking for to describe something you don't want to do, but do anyway because you need the money?

"Work".

A hard concept, I know... :p :D :runningfordearlife:

[Preno]

Actually, Deadlokd is right that exploiting someone's drug addiction, economic situation or psychological vulnerability to feed one's sexual appetite is pretty fucking low and, unless one adopts a libertarian view on voluntariness, the transaction can easily be considered not consensual (in a way that other jobs that don't carry the same social stigma aren't - which is precisely why rape is a separate crime as opposed to just being a kind of battery/assault/whatever). That doesn't make it any less idiotic to say that all prostitution is unconsensual or exploitative solely by virtue of the fact that the prostitute wouldn't have sex with her customer if it wasn't for the money.

[His Noodly Appendage]

Well gee Lois, maybe if prostitution weren't illegal, but instead cleaned up and regulated, it might not have said social stigma...

[Preno]

That's quite unlikely, given that the social stigma attaches even to promiscuity in general (or rather, female promiscuity in general), and it has nothing to do with the point, which was that the fact that no-one physically coerces the women doesn't necessarily make it consensual in any meaningful sense unless you're a libertarian. Since your argument is presumably meant to apply to the current situation (as opposed to an ideal situation), I don't see how bringing up an ideal situation is relevant to whether your point is valid or not.

[Bane]

Well, the problem is partly due to the "sex outside of marriage will make you go to hell" mentality. Once that's no longer a view held by a significant number of people, well....then there won't be such stigma...

[Deadlokd]

Deadlokd seems to be equivocating on 'unwanted'. Prostitutes don't have sex because they want to (and often do despite the fact that they don't want to), unwanted sex is rape, therefore prostitution is rape.

However, it's equally true to say that unwanted labour is slavery. I don't fix computers because I want to (and often do despite the fact that I don't want to), therefore I am a slave.

Sorry, but no. No matter *how* shitty my job might be, that doesn't make it slavery. Even if it were slogging through hip-deep mud in a platinum mine. And it doesn't matter how much I need the money, either. If I walk into it of my own free will, and I'm free to walk out again with no consequnces beyond my original situation, that's not slavery, it's not rape, and it's not coercion.

For it to be any of those things, you need to shanghai me, actively prevent me from refusing or leaving, or threaten/punish me with a fate more dire than simply not havoc the job. (though even that is broad; ever heard of "contracts"?)

That does happen. Frequently. Even in Sydney which you are holding up as a shining example of legal prostitution. In 2006 the SMH reported that there were around 200 illegal brothels operating in Sydney (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/illegal-brothels-flourish-across-sydney/2006/12/09/1165081201712.html), four times the number of legal ones. That is also more than there were before the NSW government legalised it. This is what I mean about normalising the perception that women can be freely bought for sex. If the government hadn't said that it was okay thousandsa of men/boys wouldn't have used a prostitute and would have had to have tried their luck in bars/online/supermarket etc. Where many would have failed. Darwinism at it's finest. Getting back on track, three years later the number has risen to 400. (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/illegal-brothels-booming-across-sydney/story-e6freuzi-1225713067757)

Where we seem to be differing is our definition of prostitution. To you it is a job that women freely enter and are free to leave at any time. I see it as a job of last resort the job that you can't leave easily. I'd bet that most prostitutes would give their left tit to be in tech support or be a pension estimator. I'd bet most of them wish they hadn't been abused as children too. Or that they could kick the habit.

Read this. (http://www.bayswan.org/thanksma1.html)

And this. (http://www.prostitutionrecovery.org/hammer.html)

Now find me a job that those same risks. Oolon's idea that working in a 19th Century coalmine was as bad as prostitution was rather apt. Except for the lack of rape that is. The difference is that we recognised that the coalmines had unsafe working conditions and made it safer. Why can't we do the same for prostitution.

Legalising it outright is working wonders. There are eight times as many illegal brothels in Sydney as legal ones. All that has done has normalised the buying of humans.

To really limit this industry we'd need large scale support for disadvantaged women in this (and every) country. But that means raising taxes and who wants to pay more taxes?

[His Noodly Appendage]

I don't buy it, preno

Why is it any more 'fucking low' to exploit someone's economic (or drug, or whatever) situation to feed one's sexual appetite, than to feed one's burger appetite? Why isn't it just as bad to buy fast food, or to take a shit in the food court toilets and thereby "coerce" the minimum wage cleaner into cleaning it?

Because there's a social stigma associated with being a sex worker?

Well, duh. What effect does criminalising the industry and/or its clients have upon that stigma, d'you think?

[His Noodly Appendage]

No, you aren't "buying humans". You're buying services. Just exactly the fucking same as any other service.

And I agree. We should recognize that prostitution has risks, and make it safer. And you don't do that by driving it underground.

[Deadlokd]

Well, the problem is partly due to the "sex outside of marriage will make you go to hell" mentality. Once that's no longer a view held by a significant number of people, well....then there won't be such stigma...

Of course there will. Consider two people, one man and one woman. The man sleeps with a thousand women and he's a stud, a hero, a fucking champion. The woman sleeps with a thousand men and she's a slut, a skank and a whore. That's not a consequence of marriage before sex is bad, it's a consequence of thousands of years of patriarchy. Where women were encouraged to be "ladies" until the men needed their needs filled. The Madonna-whore dichotomy.

[Deadlokd]

No, you aren't "buying humans". You're buying services. Just exactly the fucking same as any other service.

And I agree. We should recognize that prostitution has risks, and make it safer. And you don't do that by driving it underground.

But bringing it into the light isn't working either. And again you seem to think that I want it made illegal. I don't.

[Preno]

I don't buy it, preno

Why is it any more 'fucking low' to exploit someone's economic (or drug, or whatever) situation to feed one's sexual appetite, than to feed one's burger appetite? Why isn't it just as bad to buy fast food, or to take a shit in the food court toilets and thereby "coerce" the minimum wage cleaner into cleaning it?

Because there's a social stigma associated with being a sex worker?

Well, duh."Why am I wrong? Because of X? Well, duh." :dunno:
What effect does criminalising the industry and/or its clients have upon that stigma, d'you think?I assume it makes it worse. What does that have to do with the fact that your assertion (that if the person is not literally physically coerced into it, it's consensual) is false?

If you disagree, feel free to say so, but the fact (if it is one) that decriminalizing prostitution might help has absolutely nothing to do with the truth or falsehood of that assertion. It would only demonstrate that under radically different circumstances, you might be right, not that you actually are right.

[Deadlokd]

Why is rape a separate criminal classification? Answer that and you'll get some idea why prostitution is not just a job.

[Deadlokd]

How fair is this? (http://www.colorlines.com/article.php?ID=673&p=1) Sex workers in New Orleans are added to the sex offender register if they engage in anal or oral sex. Not the men that procure those acts, just the women.

[Bane]

Well, the problem is partly due to the "sex outside of marriage will make you go to hell" mentality. Once that's no longer a view held by a significant number of people, well....then there won't be such stigma...

Of course there will. Consider two people, one man and one woman. The man sleeps with a thousand women and he's a stud, a hero, a fucking champion. The woman sleeps with a thousand men and she's a slut, a skank and a whore. That's not a consequence of marriage before sex is bad, it's a consequence of thousands of years of patriarchy. Where women were encouraged to be "ladies" until the men needed their needs filled. The Madonna-whore dichotomy.

That "Madonna-Whore" dichotomy needs to go, actually. Yet more religious nonsense...

[Deadlokd]

Well, the problem is partly due to the "sex outside of marriage will make you go to hell" mentality. Once that's no longer a view held by a significant number of people, well....then there won't be such stigma...

Of course there will. Consider two people, one man and one woman. The man sleeps with a thousand women and he's a stud, a hero, a fucking champion. The woman sleeps with a thousand men and she's a slut, a skank and a whore. That's not a consequence of marriage before sex is bad, it's a consequence of thousands of years of patriarchy. Where women were encouraged to be "ladies" until the men needed their needs filled. The Madonna-whore dichotomy.

That "Madonna-Whore" dichotomy needs to go, actually. Yet more religious nonsense...

Absolutely but it's effects will not be as easily eradicated. When we see women being celebrated for having lots of sex (as if anyone would give a shit) then we'll know it's gone.

[Greatest I am]

Okay, very quickly, I led up to and explained the non-consensual aspect of pornography. Most prostitutes do not have the same opportunities as other women. Most prostitutes come from an abused childhood. 80% in fact. It's in my first post in this thread with a source. A lot of prostitutes have substance abuse issues and if they didn't when they started, then they will soon. This is not the same background as someone going to Harvard. Or should I say it is statistically unlikely that someone that was abused as a child, has low self-esteem and abuses alcohol or drugs would go to Harvard. That's a valid argument. The assertion that since they wouldn't do it if it weren't for the money, that makes it non-consensual, however, is idiotic.

I think that you may have Deadlokd on this one point.

Once the transaction is agreed to then that is consent.
It may be a consent that is forced, so to speak, by circumstances, IE, a pimp, or as is often times the case, mental trauma cause by parental abuse in youth. In a minority of cases only, is there little to no force at play.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

Recognizing that many prostitutes, about 1/3 are there because of abuse in the home, as part of the legislation legalizing prostitution, I would like to see a public trial and law suit attached to each of these abused children before they can be licensed.

This would help to bring down the numbers of prostitutes that are basically forced into the profession.

I'd come at it differently. I'd like to see any prospective prostitutes have to spend a few hours with a shrink who looks at why they are doing it and if there is any evidence of coercion. The license is only granted if they are doing it of their own free will.

A good way to help those here and now. My way protection is given to future abused prostitution fodder.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Greatest I am]

I created a scenario for him that had one daughter as a dentist and the other daughter as a prostitute.

He said that he would used the services of the dentist daughter but, thank God he still has some sense, because he did decline to use his prostitute daughter.

There is hope for everyone.

Strange that fathers do not mind screwing someone else's daughter but balk at others using their daughters the same way.

A double standard created in their own minds to hide their depravity.

Men know of this double standard but ignore it to follow their dicks instead of leading them.

Ta ta
Jailbird

You're forgetting that using the services of his own daughter would be incest. Thus you aren't showing a double standard at all.

If you think that paid incest is not prostitution then it is one pissed off prostitute that has to gives samples to a cheep father.

Perhaps we will have to make up a new word. Let's make sure that we chose a word with dignity to it.

That act deserves a dignified name.

Ta ta
Jailbird

[Deadlokd]

Technically true. Once the prostitute has agreed to sex for a price then technical consent has been obtained. Where I have a problem is the assumption that she has gone into the transaction on an equal footing as the john. Fact is, she hasn't or she probably wouldn't be selling herself.

[Greatest I am]

What is unsociable about having sex that is between willing agreed participants? Or is it the exchange of money thta gets your panties in a bunch?

A sociable person should be able to enter a bar for instance and be able to communicate well enough and be socially adept enough to come out with someone who wants to be with him for himself. this is socialization in my view.
To walk in and be so gauche in social skills that all he can do is buy companionship from a hooker is to admit to not being of personal unpaid for value.

One should pity such.

What about those of us who don't drink?

And pitying those who lack the social skills doesn't address the issue. If they're on the autism spectrum they probably can't learn them, period.

Coke is the solution for your first and to your last, I don't know.
You assume a non prostitute world. This may not be realistic so that or your own abstenence may never be a problem. you just may have to drive further.

Ta ta
Jailbird



Regards
DL