Poll: Prostitution, should it be legal or not?

[xj0hnx]

Illegal. It's oppressive to the women who work as prostitutes.

Haha, yea, and you telling adults what they can do with their bodies isn't? Hypocrite much?

 

[frostedflakes]

Why regulate it? Just ban street prostitution and bring back craisglist

Spoiler

censored

.

Fixed that for you

 

[woolfe9999]

PROSTITUTION DOES NOT OBJECTIFY WOMEN IT DOES NOT TREAT WOMEN AS OBJECTS. PROSTITUTION IS GENDER NEUTRAL. Prostitution is not a person, it cannot make something an object, PEOPLE DO THAT. Lets not forget prostitution isn't a gender exclusive profession, men and women can be prostitutes and ARE PROSTITUTES. It just happens to be the largest customer base is straight males so most workers are females to cater to this audience.

If you believe prostitution should be illegal, then what are your stances on professional pornography? These are people who are paid to have sex. So it's ok to pay for sex if it's on camera and you sell it? That makes sense to you people? Give me a fucking break.

I apologize for the caps lock in the beginning, I'm just sick of stupid fucking morons blaming something that cannot even have a thought when it is most definitely a PEOPLE problem.

I've already stated my disagreement with Carmen, but to be fair here, prostitution has been criminalized in societies for ages, but until recently, no society ever recognized even the concept of a male prostitute, though they likely have existed as long as female prostitutes (principally for a gay clientle, another class not recognized until recently). IIRC, some prostitution laws pre 20th century were not even gender neutral and explicitly defined the crime as female provider, male customer. If you think that is not because western culture perceived female promiscuity as morally problematic but not male promiscuity then you're delusional. Its original prohibition, without which it doubtless would be legal today, was based on a gender double standard regarding sexuality. Likewise, in practice, to the extent that prostitution does any harm, it's going to do far more to women than to men. But originally, the prevention of harm to women was no part of why it was illegal.

None of that makes it not a personal choice outside the basic zone of bodily and sexual privacy, IMO.

- wolf

 

[Fern]

I've already stated my disagreement with Carmen, but to be fair here, prostitution has been criminalized in societies for ages, but until recently, no society ever recognized even the concept of a male prostitute, though they likely have existed as long as female prostitutes (principally for a gay clientle, another class not recognized until recently). IIRC, some prostitution laws pre 20th century were not even gender neutral and explicitly defined the crime as female provider, male customer. If you think that is not because western culture perceived female promiscuity as morally problematic but not male promiscuity then you're delusional. Its original prohibition, without which it doubtless would be legal today, was based on a gender double standard regarding sexuality. Likewise, in practice, to the extent that prostitution does any harm, it's going to do far more to women than to men. But originally, the prevention of harm to women was no part of why it was illegal.

None of that makes it not a personal choice outside the basic zone of bodily and sexual privacy, IMO.

- wolf

Two things:

1. Male homosexual sex, period, was already outlawed. No need to drag the whole 'was it for money' question into it.

2. Centuries ago, I'll concede that Victorian moral pricipals influenced anti-prostitution laws (at least in England and here, but certainly not in France as they never had that whole 'victorian moral' thingy), but there were societal reasons as well. Back then no reliable contraceptives led to a bunch of orphans running around, or at least single mother households which was no easy feat back then.

Fern

 

[Darwin333]

I believe that a person "owns" their body.

I also believe that if you own something you should be able to sell/rent it.

The .gov putting someone in jail for selling their own body implies that person did not actually own what they sold.

Besides, this is another issue the .gov fucks up. People like to fuck, matter of fact its kinda hard wired in our brains. So the demand was put there by motherfriggennature or whatever diety you believe in and the demand will ALWAYS be there. So lets make the market, which there always will be a market for fucking, go underground and be absurdly more unsafe for all participants. BRILLIANT!!!

The funny thing is, most of the people I see speaking out against legalized prostitution are women. They think that the .gov should be the decider of what they can and can not do with their bodies. Personally, I think they are just afraid that their husbands might seek some nooky on the side because they aren't getting "satisfied" at home.

What really gets me is fucking for money = illegal
fucking for money while being filmed (porn) = legal

Seriously?

 

[Moonbeam]

I am wondering if anyone can persuasively defend the legal prohibition of prostitution.

Discuss.

- wolf

In the first place, what is a persuasive defense. You can tell a bigot but you can't tell him much. The only thing that persuades a bigot is his own bigotry.

In a perfect world there is no need for law. What could be more persuasive than that. Also, who here knows what a perfect woman is like. Are perfect women different in sexual appetite. Are there perfect women who would like to have many many men and pay them for it. Would a perfect man take any money?

Why ask imperfect people hard questions?

Most people engage in prostitution because they hate themselves and feel too worthless to have a self respecting job. Should we stop them from destroying themselves with their self hate. Do we want to be stopped from destroying ourselves. I don't think so. Most folk go to prostitutes for similar reasons. They don't deserve real relationships.

 

[Darwin333]

Illegal. It's a vector for STDs and oppressive to the women who work as prostitutes. It's a myth that prostitutes are empowered women in charge of their own bodies practicing glorious free market capitalism.

BTW, regulation and required STD testing doesn't stop HIV. You can have HIV for 6 months without testing positive.

Wait a minute, you are saying we should oppress a persons choice to sell what is inherently theirs in order to save them from oppression? WTF?

And please oh please tell me how it is oppressive to anyone? I guess you can argue that in todays black market world that women are oppressed because they are forced underground and often have to work for some low life pimp. That issue largely goes away if you legalize it, so you are advocating the continued oppression of women who chose to sell what they inherently own (unless you would like to argue otherwise).

 

[woolfe9999]

In the first place, what is a persuasive defense. You can tell a bigot but you can't tell him much. The only thing that persuades a bigot is his own bigotry.

In a perfect world there is no need for law. What could be more persuasive than that. Also, who here knows what a perfect woman is like. Are perfect women different in sexual appetite. Are there perfect women who would like to have many many men and pay them for it. Would a perfect man take any money?

Why ask imperfect people hard questions?

Most people engage in prostitution because they hate themselves and feel too worthless to have a self respecting job. Should we stop them from destroying themselves with their self hate. Do we want to be stopped from destroying ourselves. I don't think so. Most folk go to prostitutes for similar reasons. They don't deserve real relationships.

Or perhaps those who condemn prostitution and/or generalize about prostitutes and Johns do so because of their own self-hate. Otherwise, why would anyone care what someone else is doing with their own body. Ever consider that?

- wolf

 

[Darwin333]

And honestly...how many girls do you think answer that they want to be prostitutes when they grow up? Given how integral career is in how we view ourselves (and often something we use to form our initial impressions of a person), if prostitution was legal, do you think many people would want to admit to it publicly?

You should try googling "porn". Appears that all sorts of women, and men for that matter, have no issue with publicly admitting that they have sex for money.

 

[nyker96]

what you expect 99% will vote yes!

 

[zinfamous]

Of course it should be legal. That's the purest form of capitalism there is. The only argument against it is the same that's used against gambling - it attracts crime.

this, basically. Though the option I'd like to see is legal everywhere, b/c of the crime-attraction factor.

pockets of legality will simply create little meccas of crime and scum. Legal everywhere, or legal nowhere, I say.

 

[Throckmorton]

Haha, yea, and you telling adults what they can do with their bodies isn't? Hypocrite much?

That's right, and I also support banning dangerous drugs and riding a motorcycle without a helmet.

 

[Moonbeam]

Or perhaps those who condemn prostitution and/or generalize about prostitutes and Johns do so because of their own self-hate. Otherwise, why would anyone care what someone else is doing with their own body. Ever consider that?

- wolf

Of course, but be careful. You start seeing self hate here and there you're maybe gonna see it in yourself, and you wouldn't want that, trust me.

There ain't much self hate don't explain.

 

[Darwin333]

That's right, and I also support banning dangerous drugs and riding a motorcycle without a helmet.

I support banning you from having sex, forever, for the betterment of society of course.

 

[Throckmorton]

I support banning you from having sex, forever, for the betterment of society of course.

I already AM banned from having sex-- with minors, relatives, and animals.

 

[SammyJr]

Illegal. It's a vector for STDs and oppressive to the women who work as prostitutes. It's a myth that prostitutes are empowered women in charge of their own bodies practicing glorious free market capitalism.

BTW, regulation and required STD testing doesn't stop HIV. You can have HIV for 6 months without testing positive.

STD testing and mandatory condom use are as close as we can get to making the profession safe. Nothing is purely safe. I could get in my car and get t-boned by a drunk driver. I could go to Subway and get salmanella. Let the buyer make his or her decision about the level of risk.

As far as oppression, a wide open, regulated market will largely eliminate this problem. Sex workers will have channels for grievances that they now lack.

 

[woolfe9999]

Two things:

1. Male homosexual sex, period, was already outlawed. No need to drag the whole 'was it for money' question into it.

2. Centuries ago, I'll concede that Victorian moral pricipals influenced anti-prostitution laws (at least in England and here, but certainly not in France as they never had that whole 'victorian moral' thingy), but there were societal reasons as well. Back then no reliable contraceptives led to a bunch of orphans running around, or at least single mother households which was no easy feat back then.

Fern

The criminalization of gay sex had nothing to do with sexism, however. It was about homophobia. Had there been a recognized class of male prostitutes who catered to women, doubtless no one would have cared. Actually, I take that back. They would have condemned the "Janes," women who hired the male prostitutes, more so than the prostitutes themselves.

This whole thing about prohibitting prostitution IMO has a lot to do with a paternalistic attitude that many men have toward women these days. Particularly some male liberals. Let's face it, everyone knows that the vast majority of prostitutes are female, so the male prostitute argument holds very little water. This is about women, except that now with the liberal critiques it isn't in the guise of chastising women for promiscuity, but more about men protecting women from themselves, as if they can't make their own decisions and live with the consquences. It's old style sexism dressed up as modern feminism, IMO.

Not meaning to insinuate anything about Throck or Carmen in particular by the way. I'm just making a general observation.

- wolf

 

[colonel]

Should be legal, the state should not get into controlling peoples lives, the religious and conservative American society must punish the business of prostitution of minors. When I was in Brazil it was legal and open and I was impressed how strong the families values are in a open and liberal society.

 

[shortylickens]

Legal, with lotsa regulations and taxes, just like everything else.
For reference: There is no federal law banning prostitution. It just so happens every state except Nevada has decided they dont like it.
Good luck getting that changed.

 

[Carmen813]

People wouldn't want to "admit to it publicly" because society morally disapproves of it, be it from a right/religious perspective or from a left/feminist perspective. That doesn't make any of those judgments correct or incorrect and hence you're sort of begging the question.

What I see here is you arguing that harm to both men and women comes from prostitution in that it "devalues relationships." Let's assume that to be true. It's also true of all kinds of other things, such as the use of sex in advertising. And what about the right of both men and women to make their own decisions about what to do with their bodies and their money? Can we right every wrong with our laws, cops, and jails, or should some moral decisions just be left to individuals? Should we criminalize sodomy, abortion, adultery? Isn't sexuality in a zone of privacy?

- wolf

I don't think you'll find many people aspiring to be prostitutes when they grow up, regardless of how societies view towards it changes. Most individuals who work as prostitutes are doing so due to circumstances that I believe to be beyond their control.

With regards to your response about relationships, respectfully, you've used a logical fallacy (straw man). It isn't really relevant that sex in advertising may or may not devalue relationships, because that has nothing to do with my primary view that prostitution does.

Last time I checked, there is nothing against individuals going and having sex with anyone they choose. It's when money gets tossed into the equation that I believe the issue gets a great deal murkier. It's turning sex into a commodity, a good to be bought and sold, and that is something I view as substantially damaging to relationships, society, and indeed men themselves.

In my view, comparisons of prostitution and pornography do not hold much water because each actor in porn is paid. Prostitution is a one way transaction, with one person receiving money explicitly from another in exchange for sex.

I fail to see legalizing prostitution as anything less than a male power grab because in our society men are the dominant political group. If you want to put this to a vote to women, and women only, then maybe I could at least change my mind on this particular point. Otherwise you are talking about men creating the laws and regulations for an industry that will be almost exclusively women, and I'm sure it will be structured in a way that gives maximum benefit to the primary consumer.

Our societies gender biased views about sex are a factor as well. For men, having sex with multiple partners is, in general, seen as a positive sign of male virility (though certainly this isn't true across all cultures). Women who have sex with many partners have any number of derogatory terms directed at them.

Prostitution is not a sexuality, so unless you go into more depth about privacy I'm not really sure what argument you are trying to make.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

In a country where prostitution is legal, swingers are more likely to have STDs than hookers.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/3849400/Swingers-at-greater-risk-of-STDs-than-prostitutes

Overall, combined rates of Chlamydia and gonorrhea were just over 10 percent among straight people, 14 percent among gay men, just under 5 percent in female prostitutes, and 10.4 percent among swingers, they found. And female swingers had higher infection rates than male swingers.

STD rates are high in hookers in USA because it's illegal and unregulated.

 

[Carmen813]

In a country where prostitution is legal, swingers are more likely to have STDs than hookers.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/3849400/Swingers-at-greater-risk-of-STDs-than-prostitutes



STD rates are high in hookers in USA because it's illegal and unregulated.

The U.S. also has high STD rates in general.

 

[bfdd]

I don't think you'll find many people aspiring to be prostitutes when they grow up, regardless of how societies view towards it changes. Most individuals who work as prostitutes are doing so due to circumstances that I believe to be beyond their control.
-snip-

While this is true, I actually knew two chicks in high school who set the goals for themselves to become well known strippers and/or porn stars. Basically prostitutes. I honestly don't find it that weird at all.

 

[BoberFett]

Crime associated with it will never go away, because very few go into that line of work voluntarily. They end up there to support a drug habit or are coerced in one way or another, so the seedy part of the business still exists.

Yeah, lots of people flip burgers and clean up shit for a living voluntarily. I know I see people sold into McDonalds and janitorial slavery all the time. :sneaky:

 

[woolfe9999]

I don't think you'll find many people aspiring to be prostitutes when they grow up, regardless of how societies view towards it changes. Most individuals who work as prostitutes are doing so due to circumstances that I believe to be beyond their control.

You're speculating. So far as I know, you won't find a society that morally approves of it so the point is difficult to prove either way. However, it's kind of undeniable that when a society views a profession as disreputable, people will not aspire to that profession. It's just as obvious as it's contra, that people aspire to professions which are respected. Pretending that this has nothing to do with societal stigmas is not tenable.

With regards to your response about relationships, respectfully, you've used a logical fallacy (straw man). It isn't really relevant that sex in advertising may or may not devalue relationships, because that has nothing to do with my primary view that prostitution does.

Last time I checked, there is nothing against individuals going and having sex with anyone they choose. It's when money gets tossed into the equation that I believe the issue gets a great deal murkier. It's turning sex into a commodity, a good to be bought and sold, and that is something I view as substantially damaging to relationships, society, and indeed men themselves.

I don't think it's a straw man because the use of sex in advertising makes sex a "commodity" just as selling the sex directly does. What is the difference if you are selling sex versus using sex to sell something else? In my view, the one is at least more honest than the other.

In my view, comparisons of prostitution and pornography do not hold much water because each actor in porn is paid. Prostitution is a one way transaction, with one person receiving money explicitly from another in exchange for sex.

No, prostitution is a two-way transaction, with money being exchanged for sex. It's the same in porn, except both sexual partners are being paid for the sex by a third party. I don't see the real difference there. Is it less "comodifying" of sex, or less degrading of women or relationships because it is porn>

It still commodifies sex just like advertising and prostitution. And the porn industry itself is typically run by men and works to their advantage, just as you'd presume of a legal prostitution industry.

I fail to see legalizing prostitution as anything less than a male power grab because in our society men are the dominant political group. If you want to put this to a vote to women, and women only, then maybe I could at least change my mind on this particular point. Otherwise you are talking about men creating the laws and regulations for an industry that will be almost exclusively women, and I'm sure it will be structured in a way that gives maximum benefit to the primary consumer.

Perhaps, but that is just a theory. It would help if you could be more specific about what particular rules you think will be put into place that would benefit males at the expense of females, and why it is any worse than the current situation with illegal prostitution. Frankly, I can't see any way women would be LESS protected in a legal system than in the present black market system. They SHOULD be more protected, but at the worst case it is about the same.

Our societies gender biased views about sex are a factor as well. For men, having sex with multiple partners is, in general, seen as a positive sign of male virility (though certainly this isn't true across all cultures). Women who have sex with many partners have any number of derogatory terms directed at them.

Precisely a point I just made in my posts above, and precisely why prostitution was made illegal to begin with, because females are the bulk of prostitutes, and paternalistic society views female promiscuity as worse than male promiscuity. How that is an argument in favor of its continued criminalization is beyond me. Do we need to police female sexual behavior more so than male sexual behavior?

Prostitution is not a sexuality, so unless you go into more depth about privacy I'm not really sure what argument you are trying to make.

I shouldn't need to go into any more depth about privacy. Sex between consenting adults should always be beyond government intrustion. But YMMV I suppose.

- wolf