Prostitution, The legal morality of

Remove all ads!

To my knowledge there are only two 'western' countries in the world where a person is allowed to have sex with another for monetary compensation. Those countries are The Neterlands and none-other than the greatest place on earth and one of the safest countries in the world: New Zealand.

Now, the reasoning behind legalising prostitution is that it's going to happen no matter what. That when you force an "occupation" into the underworld then all of those participating in said occupation are going to be exposed to criminals as their boss. A prostitute can't report to the police that some guy was extra rough to her during "service" or he didn't pay for the "service". Since it's going to happen anyway the government might as well get a cut of it via taxes and use those taxes to police the illegal prostitution that occurs. It's a victimless crime, both parties enter into the arrangement with a clear expectation of what's going to happen.

The arguments against are often the morality about it and that prostitution is the core incentive behind cetain types of slavery. Morality is subjective. Human slavery is illegal anyway and legalising prostitution can only reduce the slavery since if it's no longer illegal then why would somebody go through all the effort and bribes and so forth to run an illegal prostitution/slave operation when they could just do so legally and charge the clients MORE because of it?

So, is prostitution legal in your country? Why? Why not? Should it be illegal/legal? If it should be legal what safeguards should be put in place? What special rulings should surround it?

 

Legalize it. Its a win-win situation:

1. Better protection for the workers
2. More tax for the government
3. I don't get hassled when I am bar crawling in Belfast by ugly old women in tracksuite bottoms!

 

Sure, legalize it. But tax them. Oh yes, tax them to the hilt.

 

Down sides:
1.Every damn street corner will be full of them.
2.You meet a hottie. In the morning she tells what she does for living (Yeah possible before, but chances will be bigger).
3. Nasty, just imagine a conversation:
"Mom came just back from work."
-"Oh, what does she do?"
"She's a prostitute"
-"My sister's also!"
"I know "

 

Hmm... I'm going to get flamed, but:

1. Prostitution is about the same kind of victimless crime as forgery is. There is a good which is struck against by this crime. There are ill effects.

2. Legalising prostitution will not force illegal brothels with slaves out of business.

3. Clients might as well be charged more for the additional risk associated with running an illegal business. If they don't have to pay bribes and guns and grunts and all, they won't have to charge the clients more.

4. Certain women will not go into prostitution so easily if it's illegal. This may hold true for some clients.

Here, prostitution is not a crime, but neither is it a legal business. They act as public houses, escort agencies etc and they don't sell sex directly. Pimping or otherwise profiting from someone else's dissolution is a crime.

BTW, in Germany, I think prostitution is legal. They had issues with jobless women potentially losing welfare rights for refusing to take up jobs in the sex industry.

 

From what I've heard this has been fixed so it's really a non-issue and simply a hole in the legistlation and nothing that anyone really thinks should be.

In any case I'm a bit torn with this situation. I have to agree with Chev that it really would not affect the slave trade in Europe. Plenty of the human trade is targetted for German market and prostitution is legal there. So I'm not convinced that the work enviorment will get much better for those least fortunate. Those born in their own country hardly ever end up as targets for human trade, so the legalised prostitution would not help those who needed the most support. Also as Chev pointed out it might increase the popularity of prostitution which I certainly don't view as a good thing.

In Finland we have a very similar laws as in Poland it is illegal to advertise prostitutional services and outside profiting from it is illegal. There are certain groups that wish to make the buying of sex services illegal but selling legal and that kind of dual morality I really can't accept.

 

Prostititution is illegal in 49 of the 50 states in the U.S. The lone exception is Nevada. However, there are no states where "escort agencies" or "escort services" are illegal, but these are tantamount to prostitution.

These are basically places where you hire a woman to "escort" you to some event for the night. They don't *technically* qualify as prostitution as the agency says the customer is paying for the escort's time, and sex is not included in that price. They claim that sex may occur, but that happens after the event, and it is between two consenting adults. However, most website of these escort agencies (so I'm told - I don't have firsthand knowledge) tell which sexual acts certain escort are willing to perform, so it's prostitution for all intenets and purposes.

 

As long as it would be legal for the two individuals to have consentual sex I see no reason why there should be a law prohibiting one of the individuals from providing compensation to the other for engaging in sex. What possible rationale can there be for saying that it is illegal to pay someone to do something when it is not illegal to do that thing in the first place?

Should we also say that giving flowers, chocolates, jewellery etc. in order to facilitate a sexual relationship should be illegal? How is that any different from giving money?

 

Heh, I'm actually a member of a sex-board which lists the escort-services of Finland. Unfortunately, there are no service-providers in Vaasa. Sucks to be in a whole-family-town. Or Finland for that matter. On top of that, the service-providers are difficult to reach and even if you find one, she quite likely already has 50+ candidates to choose from. To put it simply: the prices are high, the people difficult to reach, and still there are thousands and thousands looking for them. The law be damned when you got a very primitive need to fulfill.

I have to agree with most of the people here: prostitution should be legalized. There is just one problem: the conservatives have put down their foot on this matter (like they have with abortion, stem-cells, conscript-service, and euthanasia). For example, there was this radio-show some months ago where they were discussing about prostitution with a certain, elderly woman. In the end, the "discussion" turned into what it always does with topics like this: I'm right, you are wrong, and god help us. The woman basically kept ranting on about sinning, slavery, and the immorality of it.

To me it means only one thing: you can't discuss or make decisions with people like that. They have to be overruled if there are to be any liberties at all. It's a no-win situation for any politicians if they can't come up with a *really* good compromise. Most of them are too smart to even try, so I doubt any change will be coming very soon.

Then the feminists begin to nag about men doing "vacation-trips" to places like Bangkok, Pattaya, Puhket, Patong, or maybe Moscow (if you prefer russians). Some spend as much as 1.000 € per week on such trips, so it is, of course, a big money-route for the locals.

[ November 02, 2006, 18:15: Message edited by: Wordplay ]

 

As a secular humanist, I find prostitution absolutely appalling. Not only does it in the most direct sense turn a human into a material good, but it's a humiliating occupation in which next to no one chooses to go into when they have other options. Legalizing prostitution is legalizing the exploitation of runaways and victimized women.

It's not uncommon for single mothers or battered mothers to go into this "profession" in order to support their children. Regardless of legislation around prostitution, every time that mother goes out to work, she puts herself in danger; johns look for their own pleasure, they aren't concerned about the spread of STDs they have or the health of the prostitue in any other way.

Street walkers aren't going to be magically safe with the legalization of what they are doing. Poor women in the States go missing everyday and they usually aren't found alive again. Prostitution shouldn't be legalized, instead the Government should take steps to get prostitutes out of the situation they are in.

 

Ah, yes; the standard denial. That's exactly what the granny said in radio: "They wouldn't sell sex if they had the choise. They know they will become sex-objects."

So the best thing to do for them is a) forbid them taking the option, b) punishing them if they do, and c) labeling the current practitioners as criminals and poor wretches who do not know how to take care of themselves. Many people even make a hobby of hunting them down so that the police can throw them out of the city. Throw them to where? Not our problem.

It infuriates me to no end when the conservatives bring this argument up again and again despite what is said to them either by the escorts themselves or anyone else. Let's try the following questions:

1) What if the prostitute is a male? Many men sell sex-services for those women who can't get it otherwise. Are they poor, wretched sex-objects too?

2) Who are you to tell who can buy and sell sex? People make their own decisions are if the option of selling sex is the most lucrative one, then that's exactly what they have right to do. If they have to do it to feed themselves, would you prefer to starve them instead (or throw to jail)? In such cases the underlying faults are always elsewhere, like poor social-security or drug-addiction. Those are the things that require attention.

3) Can you tell the difference between sex that has been bought by money and sex that has been bought by a few drinks? Of course, you could say that they both are evil, but that would be only your own sexual preference and forbidding the alternative would be discrimination. Which, ironically, is illegal.

 

That's the most logical and sensible thing I have ever heard said about this topic.

 

I said that the Government was to provide assistance to move them into a different mode of producing income. It is the government's responsibility to aid its citizens in need.

As for prostitution, man, all the research that is been done into this by non-profit groups is that prostitues would get out if they had the ability to get out. They don't leave because they can't leave. Prostitution is a low income occupation with almost no chance of advancement and it dangerous all the same. I don't know what prostitues you know Wordplay, but any prostitue advocate would tell you that prostitues wouldn't be selling sex if they had another means of income.

 

Ilmater's Suffering is right for the most part. This isn't true for all prostitutes by any means, but the majority of them would much rather work in McDonald's 9-5 for the same pay. Add to that the spread of STDs (condoms aren't a guarantee, and no one's really there to enforce the use of condoms anyway) and the risks of abuse and this just isn't a good occupation. For those that say these things would be minimized by legalization, think again. Even in legal professions like the porn industry STDs are a major concern, and they have an organized industry-run set-up to try and control it. As for the risks of abuse, you're still doing something that tends to arrouse passions, while you're alone, pretty much defenseless, and with little/no prior knowledge of the other person.

 

The same can be said for many dead-end low wage paying jobs. Do you think the uneducated guy who has a warehouse job doing heavy lifting should have his job made illegal too? He is using/abusing his body to earn some bucks too - should we say that he is being exploited and take away the only job that his limited skills will enable him to do?

 

I know three prostitutes that say that they do the job because they want to do it. When they want to quit, they simply lose the number (pre-paid = no registration), leave the city, and never look back. And you? How many prostitutes do you know for real? C'mon, don't be shy; even if you use their services, it's not a problem if you preach against them too.

Let me ask you another thing. How much do you think they earn per customer in developed countries? 100 € from 30 minutes. That's right: they earn six times more than a well-to-do businessman who earns 15 € for every hour of hard work. 30 minutes in bed and whoopdee****ingdoo: day's work done. Leaves a lot free time to party in the city, don't you think? Even better, party in city, take the guys in twice a weekend, and earn 800€ of the same you would otherwise do for free.

Then there are the extra services and those people who want to hire you for a good, old-fashioned dinner with candles and all (yes, some men prefer to have a romantic dinner which ends to sex instead of just hopping on the bed). Escorts do that too and those same guys would be happy to pay the 500 € price instead of having the same with a regular gal that possibly ends to sex. 'Possibly' because, to have sex with a regular gal, you must not only be pleasant, all-around-acceptable, willing to commit to a long-term relationship, put her pregnant, and pay the bills if you divorce (in which case you are either cursed with kids or monthly support-fees). Escorts, in this sense, are a very solid option.

Now, are you guys going to ignore my other questions completely? 1, 2, and 3? They are very central questions, so if they can't be answered, the legistlation really should be liberalized. How? Like with all careers, there needs to be unions, watchdogs, and enforcers. Abuse and crime can then be dealt the normal way.

 

@Wordplay: Well, I might question those by

1) Sex as a basic human right, is that it? C'mon.

2) This question bounces right back. Who are you to say who can buy or sell sex? Having only lucrativeness as a standard is a bad way of judging and doing business. Other standards should be met as well. Unless you're only concerned about short-term profits and perfectly unconcerned about the society. Which brings me to this

This would lead to "it's ok to harvest organs from the poor for a monetary compensation", let's have an union for them, that'll make the black market on organs to go away.

Are you saying that it's ok to have social inequality as long as the poor can sustain themselves, which would make improving their situation unnecessary since they can feed themselves? Might I remind you of India's struggle for independence? Sometimes it is better to starve yourself, or to have you put to jail than have another people's will imposed on yourself. However, the choice is for each one of us to make for ourselves, but there is right and wrong, and injustice should be fought against. Don't get excited, this deals with some of the consequences of the logic you, dear Wordplay, are using, not prostitution as such, and not necessarily the way you see prostitution.

3) If legality would be derived only from something being lucrative or not, I wouldn't have to disagree with you. Or with Abomination saying that it's a victimless crime. I wouldn't say that buying sex with drinks should be illegal, but it is very questionable. Saying that it's ok is following questionable ethics and this does not lead to good.

Funnily enough, legalizing prostitution might improve the prostitutes conditions. I might even remember one prostitute advocate speaking for legalizing prostitution on that basis. But the question I'd like to have answered would be that would it improve the society's condition and more specifically, women's condition as male prostitutes are exceedingly rare. If you can prove that it does, then fine. I have my suspicions however.

By the way, how many people do you know that have been abducted, forced to work as sex-slaves and raped repeatedly? Don't be shy now. And since prostitution pays so well then why aren't you doing it? Now this is something I'd really like an answer to. Let's hear it.

As Chev and Morgoroth pointed out already, which none has tried to counter, would legalizing prostitution make human trade go away? The problem is that in an atmosphere that says that people can be bought and sold with money, that it is ok to do that, would not likely increase people seeing each other as equal human beings.

@JSBB: How about applying that to child labour in third world countries? They've got no future, might as well make their living while they still can? When did the exploitation of uneducated and the poor become an allright thing to do again?

 

Legalization would be better. It's definitely not a panacea, but it would improve a lot of problems. Less money to the mafia (more to the state), better health and quality of the "services", and probably a bit less stigma involved. If the women do it because they have no choice, they should not deserve shame - they don't kill or rob people. If they do it because they want to, then they should not be made to associate with criminals and become such if we could help it. I don't think the illegal part will go away - but I think it will decrease. That, and the state will have the more incentive to actually put more money in fighiting it: it's a bit unfair towards the competition, but I could tolerate it in such cases.

I can't equate forgery with prostitution, as forgery directly harms the country's economy by devaluating the money, which eventually hits everyone, especially those with least money. Prostitution offends some people's morality, and could transmit STDs. Well, so does premarital sex. The difference between the two is that prostitution involves less romantic affiliations (usually) and more direct money transfers. It may diminish romantic feelings to a degree, but sex is not always romantic in society either. Look at pornography, for example. Or, for that matter, all advertisements alluding to sex, and there are tons of them.

Ironically, the business/market approach preached today tends to have similar effect on other relations once considered sacral and intimate. Raising a child through a babysitter, for example: you pay someone to do something that traditionally is one of the family's most intimate activities: taking care of their children. Or how the sharing of secrets and help by a friend or parent has been replaced by such with a psychiatrist.

Edit: It is more drastic, granted - but the rationale is the same: you pay a professional for a service that ideally should be given freely.

[ November 03, 2006, 00:09: Message edited by: The Shaman ]

 

Legalization + mandatory health screening for the 'providers' and 'customers' alike = ideal.

 

@JSBB: Giving and taking flowers in more or less direct exchange for sex is prostitution all the same. Showering with gifts with the mind of obtaining sexual favours is the same as getting billed for N hours of sexual services. This means that if a guy buys his wife some jewelry so she would sleep with him (more eagerly), it's prostitution. And no, adding a kiss to a sincere "thank you", is not a pay-for-favours thing.

@Ilmater's Suffering: I have a problem with it not only as a humanist or a religious person, but also as a lawyer, surprisingly. There are just some things you can't sign away. Some things you can't sell. You can sell property but you can't sell dignity. Or liberty. You can't sell yourself into slavery, you can't sell permission to beat you up, you can't allow someone to kill you at impunity. Same way, sex for money should and can be banned. I wouldn't advocate any rash action without good planning and a real, well-thought solution, instead of just outlawing it. After all, the source of the problem lies deep there. The mentality that makes some people sell or buy it. The situation in which some people are...

Legalising prostitution doesn't cut it, but where it is legal, outlawing it right away wouldn't better the fate of prostitutes or eliminate the customers, so as I said, complex action would be needed.