Legalizing Prostitution

So...your conjecture above is irresponsible and deflective as well? :razz: Back to the topic, the link I posted gives facts and statistics. The argument could be made that keeping it illegal is in fact a deterrent, but this cannot be proven as those who would consider it if not for legal consequences do not commit the crime so it cannot be measured. Here is another link with facts that

http://www.frc.org/content/the-medical-arguments-against-legalizing-prostitution
"In 2003, Dr. Janice G. Raymond, a professor of ethics and women's studies, published a compelling series of arguments against legalization (3). Evidence has begun to accumulate from the Netherlands and Australia that legalization has resulted in more crime rather than less. Dr. Raymond and others have shown that a legally-sanctioned sex industry simply increases demand and attracts traffickers."

There are also numerous health concerns per below

"From our backgrounds in infectious disease epidemiology and obstetrics and gynecology respectively, we also believe legalization is a very unwise approach. Another of the frequently heard arguments for legalization is that by facilitating regular screening and treatment of prostitutes for sexually-transmitted infection, prostitution can be rendered safe from a health perspective (4). This line of reasoning is obviously flawed when one considers that to make a living for herself, or more usually for her pimp or trafficker, a prostitute has to have sex with several dozen customers a week at least. There is no way that screening could be carried out frequently enough in that context to avoid passing on a variety of infections from one customer to the next. Furthermore, it would be impractical to test and treat the male customers in order to protect the prostitutes (3). Gonorrhea, syphilis, chlamydia, human papillomavirus, trichomonas, and herpes are commonly encountered among sexually-active populations and would continue to be endemic among prostitutes and their customers despite a screening and treatment protocol.

A tempting option for control of bacterial STIs might be to simply keep prostitutes on antibiotics more or less continuously. However, this approach would only lead quickly to the development of resistant strains of bacteria, and in the meantime, viral STIs would only continue to circulate unchecked. Additionally, HIV infection could be acquired by a prostitute and passed on to customers for several weeks before a screening test would turn positive (5).

The answer given by many to this infectious disease dilemma is to promote the use of condoms among prostitutes. Unfortunately, even in areas where prostitutes are given complete autonomy over their work conditions, they often choose to forego condom use for the extra money the customer is willing to pay for sex without a condom. In fact, one study showed that only 5.8 percent of prostitutes used condoms consistently over the previous 2 weeks."

I personally lean towards not legalizing it, that being said, I do recognize that this is a complex issue with no easy answers either way.

 

All valid points, that have nothing to do with the legal status of prostitution. Each point mentioned already exists and will continue to do so with prostitution remaining illegal. These are not issues introduced with the legalization of prostitution. THAT is the entire issue that I have with this side of the debate. The points raised are in no way impacted by the legal status of prostitution. Again, like with everything else, there will be no perfect system but with proper regulations and controls in place the impact could be lessened.

A grown man knows when putting his unprotected penis into a vagina that he has high probability of contracting an STD, as does the woman accepting the penis. It is not the governments job to serve as our moral authority.

 

Spoken like an educated pimp

 

That's not conjecture, btw. I'm not saying that the US execution will or will not be identical to Amsterdam. Just saying that we can't just say "Well, it didn't work there so it won't work here".

 

My brain hurts

 

Agree for the most part, except for the studies that suggest per below..

"Dr. Raymond and others have shown that a legally-sanctioned sex industry simply increases demand and attracts traffickers."

 

My argument is not that it decreases demand, but even saying that I doubt that the legality of it changes demand at all. Making it legal makes it available to those who choose to engage. I do wonder how Dr. Janice Raymond and others were able to gain accurate statistics on an underground market.

With regard to trafficking, it already exists.... it happens. Look at this at face value. Making prostitution legal takes it from the black market and makes it a very visible and more controllable industry. As long as it remains illegal, it is very easy for the general public to turn their back to it and THAT is where violence, rape, and trafficking flourish. There is currently no legislation around it, there is nothing to protect the workers. Prostitutes cannot go to the police when they are beaten or raped because they themselves are on the wrong side of the law.

"Blanket statements about prostitution and the exploitation of women are propaganda from a political agenda which seeks to control the way people think and behave. The situations which the anti-traffickers rail against, insofar as they do exist, are a result of economic, political and gender inequalities which should be our central cause for concern. The vast range of sex industries and contexts requires an understanding of diversity and difference and a realization that prohibition and unitary 'moral values' are part of the problem, not the solution.

"Criminalisation forces prostitution into the underworld. Legalisation would bring it into the open, where abuses such as trafficking and under-age prostitution can be more easily tackled. Brothels would develop reputations worth protecting."

Lets face it, prostitution is not going away. It's called the worlds oldest profession for a reason. That said; if the goal is to protect women, then prostitution needs to be legalized. Human trafficking is not a result of prostitution, it is a result of pimping. Legalizing prostitution is really the only conceivable way to separate the two. However, if the goal is to control people by making them abide to ones own morality, then we should continue to allow the government to tell us what is right and wrong for us. Lets just be honest about it and acknowledge that that it is really a moral objection that we are imposing on others.

 

Grrr... I don't know why I keep coming to this.

Actually, I do know. It annoys me when the government and moral activists enforce policy by way of jedi mind tricks.

Human trafficking is largely broken down into two areas, labor trafficking and sex trafficking. Sex trafficking benefits more than just prostitution, it benefits strip clubs, it benefits massage parlors, online services, and yes... street prostitution.

Knowing this, how can making it legal and regulated encourage trafficking?

To address human trafficking, you have to make a commitment to addressing human trafficking.... not one of the many illicit industries that benefit from it.

 

Given my libertarian leanings, we can agree on the dangers of the moral police. That being said, my take is that there are some compelling social reasons arguing for keeping it illegal. Per below it seems Sweden has made some very good strides, I think it is important to carefully consider what those on the front lines of this issue have to say, it is VERY telling that..

"81% of the women in the Nevada legal brothels urgently want to escape it.
For information based on research interviews of the women in the legal brothels see
Prostitution
and Trafficking in Nevada":

http://renotahoe.about.com/gi/o.htm...bt=8&bts=8&zu=http://www.nevadacoalition.org/

"There is a law that works. The 1999 Swedish law on prostitution has almost entirely eliminated trafficking of women into Sweeden. Domestic prostitution has not increased as it has elsewhere in Europe since 2000. Recognizing the harms of prostitution to those in it, Sweden focused on the source of the probelm: men who buy women in prostitution. The victim - the woamn or man or child in prostitution - is not arrested. Instead, Sweden levies felony-level charges only at buyers, pimps, and traffickers. Victims are offered services. Other countries in Europe are now adopting the Swedish law on prostitution and trafficking. The Nevada legislature is encouraged to consider this law."

 

"Sweden’s definition of ‘trafficking’ is consistent with the view that all sex workers are always victims. Under Swedish law, ‘trafficking’ includes “exploitation for casual sexual relations or in another way exploited for sexual
purposes” (Swedish Penal Code, ch. 4). In other words, ‘trafficking’ means any prostitution involving third parties, such as a club, an assistant, a phone service or a brothel, even when there is no force, fraud or coercion. Thus, when the government claims there were 400 to 600 trafficking victims in 2004 (Skarhed 2010, 29), it means there were 400 to 600 women working in prostitution with third parties. This approach inflates the number of ‘trafficking
victims’ because it includes women who are working freely with a third party and who are not forced or coerced to work.

The government does not know whether there has been any change in the number of ‘exploited sex workers’ between 1999 and 2010, when the Skarhed Report was issued (Skarhed 2010, 29). It admits that it does not “have completely reliable knowledge about the
occurrence of human trafficking for sexual purposes in Sweden” (Skarhed 2010, 35).

Instead, it relies on statements by the Swedish Police to claim that “the ban on the purchase of sexual services acts as a barrier to human
traffickers (Skarhed 2010, 9).

In fact,the opposite could as easily be true -it is possible that real trafficking (involving force, fraud or coercion) has increased because sex workers now need third parties to ensure that clients are safe from police scrutiny. However, data is lacking on this question.

The rate of prosecutions remains low. The National Police reported that the law has not led to more information about trafficking, which was one of the hoped-for outcomes. According to the National Police, “no one was
convicted of human trafficking for sexual purposes” in 2009 (Swedish National Police 2010, 10).10 Government documents reveal that only 22 people were convicted from 2003 to 2009 (Dodillet and Östergren 2011, 13). The average is 2.75 convictions a year over eight years. One explanation for the low conviction rates might be the fact that a large percentage of the so-called trafficking victims are not real victims at all because they work voluntarily and
freely"

http://rightswork.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Issue-Paper-4.pdf

 

Interesting, seems the sources are in disagreement, truly complicated issue, no easy answers.

 

Yes

I think it should be legalized. While there are significant issues that have been raised in a legalized context, they mostly seem to be byproducts of an incomplete legalization, in much the same way that Amsterdam also has a quasi-legal structure or marijuana consumption. It protects the end user from prosecution but the importation and distribution of it is still illegal. These factors don't mitigate against legalization, they instead demonstrate the need for full legalization and bringing the trade out of the shadows.

 

I have mixed feelings about legalizing prostitution. On one hand, it would relieve a lot of tension for men and women(there are brothels for women). It will satisfy a lot of hedonists. And, depending on the way the brothel is run, the women who work there could benefit like those in Nevada. On the other hand, I'm concerned about the recruitment of young girls below the age of 18. I think the age should be increased to 21 and they must not be trafficked into the country. I am vehemently opposed to human trafficking. If the State of Florida legalized prostitution, it would make a fortune if it had its fingers in that pie. Especially here in South Florida.

 

meh. legalize it. There would be hos everywhere. Already a lot of young women are so materialistic and hooked on "glamour" - can you imagine the stampede to earn those ho dollars?

And U.s. men would have more leverage in the war between the sexes. You think nobody's marrying now? Legalize prostitution, watch prices drop and only the best of the best of the best women would ever find husbands.

Population would decline because fewer boyfriend/girlfriend relationships would mean fewer accidental babies. Women would be more fit, trying to compete for the few men who would remain the marrying kind.

And the "attitude" movement would disappear with a swiftness.

Yes, yes! - legalize it, and create special visas so women can pour in from overseas to practice their craft. america is on the decline anyway. Might as well make a party of it.

Did you know that in some cultures, hookerdom was a normal and accepted way to meet your wife? Like in old japan... Takes "try before you buy" to a whole new level.

 

If anything there population would increase. more sex means more chances for screw ups. aka forgot my pill, forgot my condom forgot blah blah blah. Sperm doesn't forget where to go lmao

 

Nah - pros know what to do. It's the amateurs who "fall in love" or "hope for the best" or "trap" each other, etc.

 

Abductive reasoning at its finest, ladies and gents.

 

He is kind of right. It is sort of a win win for everyone. My taxes may stay the same. John gets his jollies and a prostitute gets money.

 

As long as it's at its finest, bro. :smt023

 

The doom and gloom scenario that he paints is way off.

No there wouldn't.

Who thinks nobody is marrying now? Statistically, MANY people are marrying. Ironically, generally speaking it's the same camp that is in favor of prohibitions that is also against same sex marriages. But yeah, following this line of thinking, one would assume that the sole reason that men are marrying is not for companionship, but for sex?

This again assumes boyfriend/girlfriend relationships are solely based on sex.

I don't know if this is supposed to be a bad thing, or a good thing..... either way it's quite the assumption, no?

The sky is falling, the sky is falling..... America is on the decline, based on what? ... oh, nevermind... the sky is falling, the sky is falling...

In Japan, didn't the whole village jerk off on the face of an adulterous woman as well? FYI, that is one of my top porn searches, right behind eastern european casting couch and amateur boyfriend / girlfriend stuff.... eh.,. anyway, not sure what point he was trying to get across here.


Sorry man, that entire post reads as an onion article.