Do you think that prostitution should be legalized?

[twocows]

Being forced by monetary issues makes it a form of slavery and human trafficking, Guillermo. We cannot legalize that sort of situation. That is at least 100 levels of wrong.

We need to fight the fact that people can be forced into it. This may involve raising minimum wage, and it might involve creating more jobs, and it may involve laws protecting the poor. It might even involve an answer I haven't thought of.

Think of it this way. Look at the type of prostitute you're describing. They've been forced to resort to prostitution due to money issues somehow, maybe debts. They didn't want to do it, if they did they wouldn't have waited until they had no choice.

You can either make it legal to keep doing what they're doing.

Or you can help them not need to resort to it anymore. Give them the /choice/ to do it or not.

Which do you think the prostitutes themselves will appreciate more?

That would be the ideal solution and I think anyone could agree with it. However, as the saying goes, reality is a harsh mistress. While in an ideal world there would be no need for women to take up that occupation, the reality is that, unless we move to a more socialized economy, there's always going to be a lower class that will resort to doing what they can to get by. That's, unfortunately, just the nature of our system. Taking away those peoples' "last resort," so to say, isn't going to help. The reason they choose such a profession is because they have no alternative; most would rather do that than starve (and I think they would tell you the same).

 

[Dawn]

That would be the ideal solution and I think anyone could agree with it. However, as the saying goes, reality is a harsh mistress. While in an ideal world there would be no need for women to take up that occupation, the reality is that, unless we move to a more socialized economy, there's always going to be a lower class that will resort to doing what they can to get by. That's, unfortunately, just the nature of our system. Taking away those peoples' "last resort," so to say, isn't going to help. The reason they choose such a profession is because they have no alternative; most would rather do that than starve (and I think they would tell you the same).

If the only way to solving this problem without resorting to socialism is to embrace slavery, then I would have to say democracy has failed us and it's time for one heck of a change to our government. Slavery is a crime against humanity, not something that should be supported under /any/ condition, like ever. It is that bad.

That being said, I don't think it's the only way and I don't think democracy has failed us. I think we need to consider attacking the root of the problem like I said earlier. We may not be able to stop forced prostitution from happening completely anymore than we can murder or thievery, but hell we have to try.

 

[FrostPheonix]

I think that prostitution should be illegal. STDs, STIs, etc; are all spread through it. Even if it were legal, STDs or STIs can be spread within days, and people won't check them every week. So, it should be illegal. Acually, our governments should take more action against prostitution, and provide some way for these people to earn income another way. Prostitution is a horrible experience, and people should not be forced to do it.

On the other hand, I do not think our governments today have enough power to stop it. What to do? o_o

 

[Guillermo]

Being forced by monetary issues makes it a form of slavery and human trafficking, Guillermo. We cannot legalize that sort of situation. That is at least 100 levels of wrong.

We need to fight the fact that people can be forced into it. This may involve raising minimum wage, and it might involve creating more jobs, and it may involve laws protecting the poor. It might even involve an answer I haven't thought of.

Think of it this way. Look at the type of prostitute you're describing. They've been forced to resort to prostitution due to money issues somehow, maybe debts. They didn't want to do it, if they did they wouldn't have waited until they had no choice.

You can either make it legal to keep doing what they're doing.

Or you can help them not need to resort to it anymore. Give them the /choice/ to do it or not.

Which do you think the prostitutes themselves will appreciate more?

You keep repeating the same point over and over again and it's actually getting kind of annoying, even though the entire thread is arguing against you.

Stop talking about an ideal world where this happens and that happens and this doesn't need to happen, because in reality, that's not how it works and it never will be. Like twocows said, there will always be a lowerclass that resort to prostitution simply because there is no other alternative for them. They've tried and they've failed at maintaining a job, simply because they either didn't get a proper education or because they're lazy. Whatever reason it is, that doesn't matter.

No **** the government have to sort it out, the government have a lot of things to sort out. The only problem with that, is as mentioned above, we don't live in an ideal world. There will always be problems that the government can't deal with, because we, as a civilisation, screw things up too much.

 

[Dawn]

You keep repeating the same point over and over again and it's actually getting kind of annoying, even though the entire thread is arguing against you.

Y'know what it's technically called when you start pressuring me with intimidation tactics to try and stop me from posting? It's technically called harassment.

Also, the internet has a very significant liberal bias in comparison to the actual real world. Having mostly liberal arguments on an internet debate thread isn't much of an indicator of anything.

Stop talking about an ideal world where this happens and that happens and this doesn't need to happen, because in reality, that's not how it works and it never will be. Like twocows said, there will always be a lowerclass that resort to prostitution simply because there is no other alternative for them. They've tried and they've failed at maintaining a job, simply because they either didn't get a proper education or because they're lazy. Whatever reason it is, that doesn't matter.

No **** the government have to sort it out, the government have a lot of things to sort out. The only problem with that, is as mentioned above, we don't live in an ideal world. There will always be problems that the government can't deal with, because we, as a civilisation, screw things up too much.

So basically your argument is that the world isn't perfect and so even though you can't tell me how my plan doesn't work, it's just too ideal to use. You're missing something important for that argument to work. Namely, you need to be able to tell me how my plan doesn't work. Clearly if it's too ideal to work, there's some reason for it that can be expressed in words. It's absolutely imperative that you can give that reason, which you haven't done yet.

 

[Oryx]

Y'know what it's technically called when you start pressuring me with intimidation tactics to try and stop me from posting? It's technically called harassment.

He said you were getting annoying. You have thicker skin than that, you can handle it, it's not harassment.

Also, the internet has a very significant liberal bias in comparison to the actual real world. Having mostly liberal arguments on an internet debate thread isn't much of an indicator of anything.

Very, very true, lol.

So basically your argument is that the world isn't perfect and so even though you can't tell me how my plan doesn't work, it's just too ideal to use. You're missing something important for that argument to work. Namely, you need to be able to tell me how my plan doesn't work. Clearly if it's too ideal to work, there's some reason for it that can be expressed in words. It's absolutely imperative that you can give that reason, which you haven't done yet.

Here's how it doesn't work: Do you think that right now the government isn't doing anything to try to help people, well, not be poor? The government is already at its limit trying to balance helping poor people and rewarding people that work hard. Your plan doesn't work because that's what's in place right now. If prostitution is legalized, the people right now tasked to trying to control its spread would then be converted over to helping make sure it's safe. If it remains illegal, then nothing changes. Your world is ideal because it assumes that the government hasn't been trying at all to create more jobs and help the poor, and if they just start trying all will be well. They have been trying. We're still sitting on a ton of unemployment and massive amounts of people poor. Unless you have a suggestion as to how the government can end the crisis we have with jobs already, your suggestion of "oh, they just need to try and people will get less poor" is more than ideal.

 

[Dawn]

He said you were getting annoying. You have thicker skin than that, you can handle it, it's not harassment.

Actually, it's harassment by definition. Believe it or not harassment has two definitions and that's the lesser known one, and what he did was a perfect example of it. (Google "define: harassment" if you'd like to see for yourself.) I pointed it out because it undermined his argument. I would not respond to an attack that actually offended me, promise.

Now, I see what you're saying but I honestly don't believe you when you imply the government cannot try harder. That the people cannot try harder. I honestly think that sounds pretty extreme. Think about it. Is the question really about whether we can try harder, as if it's simply impossible, or is the question whether we can try harder enough to actually make a difference. Surely there's something that can be done, no matter how small, but is it worth it? I'd like to believe we can make a difference, not at stopping prostitution altogether, but at least making it so that people being forced is no longer as significant an issue. Obviously getting rid of it completely is a fantasy. We can't 100% get rid of /any/ crime. It's just a matter of making it reasonable.

 

[Oryx]

I would love to see what kind of ideas that you have(unless I missed them in a post of yours) that would actually be realistically possible that the American Government would actually enforce to lessen prostitution(assuming that is your stance here, which it kinda is going from your posts), even though we have much bigger things to worry about, like I dunno, our national debt and wars? I don't see how promiscuous women takes priority over all of that, do you? And what can the people do? I honestly think people have bigger problems to worry about as well. I mean heck, strip clubs exist for a reason, apparently you haven't thought of that.

The way I see it, there's now a certain amount of the police force's time which is dedicated to finding/stamping out prostitution. It may not be certain people dedicated to it, I'm not quite sure, but there are at least people enforcing these laws. If prostitution was legalized, this is the scenario that I think would happen:

-That time will be spent focusing on people who are prostitutes because they're a victim of human trafficking, instead of people who are prostitutes by choice. Because they don't have to spend as much time focusing on everyone, they have more time to verify that the prostitutes are being safe with STD tests and such. There will of course still be people who may not want to pay as much so they get a prostitute under the table, one that hasn't been following regulations. However, they have the option of getting a clean prostitute, instead of some questionably STD-ridden women who have no reason to tell them the truth about whether or not they're clean, and have no verification for it.

If legitimate prostitutes, ones not being enslaved or forced, didn't have to be focused on by the police and government, they would free up some time to focus on the real issues of prostitution, such as the human slavery that happens in some circles, or even spend that extra time working towards the ideal world that Yellow wants, where no one is poor enough to feel the need to resort to prostitution.

 

[Dawn]

-That time will be spent focusing on people who are prostitutes because they're a victim of human trafficking, instead of people who are prostitutes by choice.

How are you supposed to tell choice from force? There's literally no difference besides what someone says to the police from a third person perspective. Police will still be doing the same thing only some people will get away with getting caught. Unless you intend to start giving people a license to prostitute, which pretty much throws the whole "It will free up people's work to find illegals" out the window and then some.

such as the human slavery that happens in some circles

You of course realize that human slavery is the norm and not the exception, right?

 

[Guillermo]

Y'know what it's technically called when you start pressuring me with intimidation tactics to try and stop me from posting? It's technically called harassment

ha-rass;
–verb (used with object) 1. to disturb persistently; torment, as with troubles or cares; bother continually; pester; persecute.

2. to trouble by repeated attacks, incursions, etc., as in war or hostilities; harry; raid.

I'm sorry what, try stop you from posting? Yellow, you're obviously stubborn enough to continue posting even though everyone in this thread is arguing against you, I don't think me saying you're being annoying is going to stop you either.

Also, the internet has a very significant liberal bias in comparison to the actual real world. Having mostly liberal arguments on an internet debate thread isn't much of an indicator of anything.

What point are you trying to get across here?

basically your argument is that the world isn't perfect and so even though you can't tell me how my plan doesn't work, it's just too ideal to use. You're missing something important for that argument to work. Namely, you need to be able to tell me how my plan doesn't work. Clearly if it's too ideal to work, there's some reason for it that can be expressed in words. It's absolutely imperative that you can give that reason, which you haven't done yet.

Well no, I made a point up there ^^^ by saying that no matter what the government do, we will always find a way to screw it up and make things bad again. You obviously didn't read what I said lol. Tell me how the government is going to prevent people from resorting to prostitution. Please, I'd love to know.

 

[twocows]

Also, the internet has a very significant liberal bias in comparison to the actual real world. Having mostly liberal arguments on an internet debate thread isn't much of an indicator of anything.

This is true if your descriptor of the "real world" is equivalent to the boundaries of the United States. The "liberals" of the US are conservative to most of Europe and a number of other places.

 

[Oryx]

How are you supposed to tell choice from force? There's literally no difference besides what someone says to the police from a third person perspective. Police will still be doing the same thing only some people will get away with getting caught. Unless you intend to start giving people a license to prostitute, which pretty much throws the whole "It will free up people's work to find illegals" out the window and then some.

There are lots of things that are legal only if you choose to do them. Sex, for example. It's legal to have sex, it's not legal to force someone to have sex. Should we make sex illegal because it can be forced and you can't tell the difference? Imo having a license for it would make things easier, as it wouldn't take many people to issue them, and that way police could ask for their license and STD tests, make sure they're real (inb4"how can they tell", a lot of things have licenses that work just fine), and move on. It would streamline the process.

"Only some people will get away with being caught" - They'd only be "getting away" in the way a person licensed to drive "gets away" with driving, or someone "gets away" with doing the work their job requires of them. They wouldn't be getting away because it would be legal. Police will be doing the same thing, yes - only now they have less people they have to focus on.

You of course realize that human slavery is the norm and not the exception, right?

Just because something is in the minority doesn't mean that it should be restricted. People who make a free choice to become a prostitute for whatever reason shouldn't be punished because other people in the same profession are horrible people.

I'm starting to wonder where you're getting statistics like that, anyway. I remember you posting once one website that mentioned there was a lot of human trafficking, but not how much compared to prostitutes that are prostitutes by choice. Unless you have some kind of statistic to back that up, I have no reason to believe that you're right.

 

[Azureth]

Umm...I don't know why my post was deleted, I was simply talking about how prostitution would be good for disabled men such as myself that because of our disability find it very hard to get sex.

 

[Dawn]

This is true if your descriptor of the "real world" is equivalent to the boundaries of the United States. The "liberals" of the US are conservative to most of Europe and a number of other places.

That would sure explain why I feel like a conservative whenever I debate on the internet. I seriously question whether that accounts for the entirety of the severe liberal bias the internet seems to have in general though.

There are lots of things that are legal only if you choose to do them. Sex, for example. It's legal to have sex, it's not legal to force someone to have sex. Should we make sex illegal because it can be forced and you can't tell the difference?

I think it's perfectly appropriate to have a balance between freedom and restriction. You can have sex all you want (And even that is subjectively tasteless) but you can't turn it into a business.

The comparison also doesn't really work because let's be honest, rape is not nearly as severe a problem or severe a crime as human trafficking. That's not even getting into the fact that the two tend to mix freely.

Imo having a license for it would make things easier, as it wouldn't take many people to issue them and that way police could ask for their license and STD tests, make sure they're real (inb4"how can they tell", a lot of things have licenses that work just fine), and move on. It would streamline the process.

Major understatement. It would take plenty, plenty of manpower to put that system into place and keep it functional. You're now talking let's say a million licenses that obviously can't last forever, and if you really want to fight STDs you're going to have to instate mandatory tests on a very, very regular basis. You're talking weekly if not daily. You're now talking millions upon millions of dollars just to keep this system up every year, and that's assuming a generous weekly basis with dirt cheap STD tests on only half the estimated prostitute population to account for people who wouldn't bother working with the system for one reason or another.

Basically, there is no monetary or manpower gain to be had from this at all.

They wouldn't be getting away because it would be legal. Police will be doing the same thing, yes - only now they have fewer people they have to focus on.

How exactly are the police going to be able to tell the difference without investigating and finding either a license or someone's word. The only difference is that they aren't driving some of the people they catch to jail anymore. It's not going to be like there's any glowing indicator without asking that someone is or is not illegal.

Just because something is in the minority doesn't mean that it should be restricted. People who make a free choice to become a prostitute for whatever reason shouldn't be punished because other people in the same profession are horrible people.

A lot of the time, that just isn't practical or reasonable.

I'm starting to wonder where you're getting statistics like that, anyway. I remember you posting once one website that mentioned there was a lot of human trafficking, but not how much compared to prostitutes that are prostitutes by choice. Unless you have some kind of statistic to back that up, I have no reason to believe that you're right

That applies to you too. [lame]Of course, you're not going to find a good source about that because it turns out getting proper statistics from rings of criminals that don't want to be found is hard.[/lame]

I can however, offer you the logic that our society really looks down on prostitution, and so the most logical reasons for a prostitute to just ignore that is pressure from other sources such as being coerced by the thought of money or being forced through physical or mental abuse. Exactly how many people do you think just think prostitution is the most awesome job ever? Besides the hipsters anyway. They're going to be a small minority either way though.

So yeah, we're not going to get any better evidence than knowledge or theory crafting here, because doing so is ridiculously impractical, and I think the chances of me being wrong about this are pretty far in my favor so...

 

[Mr. X]

Im honestly suprised that no one has called yellow a troll yet.

Anyway, just going to point a few things out.

For those that are pointing to tests for STD's and STI's, how often will the person be tested and do any of you know how long it takes to get results for this type of test? (I am, of course, assuming the test will account for all STD's/STI's and not just for a select few)

And as for all prostution being human trafficking, its not. You know why? Some people decide, themselves, to become a prostitute. Therefore, its not considered trafficking as these people are not recruited.

Anyway, my stance is legalization with regulation. Whilst prostution might be immoral, its best for everyone that it be made as safe as possiable. (Because we all know that prostution just won't end for no reason. Immoral or not.)

 

[Dawn]

@Mr. X: They prefer not to resort to attacking the opposition instead of their opposition's argument. c:

For those that are pointing to tests for STD's and STI's, how often will the person be tested and do any of you know how long it takes to get results for this type of test? (I am, of course, assuming the test will account for all STD's/STI's and not just for a select few)

A prostitute is at great risk of contracting one. The more often, the better. It only takes one "session" to catch one and they almost immediately become contagious

And as for all prostution being human trafficking, its not. You know why? Some people decide, themselves, to become a prostitute. Therefore, its not considered trafficking as these people are not recruited.

Nobody disagrees with you. /Most/ prostitution, however, is human trafficking.

Anyway, my stance is legalization with regulation. Whilst prostution might be immoral, its best for everyone that it be made as safe as possiable. (Because we all know that prostution just won't end for no reason. Immoral or not.)

Lots of other crimes are unsafe, won't end for no reason, and are immoral. Y'know, like murder, thievery, griefing. Basically crime in general. So when exactly do we stop making it more convenient for criminals to continue doing crime, and why should we care when the consequences for what they do catch up with them?

 

[Mr. X]

Well, before I respond im going to comment about something else you said earlier that I missed.

The comparison also doesn't really work because let's be honest, rape is not nearly as severe a problem or severe a crime as human trafficking. That's not even getting into the fact that the two tend to mix freely.

And you also, apparently, beleive that legalized prostution is the same as human trafficking

So, in other words, you think legal prostution is worse then rape? Hypothetical situiation. Lets say prostution gets legalized. Person A walks into a brothel, pays $50, gets laid and goes on with his day. Now lets say prostution isn't legalized. Person A stalks person B, corners her, and rapes her. Person B now have severe mental problems due to this and tax payers now have to pay for person A's stay in prison. But hey, at least prostution is still illegal.

Here's hoping that you don't become person b in the future.

Anyway, next.

Lots of other crimes are unsafe, won't end for no reason, and are immoral. Y'know, like murder, thievery, griefing. Basically crime in general. So when exactly do we stop making it more convenient for criminals to continue doing crime, and why should we care when the consequences for what they do catch up with them?

I consider immoral crimes to be ones that will have a permenant, intentional effect, either physical or mental to a single or group of people... You know, like rape and murder. Thievery, while wrong, causes no permanant harm. (Some steals something of yours, you can easily rebuy it. However, if your murdered well... thats all folks.)

Next

/Most/ prostitution, however, is human trafficking.

Perhaps, but the comment I was referring to was then you said ALL prostution was human trafficking.

Next

A prostitute is at great risk of contracting one. The more often, the better. It only takes one "session" to catch one and they almost immediately become contagious

Agreed and this is why, yet again, prostution needs to be legalized and regulated. Also, by doing this, we can (theoretically) reduce the rates of STD infection.

Lets say that each prostitute would be required to be tested at least once a month.
This would be a effective way to control STD rates, because how often do you think the average prostitute gets tested?

The only real issue is how to seperate the legal prostitutes from the illegal ones (As in, the ones that are following the new regulations and the ones that aren't.) The best way to do that would be to establish brothels, like in nevada, but the specifics of how legalized prostution would function is completely diffrent topic from wether or not it should be legalized.

 

[Dawn]

Perhaps, but the comment I was referring to was then you said ALL prostution was human trafficking.

Yeaaah, but the discussion has already moved past that. You're arguing as if I currently believe such a thing which is redundant because I don't. That was originally intended to make a point, but appears to have been badly thought out on my part. The point being that human trafficking is the heart and soul of prostitution as we know it now.

And you also, apparently, beleive that legalized prostution is the same as human trafficking

Slow down there. Why do I "apparently" believe that?

Lets say that each prostitute would be required to be tested at least once a month.

That would actually do approximately nothing. Not only does that almost garauntee the STD spreads after it's caught, possibly many times, but let's be realistic here, you're now putting people with STDs in the spot where they have to start going illegal again, and let's be honest, prostitutes who pass on STDs aren't exactly known for their honesty. They're going to find ways to hide the fact that they're illegals with STDs like before. Probably among the remaining illegals who refuse to cooperate with the law to join the legal side. See, illegals have no particular reason to sacrifice a chunk of the money they desperately need to be forced to deal with regulations, the hateful eyes and possible hate crimes they're making themselves more vulnerable to by becoming publicly transparent, and possible retribution by their "masters".

Because let's just drop the ball on being unrealistic here and acknowledge that an overwhelming majority of the business is run by slave owners who often take quite a bit of pride out of having a disturbing amount of control over their "workers".

If you want to fight STDs with STD tests in a business based completely around shameless promiscuous sex, you're going to have to do them a heck of a lot more often than every month if you want to have hope of even remotely denting the problem.

The only real issue is how to seperate the legal prostitutes from the illegal ones (As in, the ones that are following the new regulations and the ones that aren't.) The best way to do that would be to establish brothels, like in nevada

Sure! Because that worked great in Nevada and Nevada is clearly a good example of what we want for everyone. >w> [/sarcasm]

Now lets say prostution isn't legalized. Person A stalks person B, corners her, and rapes her. Person B now have severe mental problems due to this and tax payers now have to pay for person A's stay in prison. But hey, at least prostution is still illegal.

Here's hoping that you don't become person b in the future.

...Excuse me? Yes. Yes I suppose that /would/ be a shame if something like that happened to me. ಠ_ಠ

 

[Mr. X]

Slow down there. Why do I "apparently" believe that?

For the record, prostitution is human trafficking. They're not separate.

Originally Posted by Mr. X
And as for all prostution being human trafficking, its not. You know why? Some people decide, themselves, to become a prostitute. Therefore, its not considered trafficking as these people are not recruited.

Nobody disagrees with you. /Most/ prostitution, however, is human trafficking.

And as for the legalized part, thats a assumption of mine since you are agenst legalized prostution.

Now, something semi-related to this topic.

Do you consider the porn industry to be human trafficking? After all, its pretty much the same as prostution. (She has sex with man, makes money from it. Same as prostution)

Anyway, for some reason im reminded about Sweet Daddy D and him being a p.i.m.p.

 

[Dawn]

Yeah that quote is irrelevant, because I've said I don't believe that multiple times now so I don't see why you're still bringing it up. I think you're playing necromancer with points made in this thread too much. Can we move on, please?

Do you consider the porn industry to be human trafficking? After all, its pretty much the same as prostution. (She has sex with man, makes money from it. Same as prostution)

Anyway, for some reason im reminded about Sweet Daddy D and him being a p.i.m.p.

There is a thin line between the two. They are not technically prostituting because the money is technically being given to them for the movie, not the sex. The question you raised was actually highly controversial, but that is the law's view and because we are not here to discuss whether that part of the law is good or not, I will be leaving it at that.