Why is prostitution illegal?

Tsukasa Buddha said:
Just as an interesting factoid, prostitutes actually have a lower preponderance of AIDS etc. than the general population.

(Sorry, I will find my linky later)
Click to expand...
They are not going to work as a prostitute once they are diagnosed to be HIV infected.It develops into AIDS only in the next few years time.so the ones diagnosed are not prostitues anymore and wouldn't be classifed as such even for statistical purposes.It would be unethical.Also prostitutes and gay people are most health aware. So there would be a lesser incidence of both prostitutes and gay people being diagnosed as having AIDS.But the world is full of prejudiced people and eager to class AIDS as some sort of a disease exclusive to people who have several partners.You could be HIV infected if you've never had sex for instance if you share needles or been given a blood transfusion which wasn't checked.These are far higher incidences than any specific category.
 
Last edited:
Jonnyclueless said:
One of the problems is that legal prostitutes have trouble getting health care because of their profession. And being in such a high risk profession it's understandable for insurance companies.
Click to expand...

...sorry, Jonnyclueless, that's a real stretch....

I wonder how coal miners get health insurance? How about nuclear power plant workers? Oh, and there's all those people who work with toxic chemicals...

.....I'm sure they don't get any health care, either...... :)
 
Insurers often rate or exclude on what is called moral hazard (moral as opposed to physical hazard, not immoral).
An entertainer (travelling at night, often from club etc) would pay more than an accountant for motor insurance.
A hooker would likely pay more for health insurance than a schoolteacher. But if there's a profit to be made.....
 
SophieHirschfeld said:
Dude, harassment and rape are NOT the same THING AND neither one are prostitution!
Click to expand...

I never said they were. All I´m saying is that they have specific legislation, and that shows that abuses of that kind are somehow special, otherwise we could just use the general, non-specific harassment or kidnapping laws to prosecute these types of crimes.


SophieHirschfeld said:
Any type of slavery is wrong and sex trade is not the only place you find slaves.
Click to expand...
But not all types of slavery all equally wrong, are they? That was my point.

SophieHirschfeld said:
I think you're making the assumption that we should make laws based on what society thinks is acceptable. This might be your problem. If laws were based on what society thinks is acceptable social progress would likely be even slower. Society doesn't think rationally about laws overall. In fact, many things that society has thought in the past would be terrible if they allowed it to influence law. Some of those things would include the killing of homosexuals, slavery being legal, legal indentured servitude, and drinking alcohol being illegal.

In reality, the reference to society is the Bandwagon Fallacy and, quite frankly, it is not worth jumping on.
Click to expand...
The reference to societal views was one of two two different angles in which I was trying to show that there is a difference between sexual and other types of abuse. The other was an appeal to individual morality, with the example of the rape of the daughter I have repeated several times.

I know we are taking about prostitution and not rape, but my argument relies on the fact that for most people abuses of the sexual kind (rape, harassment, whatever...) are distinct form other kinds of abuses. In that sense sex work is not like any other work. Just like cleaning glass windows on a skyscraper is not the same job as cleaning glasses on floor level. One might never have an fall, one might not have fear of heights and do the job happily. But it´s not the same job.

Combine this point with the fact that the market economy sometimes produces abusive cicumstances and inequalities (of course this is what liberalists will never admit since for them the market economy is the ultimate force of good), and you can have a an argument for the illegalisation of prostitution for protectionist reasons.

I see this parallel to the spirit of work safety laws. Let´s take industrial presses for example, a very common type of machine. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_press) Not so long ago workers used to work in these machines with no protections, sticking their hands in the thing and missing a limb every so often. Nowadays one is not even ALLOWED near one of these machines unless the machine has a number of protections that make it almost impossible to have an accident (detectors, covers etc.).

Even if a worker says that he´s so confident about the job that he can, and wants to work in an unprotected press, he´s not allowed to.

In a similar spirit, if sex work is deemed too "risky" or demeaning by society, an outright ban (or very strict regulations and controls) might be enacted. And the fact that some sex workers don´t think the work is dangerous or demeaning does not invalidate this, just like in the case of the press worker.

However I understand your argument, that ultimately everyone has a choice and that some (or many) sex workers do it voluntarily and see it as "any other job", So they have a right to do that kind of work, since they are not hurting anybody, not even themselves. It is a strong argument and I´m even inclined to say you´re right.

But for the reasons given, I don´t think it is like any other job (it changes severely once coercion is brought into the picture, something impossible to avoid completely, just like accidents are impossible to avoid completely in industrial jobs), and the "choice" is not always so freely made. (It would only be so in a country with a good social security...)

So legalisation should come together with a very strict set of regulations and controls to make it hard for abuses to happen.
 
Last edited:
slingblade said:
Yes.
Click to expand...

I thought you didn´t want to argue with me anymore...

So kidnapping someone and making him/her work in a sweatshop and kidnapping someone and making him/her work in a brothel should receive the same kind of punishment?
 
Abooga said:
I thought you didn´t want to argue with me anymore...
Click to expand...

Don't worry about what I do and don't want. You haven't yet; no reason to change that.

So kidnapping someone and making him/her work in a sweatshop and kidnapping someone and making him/her work in a brothel should receive the same kind of punishment?
Click to expand...


Yes. Kidnapping's a crime. If there are other crimes committed as well, they will also be punished. One of your hypothets involves kidnapping and slavery. The other involves kidnapping, slavery, and rape. Each crime would be punished, were anyone caught.

Kidnapping and slavery aren't the same things. I think you don't know that.

You asked if all forms of slavery are equally wrong.

They are. All forms of slavery are slavery. And all are equally immoral.
 
Last edited:
slingblade said:
Don't worry about what I do and don't want. You haven't yet; no reason to change that.




Yes. Kidnapping's a crime. If there are other crimes committed as well, they will also be punished. One of your hypothets involves kidnapping and slavery. The other involves kidnapping, slavery, and rape. Each crime would be punished, were anyone caught.

Kidnapping and slavery aren't the same things. I think you don't know that.

You asked if all forms of slavery are equally wrong.

They are. All forms of slavery are slavery. And all are equally immoral.
Click to expand...

So you admit that sexual slavery is worse than other forms of slavery. Thank you...
 
Abooga said:
So you admit that sexual slavery is worse than other forms of slavery. Thank you...
Click to expand...

Dude, you didn't read his post.

He never said sexual slavery is worse than "regular" slavery. He said that rape would just be a different charge.

For example: If I rob a store and force the clerk to take the money for me then use her as a hostage for a length of time: Then I am guilty of robbery and kidnapping. If during that time I force sex on her, then I am guilty of rape as well. It's not that I am guilty of sexual slavery causing: I am guilty of rape. Three different charges instead of two.

By your thinking, someone who rapes a woman once is guilty of sexual slavery. .... doesn't work like that.

And, by the way, from my own experience, NewtonTrino is right when he says
I love having my own sex slave. It's way cool and definitely not wrong.
Click to expand...

Because it is fun. And sexual slavery isn't wrong -- as long as it isn't rape. :)


Edited to add:
By the way, what does this question have to do with a legal brothel anyway? The women (or men) there are at a real job, just like any other job (since it's legal)........
 
Last edited:
JFrankA said:
Edited to add:
By the way, what does this question have to do with a legal brothel anyway? The women (or men) there are at a real job, just like any other job (since it's legal)........
Click to expand...

It stems from the idea that prostitution is rape because the prostitutes need a job because they need the money to eat. So they are forced by poverty to be prostitutes so prostitution is rape.

No, no one here is really buying that argument asside from abooga, but that is where this started.
 
JFrankA said:
...sorry, Jonnyclueless, that's a real stretch....

I wonder how coal miners get health insurance? How about nuclear power plant workers? Oh, and there's all those people who work with toxic chemicals...

.....I'm sure they don't get any health care, either...... :)
Click to expand...


It's not a stretch, it's based on interviews with the prostitutes who work in the brothels in Nevada. They are denied health insurance because of their occupation. And it's not a stretch that some people are denied health insurance due to risks. Just look at smokers.
 
JFrankA said:
Dude, you didn't read his post.

He never said sexual slavery is worse than "regular" slavery. He said that rape would just be a different charge.

For example: If I rob a store and force the clerk to take the money for me then use her as a hostage for a length of time: Then I am guilty of robbery and kidnapping. If during that time I force sex on her, then I am guilty of rape as well. It's not that I am guilty of sexual slavery causing: I am guilty of rape. Three different charges instead of two.

By your thinking, someone who rapes a woman once is guilty of sexual slavery. .... doesn't work like that.

And, by the way, from my own experience, NewtonTrino is right when he says


Because it is fun. And sexual slavery isn't wrong -- as long as it isn't rape. :)


Edited to add:
By the way, what does this question have to do with a legal brothel anyway? The women (or men) there are at a real job, just like any other job (since it's legal)........
Click to expand...

I read his post. What I meant by sexual slavery was slavery + rape, not any of that kinky stuff you guys seem to have in mind...

So in that sense it is obvious, and he admitted that it is worse than regular slavery.

Oh, and regarding the E.T.A. question, I have tried to explain several times... not very successfully. And I´ve admitted it is a weak argument... and I am going to give up on it unless you bother to read it and answer it in some meaningful way.
 
Last edited:
Abooga said:
I read his post.
...
he admitted that it is worse than regular slavery.
Click to expand...

You may have read his post, but you did not understand it, or you are deliberately twisting the meaning.
He did not admit that sexual slavery is worse than regular(sic) slavery
It was clearly explained that slavery does not come in categories. Slavery is slavery, and other crimes are distinct.
 
Last edited:
kerikiwi said:
You may have read his post, but you did not understand it, or you are deliberately twisting the meaning.
He did not admit that sexual slavery is worse than regular(sic) slavery
It was clearly explained that slavery does not come in categories. Slavery is slavery, and other crimes are distinct.
Click to expand...

Hey kerikiwi (and JFrankA), Slingblade is a "she" - just thought I'd clear that up.

IMO it seems that Abooga has a serious comprehension problem, not only with Slingblade's posts, but with the majority of posts in this thread that support opinions contrary to his. I am so often reminded of the Paul Simon line from The Boxer - "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest".
 
dogguy said:
Hey kerikiwi (and JFrankA), Slingblade is a "she" - just thought I'd clear that up.
Click to expand...
Actually I knew that, but forgot!
Changed his name and then he was a she...
Would I be presumptuous if I suggested that whether or not anyone is walking on the wild side, it is what they say that is important.
And probably how they say it, to help Abooga with comprehension.
 
dogguy said:
Hey kerikiwi (and JFrankA), Slingblade is a "she" - just thought I'd clear that up.
Click to expand...

D'OH!!!! I thought she was making too much sense to be a man..... :)

My humble apologies, Slingblade.

IMO it seems that Abooga has a serious comprehension problem, not only with Slingblade's posts, but with the majority of posts in this thread that support opinions contrary to his. I am so often reminded of the Paul Simon line from The Boxer - "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest".
Click to expand...

Dogguy, that is my favorite song of all time. And I've found that that lyric is one of the most truest lyrics ever.....

Originally Posted by Abooga
Oh, and regarding the E.T.A. question, I have tried to explain several times... not very successfully. And I´ve admitted it is a weak argument... and I am going to give up on it unless you bother to read it and answer it in some meaningful way.
Click to expand...

I don't mean to be disrepectful, but a) you are absolutely right: it is a very weak arguement. b) don't expect any meaningful answer from a very weak and unmeaningful stance....

Originally Posted by Jonnyclueless
It's not a stretch, it's based on interviews with the prostitutes who work in the brothels in Nevada. They are denied health insurance because of their occupation. And it's not a stretch that some people are denied health insurance due to risks. Just look at smokers.
Click to expand...

And meaning disrepect to you, but do you have the link to the interview? Right now, we have to go on your hearsay and I'd like to see the source to see how objective it really is.....
 
Abooga said:
So you admit that sexual slavery is worse than other forms of slavery. Thank you...
Click to expand...

Nope, I sure didn't. Your words taste very bad in my mouth. Stop cramming them in there.

And thanks, everyone else, for the support. It is noted and most appreciated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom