Why is prostitution illegal?

[slingblade]

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.

SHE did not admit any such thing. Quote the specific words, if they exist.

What SHE said was that your two hypotheticals are unbalanced because one involves TWO crimes, and one involves THREE, and a person caught in their commission would be charged accordingly.

Is it "worse" to commit two crimes instead of three? Yeah, maybe; probably; it usually gets you more jail time, anyway. Does it matter which crimes they are? I dunno. Three crimes are more serious than two, in a general sense.

If your two crimes are kidnapping and torture (let's say it's Saw-type torture, hmmm? Make it really bad, really painful and soul-shattering torture) and your three crimes are kidnapping, false imprisonment, and serial rape....which is "worse?"

 

[Abooga]

SHE did not admit any such thing. Quote the specific words, if they exist.

"One of your hypothets involves kidnapping and slavery. The other involves kidnapping, slavery, and rape"

Does anyone seriously mean that those two hypothesis are equally wrong? I think most sane people would think the second worse than the first. That´s why I said she addmitted it. I know she didn´t admit it expressly, but it is implicit.

What SHE said was that your two hypotheticals are unbalanced because one involves TWO crimes, and one involves THREE, and a person caught in their commission would be charged accordingly.

Is it "worse" to commit two crimes instead of three? Yeah, maybe; probably; it usually gets you more jail time, anyway. Does it matter which crimes they are? I dunno. Three crimes are more serious than two, in a general sense.

If your two crimes are kidnapping and torture (let's say it's Saw-type torture, hmmm? Make it really bad, really painful and soul-shattering torture) and your three crimes are kidnapping, false imprisonment, and serial rape....which is "worse?"

That´s not the hypothetical I was putting forward. Why do you try to make it up from thin air? I was just showing that abuses of a sexual kind are unlike other kinds of abuses. The fact that the law distinctly applies the label of "rape" to some of them just verifies my claim.

Making prostitution legal might be a good idea. But to declare that it is "just like any other work" is what I have a problem with. In other types of work, say, picking up cotton, if someone were forced to do that work, it would be bad, it would be kidnap, slavery or whatever. But with sex-work, if someone is forced to do that kind of work, it wouldn´t just be kidnap or slavery, it would be rape too.

So if prostitution is legalised this should be taken into account, it is a very particular kind of work and special controls and protective measures should be enacted.

That´s all. In the beginning I reasoned that this could be used to argue agains legalisation itself, just like other protectionist laws, the ban of dangerous drugs, work safety regs. etc. But in trying to express such a subtle point, that I was just addressing the O.P. and offering a possible reason for illegalisation, just for argument´s sake, I think I was asking too much from my poor command of English...

 

[JFrankA]

Making prostitution legal might be a good idea. But to declare that it is "just like any other work" is what I have a problem with. In other types of work, say, picking up cotton, if someone were forced to do that work, it would be bad, it would be kidnap, slavery or whatever. But with sex-work, if someone is forced to do that kind of work, it wouldn´t just be kidnap or slavery, it would be rape too.

*sigh* It's not your poor English. Actually, your English is great. It's your point that's poor.

Look at what I bolded: Just because people work to stave off poverty doesn't mean that they are forced. No one forces someone to take a job. It's a choice as to what job one goes into. I don't care if someone is a drug addict or not. Choosing to work for drugs, money or whatever is still a choice into going into that job.

Let me put it this way. Let's say I was a marksman, really good with a gun and I was very poor and a drug addict. So I am offered a lot of money to kill people. I kill a bunch of people but I get caught.

At the trail, if I say "I'm sorry for killing people, your honor, but I was forced into this profession because of poverty and drug addiction", do you think that will fly?

Of course not. I was the one who made the choice. I was the one who pulled the trigger, I chose to be a murderer.

It's the same thing with sex. You may not see it that way, but it is. Exactly the same thing.

...well, except there's no killing but a lot of pleasure instead....

 

[Abooga]

*sigh* It's not your poor English. Actually, your English is great. It's your point that's poor.

Look at what I bolded: Just because people work to stave off poverty doesn't mean that they are forced. No one forces someone to take a job. It's a choice as to what job one goes into. I don't care if someone is a drug addict or not. Choosing to work for drugs, money or whatever is still a choice into going into that job.

Let me put it this way. Let's say I was a marksman, really good with a gun and I was very poor and a drug addict. So I am offered a lot of money to kill people. I kill a bunch of people but I get caught.

At the trail, if I say "I'm sorry for killing people, your honor, but I was forced into this profession because of poverty and drug addiction", do you think that will fly?

Of course not. I was the one who made the choice. I was the one who pulled the trigger, I chose to be a murderer.

It's the same thing with sex. You may not see it that way, but it is. Exactly the same thing.

...well, except there's no killing but a lot of pleasure instead....

Yes. But what I was saying is that it is not always so black-and-white, it is more like a continuum I.M.O. On one side people who do it totally voluntarily and on the other those who have dire needs and are in a way forced/coerced to do it. Do you think rape can only happen with physical restrain? What if someone is pointing a gun at your family? Not rape? getting further away form that extreme, imagine some landlord trying to evict you from the house you live in, in the middle of winter and with a small child? Jobless and the only option to stay being to prostitute yourself.

Etc etc.

 

[JFrankA]

Yes. But what I was saying is that it is not always so black-and-white, it is more like a continuum I.M.O. On one side people who do it totally voluntarily and on the other those who have dire needs and are in a way forced/coerced to do it. Do you think rape can only happen with physical restrain? What if someone is pointing a gun at your family? Not rape? getting further away form that extreme, imagine some landlord trying to evict you from the house you live in, in the middle of winter and with a small child? Jobless and the only option to stay being to prostitute yourself.

Etc etc.

*sigh* *again*

Putting a gun to someone's head is a direct threat from one person to another. Someone evicted is NOT A THREAT. If someone is evicted then there is no one on one threat.

And you are completely and utterly wrong. This is where your mistake is.

Jobless and the only option to stay being to prostitute yourself.

That is not the only option. There is no one saying "prostitute yourself or I'll shoot you in the head". There are other options out there. You are not seeing a whole picture. No offense meant. But you are saying that the only thing that impoverished people can do for money is to street walk and sorry, that is simply not the case! Is it the easiest option? Yes. It is a very easy option to choose. But it is NOT the ONLY option.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Yes. But what I was saying is that it is not always so black-and-white, it is more like a continuum I.M.O.

And you are wrong.

People decide what profession to do for many reasons. I am sure many people here might choose a different profession if the one they where in paid them half the money they are makeing, or there was some other job that could be constructed that would pay them more.

On one side people who do it totally voluntarily and on the other those who have dire needs and are in a way forced/coerced to do it. Do you think rape can only happen with physical restrain? What if someone is pointing a gun at your family? Not rape? getting further away form that extreme, imagine some landlord trying to evict you from the house you live in, in the middle of winter and with a small child? Jobless and the only option to stay being to prostitute yourself.

So as Hugh Hefners girlfriends have lots of coercion(makes them money, gives them a lifestyle they would not have access to otherwise and so on) to be his girlfriends, that means he is raping them.

 

[Abooga]

*sigh* *again*

Putting a gun to someone's head is a direct threat from one person to another. Someone evicted is NOT A THREAT. If someone is evicted then there is no one on one threat.

And you are completely and utterly wrong. This is where your mistake is.



That is not the only option. There is no one saying "prostitute yourself or I'll shoot you in the head". There are other options out there. You are not seeing a whole picture. No offense meant. But you are saying that the only thing that impoverished people can do for money is to street walk and sorry, that is simply not the case! Is it the easiest option? Yes. It is a very easy option to choose. But it is NOT the ONLY option.

The possibility of being evicted IS a threat to the evictee´s family. In most cases there might be other options, but in some cases there is none. I think YOU are the one not seeing a whole picture. No offense meant, either, but life is not all pinky and fluffy and all prostitutes are really cool liberated girls who enjoy the job... How can you deny that some of the more extreme cases of poverty driven prostitution can be similar to the hypothetical case of the gun-point threat? Either do it or your family will starve/die form gunshoots. Same thing...

In a state with good social security there would be no excuses, though...

 

[kittynh]

late to the arguement. I'm not sure about if this should be a crime. The problem I've heard from my friend that runs a support group for protsitutes in NY city (yes, they have support groups) is that this is a job that can never be really "Legal" until it is legal not only on the law books, but in the minds of the rest of society.

It's a tough job for any man or woman (lot of men do this job also).

Drug use is rampant simply to make it though the night (or day and night). Regulation may make acceptable hours and such, and give the people that have this job more rights, but until the minds of everyone is "this is an acceptable career choice" it's not really going to solve the main problem which is that it's a horribly rotten job.

Now... more recently pole dancers and for some odd reason women that appear in sex videos are gaining a sort of "respectability" status. Not among everyone, but there is a sense that dating a stripper isn't any sort of crime and in fact is rather a "status" thing among young men today.

A lot of women would happily date a Chippendale also.

But...streetwalker? We aren't talking the 2% that are the high/very expensive type. We're talking the girl in the back alley with a pimp that beats her up if she holds out (my friend says most of the girls in her group are ok with the beatings because they admit, they would hold out money otherwise. The pimp is necessary, for security and bailing you out and as a source of drugs).

Another problem is regulation will cost money. You are always going to have a freelancer that isn't going to follow the rules. You can try to regulate it, but rather like cigarettes...if you want cheap you will break the law.

One reason people want it legal is so that THEY will not feel GUILTY for using a prostitute. If it's legal that's societies way of saying "it's ok". Most men and women in this trade really don't give a crap about this issue. they are trying to get through another day. The pimps don't want it legal!

It's not fun or pretty or clean. It's a not great job that has exsised as long as people have. Laws are nothing more than a way to "regulate" it. No politician would dare say in this day and age he will get rid of prostitution! It's more "keep it out of HERE and over THERE and don't let too too many prostitutes get killed or we get nervous".

If you would be happy that your son or daughter took up this profession, or were dating someone in this profession...well then that's way better than making it legal. Don't think it's going to happen.

 

[NewtonTrino]

Talk about a strawman argument.

ZOMG I need food so I have to work, prositution is legal therefore I AM FORCED TO DO IT.

What a bunch of malarky.

 

[Abooga]

Talk about a strawman argument.

ZOMG I need food so I have to work, prositution is legal therefore I AM FORCED TO DO IT.

What a bunch of malarky.

Strawman indeed.

 

[kittynh]

oh and for those that are assuming all this stuff about prostitutes....

go talk to a law enforcement officer. Or someone that does social work in a major city.

You will find that their take is "there but for the Grace of God do I". (well one police officer I know did say that! I asked him why the prostitute that was obviously pregnant was out on a rainy day working! He quoted that said I couldn't judge until I'd really known a prostitute as a friend. The police aren't feared by many of the women, they act almost a big brothers to them at times).

If your dad and uncle have been raping you since you were 8... or if your mom sold you to a pimp at age 13 because she needed her drug money...or if home life was dad beating you...(heck most of these women have grown up with men using them, to them it's NORMAL)...

There often aren't choices in a culture and society so very different than the one you grew up in. It's like not joining a gang is a choice, but how difficult would it be if EVERYONE including family you love belonged to one? Gangs are bad, but lonliness and being an outsider is worse. We can judge, but oddly if we had grown up in that enviroment, we'd be "bad choice, but I can see why you made it"

Plus it's like blaming the drug dealers for all the drugs on the streets. Someone is buying those drugs! If no one went to a prostitute, there would be no prostitutes. Why is the person that goes (that tends to have more money and be from a higher socio economic background) so muct better than the person that is a prostitute? I understand why the street walker that was raped by her uncle at a young age and now has a drug habit is on the streets. But why is the suburban dad with the soccer mom wife and 4 kids and a puppy at home that grew up with a stockbroker dad and a stay at home mom out there trolling for action? Hugh Grant did it and he has Elizabeth Hurley at home!

Now that needs to be explained!

 

[JFrankA]

I think YOU are the one not seeing a whole picture. No offense meant, either, but life is not all pinky and fluffy and all prostitutes are really cool liberated girls who enjoy the job.

lol. Sorry, I've been accused of many different things in my life, but never ever have I been accused of being "pinky and fluffy".

No offense taken, but honestly, you did not read my post.

I said:

But you are saying that the only thing that impoverished people can do for money is to street walk and sorry, that is simply not the case! Is it the easiest option? Yes. It is a very easy option to choose. But it is NOT the ONLY option.

I never ever said that all prostitutes are

cool liberated girls who enjoy the job

I have said that some are. Not all.

You are hearing what you want to hear. I'm sorry, but that is the truth.

What my point is, and I'll try to make this clear, that
PROSTITUTION IS NOT THE ONLY CHOICE FOR IMPOVERISHED WOMEN.

It is an easy choice, yes. Without question if not the easiest, it's one of the more easier choices, but it's NOT THE ONLY CHOICE.

The way you argue, you are saying that every impoverished woman out there becomes a prostitute. Period. No getting around it. There's no choice: there's no money coming in, there's mouths to feed, *BANG* you become a prostitute. End of story.

Sorry, that is not true.

 

[Abooga]

lol. Sorry, I've been accused of many different things in my life, but never ever have I been accused of being "pinky and fluffy".

No offense taken, but honestly, you did not read my post.

I said:


I never ever said that all prostitutes are I have said that some are. Not all.

You are hearing what you want to hear. I'm sorry, but that is the truth.

What my point is, and I'll try to make this clear, that
PROSTITUTION IS NOT THE ONLY CHOICE FOR IMPOVERISHED WOMEN.

It is an easy choice, yes. Without question if not the easiest, it's one of the more easier choices, but it's NOT THE ONLY CHOICE.

The way you argue, you are saying that every impoverished woman out there becomes a prostitute. Period. No getting around it. There's no choice: there's no money coming in, there's mouths to feed, *BANG* you become a prostitute. End of story.

Sorry, that is not true.

Do you know what a continuum is?

Then you´ll undertand that you can´t accuse me of saying that "every impoverished woman out there becomes a prostitute". Never claimed that. I was talking of the extreme end of a continuum, which does exist. Kittynh clarifies it better than me.

In many cases extreme poverty will lead you to starve, to get a nasty unhealthy job... to lose a family member... Depends on the case, the place, the culture, the social segment...

Having prostitution legalised, perhaps the cases in which it is offered as an alternative to poverty would grow. Because it would be "just like any other job...." So, you´re skint, that guy from the local brothel offered you a "position". How can you say no to a job offer in your case? It´s a perfectly legal and normal job...

 

[Mobyseven]

Holy mother of Vishnu, Abooga, get over it! You are, demonstably and conclusively, wrong!

Prostitution is not rape. Rape is rape. Learn the difference.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

<snip>

Having prostitution legalised, perhaps the cases in which it is offered as an alternative to poverty would grow. Because it would be "just like any other job...." So, you´re skint, that guy from the local brothel offered you a "position". How can you say no to a job offer in your case? It´s a perfectly legal and normal job...

...and your welfare payments will be cut/stopped if you refuse to work.

 

[Abooga]

Holy mother of Vishnu, Abooga, get over it! You are, demonstably and conclusively, wrong!

Prostitution is not rape. Rape is rape. Learn the difference.

Talk about strawmen...

 

[Abooga]

...and your welfare payments will be cut/stopped if you refuse to work.

Yea... well that was an urban myth of sorts. It was mentioned in some newspaper in Germany as a possible weird outcome of legalisation. (So I´m not the only one worrying about this kind of things...)

 

[ponderingturtle]

oh and for those that are assuming all this stuff about prostitutes....

go talk to a law enforcement officer. Or someone that does social work in a major city.

You will find that their take is "there but for the Grace of God do I". (well one police officer I know did say that! I asked him why the prostitute that was obviously pregnant was out on a rainy day working! He quoted that said I couldn't judge until I'd really known a prostitute as a friend. The police aren't feared by many of the women, they act almost a big brothers to them at times).

If your dad and uncle have been raping you since you were 8... or if your mom sold you to a pimp at age 13 because she needed her drug money...or if home life was dad beating you...(heck most of these women have grown up with men using them, to them it's NORMAL)...

Valid points, but not entirely relevent, as none of this addressess would thier lives be better if prostitution was legal or worse.

 

[Mobyseven]

Talk about strawmen...

Sorry Fiyero, I couldn't hear you over all that rustling. Mind trying again, maybe this time in full sentences?

 

[JFrankA]

Then you´ll undertand that you can´t accuse me of saying that "every impoverished woman out there becomes a prostitute".

Okay, in that, I made that mistake. I apologize. But, I'm sorry, you've made the same mistake on my side as well.

I still say that there are choices, it's just a degree of how difficult it is to go down one choice or the other. There are hard choices and very very easy ones. Even Kittynh said:

It's like not joining a gang is a choice, but how difficult would it be if EVERYONE including family you love belonged to one? Gangs are bad, but lonliness and being an outsider is worse. We can judge, but oddly if we had grown up in that enviroment, we'd be "bad choice, but I can see why you made it"

Still a choice. Let me explain my viewpoint, to me, just because 99% of the people make that choice doesn't mean it's the only one. It may be the most easiest of choices, it may be one that seems to make the most sense at the time, it may be a bad choice, but there still is another path. Is that other choice much harder? Yes. Very much so. Is that other choice filled with a lot of emotional and physical risks? Possibly a lot. Are the rewards of making that choice worth the risks and suffering that one will have to go though? I don't know. That's up to the person involved.

But that choice is there.

Doesn't mean I don't feel for someone in that situtation, doesn't mean that I think that it's entriely their fault. What Kittynh said was right "bad choice, but I can see why you made it".

But, if I am understanding you correctly: you are saying that since someone is in that postion, a street-walker (let's get specific) then any john she is with is raping her.

So in order to clear it up in my mind, let me take this example a different way:

I am not a rich person, I do not own or rent my own place. I can't afford it because most of my paycheck goes to child support. So let's say I meet an elderly (very elderly), richer woman, who is very attracted to me sexually. So, even though I may not be attracted to her at all, and don't even like her, I sleep with her repeatedly. In so doing, she gives me money, presents, etc. This pays my child support payments, gets me my own place and keeps me not rich but comfortable.

She never held me at gun point, she never ever said "do me or I won't give you money", she never tied me down but I had sex with someone I wasn't attracted to for money. That's the only reason I slept with her. Otherwise I would owe on my child support, not have my own place and not eat three meals a day.

Therefore, is what you are saying is this:

she raped me.

Have I got that right?