Prostitution Is A Choice, Not A Crime
This 2014 Economist piece is right on:
Prohibition has ugly results. Violence against prostitutes goes unpunished because victims who live on society's margins are unlikely to seek justice, or to get it. The problem of sex tourism plagues countries, like the Netherlands and Germany, where the legal part of the industry is both tightly circumscribed and highly visible....The failure of prohibition is pushing governments across the rich world to try a new tack: criminalising the purchase of sex instead of its sale. Sweden was first, in 1999, followed by Norway, Iceland and France; Canada is rewriting its laws along similar lines. The European Parliament wants the "Swedish model" to be adopted right across the EU. Campaigners in America are calling for the same approach.
Sex sells, and always will
This new consensus is misguided, as a matter of both principle and practice. Banning the purchase of sex is as illiberal as banning its sale. Criminalisation of clients perpetuates the idea of all prostitutes as victims forced into the trade. Some certainly are--by violent partners, people-traffickers or drug addiction. But there are already harsh laws against assault and trafficking. Addicts need treatment, not a jail sentence for their clients.Sweden's avowed aim is to wipe out prostitution by eliminating demand. But the sex trade will always exist--and the new approach has done nothing to cut the harms associated with it. Street prostitution declined after the law was introduced but soon increased again. Prostitutes' understandable desire not to see clients arrested means they strike deals faster and do less risk assessment. Canada's planned laws would make not only the purchase of sex illegal, but its advertisement, too. That will slow down the development of review sites and identity- and health-verification apps.
The prospect of being pressed to mend their ways makes prostitutes less willing to seek care from health or social services. Men who risk arrest will not tell the police about women they fear were coerced into prostitution. When Rhode Island unintentionally decriminalised indoor prostitution between 2003 and 2009 the state saw a steep decline in reported rapes and cases of gonorrhoea*.
Prostitution is moving online whether governments like it or not. If they try to get in the way of the shift they will do harm. Indeed, the unrealistic goal of ending the sex trade distracts the authorities from the genuine horrors of modern-day slavery (which many activists conflate with illegal immigration for the aim of selling sex) and child prostitution (better described as money changing hands to facilitate the rape of a child). Governments should focus on deterring and punishing such crimes--and leave consenting adults who wish to buy and sell sex to do so safely and privately online.
As a commenter, sojmmae, at The Economist writes:
Since you cant stop it what do you do? You control it and you guide it. This way you can mitigate the negative impacts that could come of it should it run lawless (like it does now). It would become much harder for criminals to force woman into it since it is a regulated and monitored market. Making it legal gives you control of the market, control that can be used to ensure anyone providing services is doing so of their own free will and desire to. You will never have complete control but you will have a great deal more if its legal then you will if it's illegal.I once had a conversation with a friend of mine about consenting prostitutes and he made a very good point. He asked "Assuming all you want is to get laid, whats the difference between a prostitute and chick at the bar your trying to get at?" He followed by saying "the only difference between the prostitute and that girl at the bar is that the prostitute will let you know upfront how much it will cost to get in her pants."
Say what you will but as man you end up paying for sex one way or another. I like the idea of having an option that's more clear cut. Call me a pig or whatever you like but sometimes i just want to get my jollies (no I'm not married so it wouldnt be cheating) off and I dont want to have to deal with the hassle of trying to pick up on some woman (and all the time, money and effort that it entails) just so i can get in her pants. So should there be woman in the world that is morally ok with and willing to engage in a purely physical sexual encounter for some money then no harm no foul. She got what she wanted, I got what I wanted everyone's happy.
As for all you pissed off woman griping about it seeding infidelity. As a man i will tell you this, your man's either going to cheat or he isn't. Whether he cheats on you with a prostitute, his secretary, the lady down the street or with whomever the point is if he is going to cheat he is going to cheat. As for the people complaining about it objectifying woman, get over yourself. As if plenty of woman in the world don't use their attractiveness and sexual appeal to get what they want from a guy. At least the prostitute is making her intentions clear.
"At least the prostitute is making her intentions clear."
Right. Free of the forced false veneer of "love" to appease the morality police and their handmaidens: politicians.
Morality police fail to understand that morality is saving people from harm; not saving people from themselves.
Morality police fail to understand that the real whores are the politicians who will pass any immoral law in exchange for money and/or votes.
Jim Simon at June 5, 2016 12:48 AM
Who in your family should have made money as a prostitute, but wasted time doing something else?
Crid at June 5, 2016 1:39 AM
The trend now is to make being a prostitute legal, but hiring one a crime. For obviously sexist reasons.
dee nile at June 5, 2016 5:46 AM
Nobody in my family worked as an accountant, either, but if somebody wants to work as a prostitute, why should that not be their choice?
Amy Alkon at June 5, 2016 6:07 AM
"It would become much harder for criminals to force woman into it since it is a regulated and monitored market. Making it legal gives you control of the market, control that can be used to ensure anyone providing services is doing so of their own free will and desire to. You will never have complete control but you will have a great deal more if its legal then you will if it's illegal."
How is this working on the sale of cigs in New York? How is Nevada doing on the "war" on prostitution and it's effects on their society and practitioners. Seriously, I don't know and it would seem to be a logical point for this discussion to begin here in the U.S.A. rather than just someone rambling on.
As long as criminals (big and small) can make a buck they will do whatever they can to make a buck.
We had pizza parlors being set on fire in the '70's due to a protection racket that came to town. It didn't stop until protection was paid. (I don't recall any trials or arrests.)
There's a black market for everything. Good luck stopping this one.
Bob in Texas at June 5, 2016 7:25 AM
Prostitution is illegal in Las Vegas ( also Reno and Carson City ) but is legal elsewhere in Nevada under some form of zoning.
You would think that Las Vegas, the original Sin City, would be more tolerant in their views of prostitution. What is the city's rationale ?
Nick at June 5, 2016 7:27 AM
"What is the city's rationale ?"
No kickbacks from the independent prostitutes. Gotta have an organized bunny ranch if you're going to graft 'em.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at June 5, 2016 8:25 AM
"Morality police fail to understand that morality is saving people from harm; not saving people from themselves." Jim Simon
And I have to pick up the tab via medical support, rescue support, police services, and other financial support from their inability to look ahead and see that "this" is not going to work out well. (Do climbers in Europe have to pay for rescue efforts upfront?)
Stray animals, children, widows, accidents,and the elderly deserve our help due to humane ethical reasons.
Your logic adds "people doing stupid harmful things to themselves" to the list. Thanks. It's someone else's money right?
(I realize I'm approaching Asimov's Laws of Robotics but that's a different dilemma.)
Bob in Texas at June 5, 2016 10:29 AM
Gog's on the right track. Insufficient opportunities fro graft.
Also, if they were to legalize the trade, imagine the opportunities for licensing. Whaddya mean I have to become a certified massage therapist and 100 hours of course work in human sexuality when all I want to do is give guys a rub & tug?
Also, what other occupation can a woman with minimal educational skills make $50-$200/hour?
I R A Darth Aggie at June 5, 2016 10:56 AM
> Nobody in my family worked as an
> accountant, either, but if somebody
> wants to work as a prostitute
Nakedly evasive: You can't answer.
"No accounting" indeed.
Crid at June 5, 2016 11:22 AM
Prostitution is ugly, by nature; it involve using women for base desires. And no amount of legalization is going to make it just another career choice for unskilled women.
Even legal, it will be ugly and will attract crime. People arguing for legalization imagine that legalized prostitution will be discrete advertisements in local alternative newspapers, telephone calls, and a cordial business transaction conducted in private. And some of it will be, as it is now. But the grungy end of the business will still be ugly, violent, and will still involve human trafficking.
Legalizing it might mean the mid- and high-end parts of the business will be able to come out of the closet. It might lead to clean and musical Chicken Ranches in the suburbs and Miss Mona being regarded as a semi-respectable business woman, though still not one anyone wants their mother, daughter, or girlfriend to work for.
The streets, however, will not be cleaned up by legalization. Drugged out teenagers working for brutal pimps will still be fixtures in the seedier parts of town. Only now, the pimps will call themselves legit businessmen.
Sidney Biddle Barrows will be able to come in from the cold, but the Irises of the world will still need a Travis to keep the wolves at bay.
Last time I checked, H&R Block was not trolling bus stations for desperate runaways and tricking them into a lifetime of doing 1040s for strangers.
Last time I checked, double entry bookkeeping didn't lead to disfiguring venereal diseases and a drug habit, although I have known my share of alcoholic accountants.
Sex work as a profession is not a psychologically healthy choice, no matter how many allegedly sophisticated people would have it so.
Conan the Grammarian at June 5, 2016 11:30 AM
And in what other education can a woman with "minimal educational skills" expose herself to degradation, humiliation, venereal disease, and violence?
Why are people so concerned that the unskilled make high wages? Arguments for raising the minimum wage also seem to focus on higher wages for the unskilled.
If the wages of the unskilled are such a concern, instead of legalizing the selling of one's bodies or organs, why don't we send the unskilled to trade school? Of course, that would require that those too lazy, impatient, or intellectually deficient to acquire a salable skill set for a deferred payoff now accept hard work and put in the effort in order to gain that skill set and be patient for a payoff.
Legalized prostitution is simply another lottery or get rich quick scheme to take advantage of the poor. "Don't have any skills? Sell yourself. Forget the stultifying public school system and the middle class work ethic, get your money now."
Conan the Grammarian at June 5, 2016 11:56 AM
Mistress Matisse, in The Stranger, Aug 11, 2015:
This Seattle Times Op-Ed Got Everything Wrong About Sex Work
JD at June 5, 2016 11:57 AM
Amy: if somebody wants to work as a prostitute, why should that not be their choice?
Conan's got your answer: Prostitution is ugly
It's the same mindset that has college students demanding speech they find "ugly" to be squelched.
JD at June 5, 2016 12:11 PM
"Morality police fail to understand that morality is saving people from harm; not saving people from themselves."
And I have to pick up the tab via medical support, rescue support, police services, and other financial support from their inability to look ahead and see that "this" is not going to work out well.
This is also wrong. Unfortunately, it's the way our society has gone, compounding problem on problem.
Stray animals, children, widows, accidents,and the elderly deserve our help due to humane ethical reasons.
They certainly deserve our voluntary support. Government "compassion", via other people's money, is just a way for politicians to get reelected.
Your logic adds "people doing stupid harmful things to themselves" to the list. Thanks. It's someone else's money right?
See above.
Jim Simon at June 5, 2016 12:14 PM
Hardly. I'm not advocating the criminalization of something recognized as a basic right in the US Constitution, a right so scared it's infringement in any way by the government is specifically prohibited.
In fact, I'm not even advocating the criminalization of prostitution. I'm merely pointing out the flaws in the "it's my body and my choice" or "it's a choice like accounting" legalization arguments.
The reality is that prostitution is ugly. And the dark side of it won't go away with legalization.
Conan the Grammarian at June 5, 2016 12:27 PM
"The reality is that prostitution is ugly."
Right, Conan. So is picking one's nose. Are we gonna pass a law against that, too? If you believe in freedom, you have to support the freedom to be ugly and/or stupid. Freedom to only be beautiful and smart is no freedom at all.
Jim Simon at June 5, 2016 1:27 PM
> So is picking one's nose. Are
> we gonna pass a law against
> that, too?
Pick your nose, blow a trucker... "Everything is all the same" is a very popular evasion on this blog this weekend. It ain't very bright.
Crid at June 5, 2016 1:53 PM
And how are the two comparable? Are black market nose pickers making millions? Is there even a black market for nose picking?
Are there societal implications from the criminalization or decriminalization of nose picking?
Oh forget seriousness, let's indulge your juvenile frivolity. Laws should be passed against nose picking - solely because it's ugly. As a result, we'll have criminals are making big bucks running underground nose-picking parlors. We'll have drive by shootings by gangs of nose-picking bandits. Hollywood anti-heroes will pick their noses on screen. Soon, we'll have advocacy groups arguing about the the tax revenue if it were legalized and morality groups promising to keep America's noses unpicked. Will little Johnny Nosepicker be tried as an adult?
Some things are illegal because the long-term cost to society is higher than the cost of interdiction. Drugs were once considered such an item, but wider societal acceptance of drug use and a better understanding of the issue has prompted a re-evaluation of that equation.
Prostitution, too, is undergoing a new analysis of the consequences of legalizing it vs. the costs of containing it. However, doe-eyed optimists proclaiming all will be roses and unicorns with legalization do not further a serious evaluation of the consequences of legalization vs. continued criminalization.
When you're ready to join an adult discussion, Jim Simon, take your finger out of your nose and posit a reasoned argument for or against legalized prostitution.
As I said, I'm not against legalizing prostitution. We spend an estimated $120 million fighting it every year. With cures for most sexually transmitted diseases widely available, prostitution is not the health scourge it once was.
Still, we need to acknowledge reality. Selling yourself for sexual purposes is not simply a career "choice" like accounting. One does not put it on one's resume and tout the cross-functional skill set one obtained from it to a potential new employer. Whether it should be a crime remains to be seen.
Conan the Grammarian at June 5, 2016 2:19 PM
Pick your nose, blow a trucker... "Everything is all the same" is a very popular evasion on this blog this weekend. It ain't very bright.
So, Crid, since you're so bright, maybe you should decide for everybody what they can and can't do. For their own good, of course.
Jim Simon at June 5, 2016 2:22 PM
Well, Conan, you're the one who said that prostitution was ugly. I just responded to that.
From your response, seems like I touched a nerve. Sorry. Perhaps you need to give some thought to whether you believe in freedom or not.
Jim Simon at June 5, 2016 2:32 PM
False Equivalence.
Both are "ugly" so they must be equivalent, right?
And if one is legal, though socially scorned, and the other is illegal, we should legalize the other because we've already allowed the one "ugly" thing and the world didn't collapse.
Little thing called Order of Magnitude that you've ignored, Jimmy.
So, in Jimmy world, if you simply give consideration to criminalizing something that has in the past had harmful implications to society at large, you're an enemy of freedom? Gee, hyperbolize much?
As I pointed out, prostitution was a conduit for the spread of sexually transmitted disease, so it was criminalized by necessity. Now, with cures for most STDs widely available, that argument for criminalizing it merits re-evaluation. A debate on its continued criminalization is warranted, but warranting a debate does not negate one side of the argument. Prostitution still has potential for harm to society which merits caution in the headlong rush to legalize it.
Conan the Grammarian at June 5, 2016 3:01 PM
My general feeling on government regulation is summed up neatly by this Albert Gallatin quote:
"Governmental prohibitions do always more mischief than had been calculated; and it is not without much hesitation that a statesman should hazard to regulate the concerns of individuals as if he could do it better than themselves."
Notice that even Gallatin, a hero of Libertarians and advocate of limited government, does not say the government should under no circumstances regulate anything, but calls for legislative hesitation in regulating the affairs of men.
Legalized prostitution could very well result in a peaceful societal construct of legal courtesans and socially-accepted sex brokerage. It could also have disastrous results with widespread violence, disease, and human trafficking. Most likely, the results will fall somewhere in between. We owe ourselves and our descendants a rational debate on the subject.
Perhaps we could follow the legalized marijuana course and have a state or two legalize it as a laboratory. We already have Nevada, although we have a poster on this forum who is from there and said the results in Nevada are mixed.
Conan the Grammarian at June 5, 2016 3:26 PM
Jim's statement "If you believe in freedom, you have to support the freedom to be ugly and/or stupid." reminded me of this earlier blog about someone being refused a neck tattoo.
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2015/06/19/snotty_entitled.html
So let's let buy our pregnant sister a vacation plane ticket to Africa, Southeast Asia, or the Pacific Islands. What could go wrong? Who are we to tell her that her dream vacation might be a bad idea.
Bob in Texas at June 5, 2016 3:53 PM
Jim, you should blow yourself for your own good. The internet isn't new, y'know? These simplistic, coarse and oblivious postures of audacity do nothing to move the conversation forward. Amy should have known by now; You're a new kid, so we can assume this is your first laptop. But there are some genuine libertarian spirits around here, and your childish tossing of mashed potatoes advances our cause not at all. You want more prostitution? That's great, it's dandy, that's just poodles and cream... So why don't you put your daughter on the street? A niece, maybe? (Ask your sister first, okay?)
Crid at June 5, 2016 4:05 PM
(I mean, ask her if it's okay for your niece... That's what I meant... It's important to be clear... It would be terrible if this started some kinda inter-family STRIFE, right?)
(Right?)
(Right?)
(Will someone please take this point? Anyone?)
(No, Amy, it's not a "choice"... Or you'd have someone in your life who should have made that choice.)
(I think it's very good that you don't.)
Crid at June 5, 2016 5:01 PM
"Gog's on the right track. Insufficient opportunities fro graft."
Umm, Nope.
Downtown Vegas doesn't allow prostitution because it takes people away from gambling.
Period.
Nothing beats the income per hour of gambling - when the mark can be encouraged to forget limitations like time and money.
Vegas is now making more money from shows than they are in the casinos; again, that's a captive audience, promised a show they cannot get anywhere else.
Radwaste at June 6, 2016 5:44 AM
"How is this working on the sale of cigs in New York? "
Well, part of "legalization" is that the activity not be burdened by a huge pile of punitive regulation and/or taxes. When that happens, a black market develops. Opponents of legalization often take the approach of negotiating a heavy regulatory burden in exchange for legalization, because they know this is how it will work out. Then, they point at the black market and say, "see, legalization doesn't work". It's a neat trick.
(There will always be a little bit of a black market, but keeping regulation to the necessary minimum will keep the black market inconsequential. I am aware that around here, you can buy untaxed liquor. But for 98% of liquor buyers, it's not worth the hassle or the risk. Of the ones that do, most of them seem to do it not because it's any cheaper or more available, but because they enjoy being scofflaws. There's always going to be a few people like that.)
Cousin Dave at June 6, 2016 7:44 AM
And Conan, here's a more relevant analogy: alcohol. It certainly has a dark side. But the fact that the dark side exists doesn't stop very many people from drinking. As far as the costs to taxpayers that would result from legal prostitution: it seems to me that we're already paying that cost. Prostitutes who are beaten or get diseases show up at the ER and the law says they must be treated regardless of ability to pay. It seems to me that under legalization both they and the taxpayers who foot the bill for their treatment would be no worse off. And they might be better; some of the prostitutes might get insurance, some of them might find better working situations where they get treated better, and there would be fewer showing up at the ER.
And Crid: I can think of two female relatives who would probably be better off if they were legalized prostitutes. (Actually, one of them I'm not sure about since she has a serious drug problem. But she probably wouldn't be any worse off.) As things stand, they are both burdens to the extended family.
Cousin Dave at June 6, 2016 7:52 AM
It isn't just the illegality that makes protitution a sleezy profession.
It is the fact that as a paid sex worker, you are exposing yourself to a entire raft of sexual and physical contact diseases that are ubiquitous among those populations that pay for sex.
Herpes, and AIDS, HPV, drug resistant strains of TB, etc.
I wouldn't want my family members working as Protitutes anymore than I would want them working in an Ebola ward or as a porn actor.
It isn't a healthy lifestyle.
Isab at June 6, 2016 9:19 AM
"...or as a porn actor.
It isn't a healthy lifestyle."
Violence seems to be the bigger threat. Here's the FAQ page from Asia Carrera explaining the small circle of people in the business; the citation about violence comes from a few comments by other actresses on Twitter and FB.
Radwaste at June 6, 2016 3:13 PM
Leave a comment