The Morality of Prostitution

[Pariah]

Whats the big deal about prostitution?Both parties get smething they want!Lets face it women got the upperhand in the sex game anyway!If a woman wants to get paid for it,let her get paid for it.Hell the government can legalize it so the can control it better and get their cut!(IE red light districts).Like the last post said (I think he answered his own question),"sexual repression of Christian culture."Some men can go the marrie route an put up with all the other B.S. that goes along with it.My opinion,marriage is for womenayway.If they leagalized it marraige would be a thing of the past.We all heard this on befor"You pay for it some way!"Besides women don't need usmen anymore they work and can go to a sperm bank if te want kid bad enough!

Everyone on this planet iswanting,doing or thinking about sex!Leglize it!

P.S. f a man forces a woman to hae relations with men for money he's a pimp and should be thrown in jail!!

P

[Jwny72]

I think the legal and social status of prostitution is just a manifestation of a general tendency towards sexual repression in Judeao-Christian culture. In the spirit of pure speculation, I'd like to pose the question: why is this sexually repressive attitude (the sex taboo) present in our culture? What purpose does it serve?

[Joe Zop]

The problem, as I see it, in when things remain in the nether-world between illegal and /decrim/legal/structured. If you want to eliminate bodyguards on the street, fine, then provide options for creating an environment that's safe for both parties involved. If you're concerned about trafficing in women, then by all means attack that vehemently, but also provide a viable place where those who choose freely can operate. If you want to eliminate street prostitution, allow for private places and advertising.

Let's face it, there are still going to men and women involved who are individual and variant, so no matter what you do it's going to be possible for it to go in the crapper on any individual situation. Someone's going to feel misled, or ripped off or mistreated somewhere along the line. But a relatively level playing field is what's needed. That can happen in a scenario such as Amsterdam's Red Light District, where prostitution has its clearly identified zone and both men and women generally feel safe wandering around and interacting, or in a decent brothel or in a disco pick-up scene in Rio. Depends on the place. But the key is some kind of balance, where there's support available without isolation, either for the client or the worker.

Of course, in order to get to that point, a society has to admit that prostitution is going to exist, which counts the US out of the equation for quite a while, and it sounds like Perth's still got a ways to go as well...

And for what it's worth, RN, I can see both sides of the new government's situation. If they've already managed to get people pissed off on a couple of issues, it might well be a good idea to give a decent interval before making further changes. Doesn't help if you're the one waiting for change, but it won't do much good to get the things you want, and then have a new government topple the one you've got now and reverse everything. If that happens, it will take far, far longer to ever make real change happen again. If it takes another year, but in the end you get what you're after, on a more or less permanent basis, then it's worth the wait. Sounds as though the time should be used well by helping build support on a political level so once their feet have healed a bit you can toast them again on this issue...

[Rubber Nursey]

stranger99,

i hate pimps too but, besides all of their negative aspects, they act as a deterrent for bad intentioned clients.

we don't really have pimps in wa...not at all. the worst that happens is when some guys force their wives/girlfriends to work the streets to support the couple's drug habits, etc. even though that is terrible and i'm not condoning it at all, at least it isn't quite the same as the traditional pimp scenario with teams of women forced to hand over their income to one central asshole. (pimping gets me soooooo angry!)

anyway, here the street girls were quite often accompanied by boyfriends or mates who stayed in their cars and looked after the girls' condoms and money, and wrote down rego numbers of client's cars. the guys made sure they were visible to the clients during the negotiations, so that they knew someone was watching out for the girl. when the new laws were brought in to crack down on street work in 2000, the police grabbed any man they could find hanging out with the girls, and charged them as pimps.

the two main results of this effort?
a) all the media hype about "pimp" arrests further convinced the public of the evils of street prostitution, and gave rise to many more misconceptions about the perth industry, and
b) girls are now forced to work alone. these days they are afraid to carry condoms (or they are used by police as evidence), they are robbed because they have to carry all their money on them, they are raped and beaten at a much greater rate than before, and they are being taken miles away from the city centre (because of the police crackdown) and often dumped with no way to get back.

they were much better off with their "pimps".

[Stranger99]

Dickhead,
I agree with you that the most moral form of prostitution is the one involving the prostitute alone that made a mature choice of life. I hate pimps too but, besides all of their negative aspects, they act as a deterrent for bad intentioned clients. This is particularly true for those prostitutes working in the streets where they might be more subject to violent situations.

I am sure it does not apply to escorts doing incall/outcall as a proper screening can be done or at least they can meet somebody in a neutral spot (hotel or something).

Adding my opinion to the debate I believe that the majority of people who answer in favor of some form of legalization of prostitution in reality just want to clean the streets from SW.

It is the case of my country (Italy) where a similar debate is going on. It is the typical catholic attitude: as long as you don't see it then it is ok....sort of keeping the appearances look good no matter what lays underneath.

BTW: I should be the real dickhead as I went to check if the site you indicated existed....

[Rubber Nursey]

in many places those laws are a big stick used to isolate sex workers

So true. Here it is an offence to "live off the earnings of prostitution". This can be used on madams, husbands/boyfriends and even adult male children of sex workers. Not only that, but it can be used on anyone that a sex worker employs, like a receptionist, driver or security guard (which is why sole operators are not allowed to have any of these people on the premises while they are working. Brothels are also not allowed to have security guards). It has also been suggested that real estate owners are threatened with it when accepting rental money from a brothel or independent worker. This law doesn't just perpetuate discrimination...it encourages it.

Joe re: religion/Government in WA
There was a poll done in WA last year about the legalisation of the sex industry. 86% of respondents voted in favour of it! We have a very tolerant majority here...unfortunately (as is usually the case) the minority is VERY vocal. We also have a lot of people in Government...including the Police Minister, who is of course responsible for prostitution legislation...who are openly religious.

The other problem...our Government is only newly elected. In their election policies they promised Gay and Lesbian law reform, Drug reform and Prostitution law reform. Well...they did the first two and it caused an absolute FURORE amongst the right. It is my firm belief that they are terrified to deal with prostitution now and cause further upset. Draft legislation was promised in July of last year. One year on, and they have now extended the current Act (which was supposed to become void in August due to a Sunset Clause) for another year, to give them more time. They are also scared now of seeming to be too "tolerant" with any new legislation.

'Tis a very frightening thing for those of us who were counting on positive change for the industry from this Government. All we can do now is keep the pressure on and try to rally the progressive, but apathetic, majority.

[Dickhead]

See, the whole "facilitating" thing points out that the most moral form of prostitution is the one involving the fewest possible people. It is when you begin to add middlemen that you have problems. Also politicians are very similar to pimps.

I HATE PIMPS!

Please visit my website, www.ihatepimps.org, for more information.

[Joe Zop]

Originally posted by Dickhead

BTW, Costa Rica does have rather strong laws against "facilitating prostitution." In other words, pimping is illegal. This is exactly correct in my dickheaded opinion.

This is one aspect I too generally agree with, but sometimes the devil is in the details. Escort agencies, web sites featuring more than one sex worker, hotels where assignations take place, bars where sex workers gather, men who live with sex workers (even as husbands), etc., have all, in various places, been seen to fall under the "facilitating" banner. Given that Costa Rica has some degree of past notoriety for child prostitution, I don't think that's the case in this instance, of course. There's no question that people trafficing in women or children deserve to be in a facility where they can know how it feels, but in many places those laws are a big stick used to isolate sex workers and make it impossible for them to operate.

[Dickhead]

Originally posted by RN
Dickhead,

Do you know whether Costa Rica EVER had criminal sanctions placed on prostitution? I'd be interested to know.

I don't know, but I'd be surprised. They just aren't big on rules over there. However, they are not the magically prosperous and progressive country some people think they are. They only outlawed child labor in 1998 and only very recently was it recognized to be a problem if a man hits his wife in the privacy of their own home.

BTW, Costa Rica does have rather strong laws against "facilitating prostitution." In other words, pimping is illegal. This is exactly correct in my dickheaded opinion.

[Joe Zop]

Actually, RN, your ability to make effective change will probably be better if you can hold your own with the opposition in post-election drinks And the abortive date also explains the stress over the hair (a frizzy tizzy?) Sorry to hear you got stood up -- lack of consideration seems a universal thing, unfortunately.

I understand what you mean about staying because you love the place -- it's why I've stayed in my particular area for so long, as my wife loves it, and she chooses where we live. (Me, I'd pick a place with less snow.) WA is actually on my list of places for my next OZ visit, as I never made it over there last time.

But back on topic -- what kind of change is possible/practical in this arena in a place where religion and politics are ties so closely together? Having worked on political things in similar circumstances, the approach is usually one of managing to get some sort of local control first, and that's playing a long game. Prostitution wouldn't seem like an exactly popular issue for politicians to want to weigh in on in a helpful way, particularly in a conservative religious area -- or is there less stigma attached, given its status in Sydney?

[Rubber Nursey]

Joe,

I was afraid that when I read that sober it would seem ridiculous, but I surprised myself actually! LOL At least I know that once I am Prime Minister I'll be able to indulge in pre-election drinks and still hold my own with the opposition. *grin*

Anyway, I was only on the board drunk because I got stood up last night If only there was an Australian Women section for me to gripe on! LOL

There is a saying in the eastern states of Oz...WA stands for Wait Awhile. This is the second most conservative state in the country (just behind Tasmania). We are miles behind every other state in terms of progressive legislation, and there is a very unhealthy amount of religious input when it comes to drafting new laws. There is very little separation of church and state.

Why haven't I moved to Sydney? Because I love this state dammit!! And I would much prefer to fight for change so I can live happily here, rather than run away.

[Rubber Nursey]

Dickhead,

Do you know whether Costa Rica EVER had criminal sanctions placed on prostitution? I'd be interested to know.

That seems to be the problem...getting through the "criminal" mentality that comes from centuries of criminalisation. They won't just go from completely illegal to "Citizens, the blowjobs are on us!"

[Joe Zop]

Well, RN, just a quick response (busy work day) right now -- seems to me that you make better sense drunk than most lawmakers do sober.

Is there any particular reason why WA hasn't adopted the Syndey model? (And I suppose the other question is why you're still in WA as opposed to Sydney LOL.)

[Dickhead]

Allow me to oversimplify by presenting the Costa Rican model:

1) If an adult man and adult woman decide to have X amount of sex in Y fashion for Z hours, and agree that $?? will change hands, this is a contract and is perfectly legal.
2) End of story.

[Rubber Nursey]

first let me say congratulations to you and your wife for getting to 23 years!(i'd take my hat off to you, but i'm afraid my hair would give you nightmares).

ok...welcome to rubber nursey's perfect world...

first step, decriminalisation. all criminal sanctions are completely removed. then (sydney, australia's law) "prostitution is legal anywhere except within (?) metres of a school, childcare centre, (or children's park, etc), place of worship or private dwelling". this removes street/brothel prostitution from all residential areas, and effectively out of the public eye.
*this essentially means that girls are forced to work in commercial/industrial areas, or they are charged. (this excludes girls working from their own homes).

next, "safehouses". these are also in sydney. they are short-time hotels where street girls can hire a room for small amounts per booking. my safehouses would also have clinic services, outreach/support workers, condom supplies and needle exchanges on premises. these places serve another purpose other than the obvious...the council can position them in the exact area where they would prefer the girls work from (usually in the vicinity of the brothels).
*this halts spread of disease by provision of clean syringes and condoms as well as added health education and support. it stops girls having sex in public places, and by creating a "red light" district it stops men from soliciting outside the given area (and clients' behaviour has always been the biggest complaint from residents).

brothels. in south sydney council (god i love sydney!) there is actually a provision that makes it an offence to deny a brothel application on the grounds of "immorality". they still have to abide by the "distance from...." restrictions. brothels are subject to exactly the same scrutiny that every other business is regarding taxes, safety standards, employee benefits, etc. also, in my perfect world local councils would not be allowed to deny a sole operator a permit to operate a business from her own home on the grounds of "immorality" (as they do at present).

note that in all these cases, the government has not officially "condoned" prostitution in any way...they have simply specified particular places where it may or may not occur. half of the furore from voters comes from the mention of the word legal. in the eyes of sydney residents, the government has basically said to sex workers "stay out of the public eye, stay away from the houses, stay away from the children, stay away from the churches""...and with that, the residents are happy.

next step, controls.
a) it should be an offence to offer or request a commercial sex service without a condom (as it is in wa).
b) it should remain an offence to coerce a person to work as a sex worker by force or threat of violence. (for the record, i don't see why this is only used for prostitution...look at the textile industry for example!)
c) obviously, there should be similar controls as the rest of the adult industry in regard to the participation of minors.
d) health laws already cover knowingly infecting someone with an std. the burden of proof should be on the sex worker to take "reasonable care" to ensure that he/she is disease free. (ie. regular testing according to the type of sex work you are doing and the rate of actual exposure). that said, there should be harsher penalties for sex workers who knowingly expose their clients to an std, than there are for the rest of the community. also, there should be harsh penalties for clients who knowingly infect a sex worker.
e) any man who accosts or attempts to solicit a woman outside of the "designated" red light area, or having sex in a public place, should be arrested. any street worker behaving in an offensive manner while soliciting on the street, or having sex in a public place, should be arrested. (note: i mean offensive, not "immoral"). there are already public nuisiance and indecency laws in place to control these two problems.

hmmm i think that's about it. seeing as this is my perfect world...
a) it should be unlawful to discriminate against someone on the basis of occupation (and sex work would be considered a legitimate occupation). that includes insurers!!
b) police should be required to take the [CodeWord123] or assault of a sex worker as seriously as they do for other men and women.
c) sex industry businesses should pay superannuation, sick leave, annual leave and workers compensation to their employees.
d) more money would be put into sex worker agencies for the health education and support of the sex industry, and the retraining of those workers who want to exit.

this seems to make sense to me at present...but i must admit i am a little tipsy (ok...i'm really quite drunk! lol) go for it. tell me what i missed out!