I neither smoke nor am I a prostitute and I don’t understand why some control freaks feel the need to tell others what to do in the privacy of their own homes.
I don’t like broccoli. I hate it so much that it should be illegal. Anyone caught growing or in possession of broccoli should get significant jail time - not to mention giving broccoli to my children. I don’t care if someone claims broccoli is healthy. There’s nothing in broccoli that can’t be found in a vitamin or some other created pill.
Marijuana, yes. Prostitution I have problems with…not just the moral issue, but the fact that it seems to reduce women to bundles of flesh for the enjoyment of strangers. Doesn’t that seem a bit cold-blooded?
I know it’s the "oldest profession," but I still feel it denigrates the women involved to something less than human.
Wouldn’t you think that after thousands of years of civilization this is the best we can come up with to handle unhappy libidos?
I think it denigrates women more to tell them that we’re not allowing them to do something because we want to protect them. Aren’t women adult enough to make their own decisions?
"I think it denigrates women more to tell them that we’re not allowing
them to do something because we want to protect them. Aren’t women
adult enough to make their own decisions?"
Let’s backtrack for a minute. This is not about gender (of the prostitute, the "client", or anyone else for that matter), but about prostitution. Female prostitutes are denigrating to women, just as male prostitutes are to men. If prostitution prohibitions (or this discussion) were aimed solely at women, and not prostitutes as a whole, regardless of gender, then your comment would be valid; as it is, however, the discussion is not about gender or gender-prohibitions, but about prostitution.
As for telling people they can’t do something because it will hurt them ("we want to protect them"), we do that all the time…you can’t take prescription drugs without a prescription, you can’t drive drunk (even if there’s nobody on the street who you could potentially harm), you can’t have sex with an adult if you’re a child, etc., etc., etc. Heck, you can’t commit suicide, for that matter (although enforcing that one is a bit trickier ;-) ).
IMHO, legalizing prostitution would push a lot of young people — particularly those in poor neighborhoods with bleak outlooks or prospects — into a lifetime that they would regret but not necessarily ever be able to escape, because it would now be a legal source of income. It’s one thing to talk from the position of a privileged person about the benefits of taxing prostitution and the money that would generate, but it’s another to take into account the reality "on the ground" in areas where prospects are bad and life is poor.
Mm, I generally disagree with any law that tries to protect an adult from themselves. Drug prescriptions definitely fall into a grey area, in that a combination of drugs could be dangerous and this allows a person to be informed about the effects of a number of different drugs taken together. Driving drunk is risky for others (and there’s never a situation where you can guarantee that no one is around … after all, a drunk person could drive into a house!!). Children fall into an entirely different category as I think we all agree they need to be protected from themselves in order to be able to grow up.
The reason people don’t become prostitutes now has nothing to do with the legality. After all, do you know anyone who says that they would become a prostitute but it’s illegal?!? All that keeping it illegal does is make it hard for people who turn to prostitution to get protection from themselves. After all, if you’re going to get arrested for your work, how likely are you to go to the police if you’re raped or beaten up?
The best way to keep poor women (and some men) from being prostitutes is to give them opportunities to do other things. But heaven forbid anyone bring that up, because then you’ll be accused of socialism.
RJB - I think you were making a good argument in counterpoint to Rachel’s statement …… until your last paragraph. Too bad. It is a red herring to think that prostitution would disappear if only the "poor women" had a government that would help them learn another way to make a living. Nonsense. Income available from prostitution is far greater than working 9 to 5 or in a factory somewhere.
Furthermore, the accusations of a socialist bent in the current Administration are not that far fetched. Unfortunately.
I don’t think prostitution would disappear if there were more options available to the poor. But, as you explain above, the poor often go into it because it pays better than other jobs that they are qualified for. I’m not entirely sure what I would choose were my only choices to be a 9-5 grunt at a physically demanding job or as a prostitute. And how does a person get to the point where these are their only choices? Many factors, including a poor education, limited parental involvement, and a lack of opportunities come into play. I went to a great school and had parents that worked with me to do well. They earned enough money that I could concentrate on schoolwork rather than working. We lived in an area where I did not have to worry about violence, nor where success could mean a beat-down. And so as a young adult I had many more opportunities through no great effort on my part than many other people.
As for socialism, I don’t understand why it’s considered terrible. "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." - Dom Helder Camara, Brazilian archbishop
It is my opinion that no pure form of government or economic system can work. Pure democracy fails. Pure capitalism fails. And of course, pure socialism fails. What type of system do we need? We need one that is competitive enough to inspire people to work hard and thus be more productive. But, we also need a system that allows a person to be productive through hard work if they so choose. Currently for some people, that is not the case.
Personally, I have no problems with what the current administration is trying to do. The fact that we don’t have universal healthcare is completely absurd and one of the reasons we have some of the worst health care when compared to other first world nations. This is one aspect where democracy and capitalism just fail. While I’m not 100% thrilled with the economic choices, I don’t think anyone has a better idea. Eight years of republican mismanagement had sent our economy in a nose-dive. The global economy has set up a system that no one understands. Couple these together, and the decision making becomes quite difficult. But, I’ve known quite a few people who have benefited from the stimulus money in a way that I think is beneficial. It certainly helped people stay in school who will be tomorrow’s engineers, physicists and doctors rather than have them drop out and wait tables or whatnot in order to survive.
Returning to prostitution so the moderators don’t ding me, it’s not a profession that I think many would choose were they given all available options. For instance, if every single job paid a living wage and one could choose whatever one wanted to do, I don’t think we’d see many prostitutes. But, I don’t think we’d see many maids, garbage men, miners, etc. It would be nice if we were to live in a society where more people get to do what they want to do for employment, rather than what they need to do to survive. Ultimately I think that would lead to a more productive society, which is good for all of us.
RJB - I shall not respond to any of the political stuff but as for your remarks regarding prostitution, again you have good arguments. However, one must acknowledge that many girls go into prostitution because of the sexual abuse they suffered when young. All the romance of a sexual relationship is, in their world, non-existent. Again, not all prostitutes were abused children, but many were.
As for the living-wage argument. I think it is a matter of choices. One can live a poor and moral life and, even though we all strive in this country to better ourselves or certainly try to make the lives of our children easier, we cannot escape from the fact that some jobs will mean that a person might always be a renter and never a owner, never buy a new car but always a used one and that their retirement must be made easier by Social Security allotments. Is it fair? We are all given the chance to improve through education and hard work. For those who are not assertive or who are educationally challenged then, as a country, I think our social responsibilities include the regulation of rental housing, nutritional foodstuffs at cheaper prices, violent free public schools, etc. We cannot make all us all the same. No government could. We can only try to keep the status quo from limiting each of our opportunities.
Sorry, I have got to return my soapbox to the closet.
P.S., RJB, my thinking was not that women can’t make their own decisions, but rather if legalized, we’d be telling the men it’s okay. And, actually, I think this whole subject quite distasteful. So will absent myself.
121 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
I neither smoke nor am I a prostitute and I don’t understand why some control freaks feel the need to tell others what to do in the privacy of their own homes.
I don’t like broccoli. I hate it so much that it should be illegal. Anyone caught growing or in possession of broccoli should get significant jail time - not to mention giving broccoli to my children. I don’t care if someone claims broccoli is healthy. There’s nothing in broccoli that can’t be found in a vitamin or some other created pill.
It’s no less ridiculous.
Lisa, I LOVE broccoli. If I pay taxes on it, is it o.k. to keep eating it? :)
Marijuana, yes. Prostitution I have problems with…not just the moral issue, but the fact that it seems to reduce women to bundles of flesh for the enjoyment of strangers. Doesn’t that seem a bit cold-blooded?
I know it’s the "oldest profession," but I still feel it denigrates the women involved to something less than human.
Wouldn’t you think that after thousands of years of civilization this is the best we can come up with to handle unhappy libidos?
"I think it denigrates women more to tell them that we’re not allowing them to do something because we want to protect them. Aren’t women adult enough to make their own decisions?"
Let’s backtrack for a minute. This is not about gender (of the prostitute, the "client", or anyone else for that matter), but about prostitution. Female prostitutes are denigrating to women, just as male prostitutes are to men. If prostitution prohibitions (or this discussion) were aimed solely at women, and not prostitutes as a whole, regardless of gender, then your comment would be valid; as it is, however, the discussion is not about gender or gender-prohibitions, but about prostitution.
As for telling people they can’t do something because it will hurt them ("we want to protect them"), we do that all the time…you can’t take prescription drugs without a prescription, you can’t drive drunk (even if there’s nobody on the street who you could potentially harm), you can’t have sex with an adult if you’re a child, etc., etc., etc. Heck, you can’t commit suicide, for that matter (although enforcing that one is a bit trickier ;-) ).
IMHO, legalizing prostitution would push a lot of young people — particularly those in poor neighborhoods with bleak outlooks or prospects — into a lifetime that they would regret but not necessarily ever be able to escape, because it would now be a legal source of income. It’s one thing to talk from the position of a privileged person about the benefits of taxing prostitution and the money that would generate, but it’s another to take into account the reality "on the ground" in areas where prospects are bad and life is poor.
Mm, I generally disagree with any law that tries to protect an adult from themselves. Drug prescriptions definitely fall into a grey area, in that a combination of drugs could be dangerous and this allows a person to be informed about the effects of a number of different drugs taken together. Driving drunk is risky for others (and there’s never a situation where you can guarantee that no one is around … after all, a drunk person could drive into a house!!). Children fall into an entirely different category as I think we all agree they need to be protected from themselves in order to be able to grow up.
The reason people don’t become prostitutes now has nothing to do with the legality. After all, do you know anyone who says that they would become a prostitute but it’s illegal?!? All that keeping it illegal does is make it hard for people who turn to prostitution to get protection from themselves. After all, if you’re going to get arrested for your work, how likely are you to go to the police if you’re raped or beaten up?
The best way to keep poor women (and some men) from being prostitutes is to give them opportunities to do other things. But heaven forbid anyone bring that up, because then you’ll be accused of socialism.
RJB - I think you were making a good argument in counterpoint to Rachel’s statement …… until your last paragraph. Too bad. It is a red herring to think that prostitution would disappear if only the "poor women" had a government that would help them learn another way to make a living. Nonsense. Income available from prostitution is far greater than working 9 to 5 or in a factory somewhere.
Furthermore, the accusations of a socialist bent in the current Administration are not that far fetched. Unfortunately.
I don’t think prostitution would disappear if there were more options available to the poor. But, as you explain above, the poor often go into it because it pays better than other jobs that they are qualified for. I’m not entirely sure what I would choose were my only choices to be a 9-5 grunt at a physically demanding job or as a prostitute. And how does a person get to the point where these are their only choices? Many factors, including a poor education, limited parental involvement, and a lack of opportunities come into play. I went to a great school and had parents that worked with me to do well. They earned enough money that I could concentrate on schoolwork rather than working. We lived in an area where I did not have to worry about violence, nor where success could mean a beat-down. And so as a young adult I had many more opportunities through no great effort on my part than many other people.
As for socialism, I don’t understand why it’s considered terrible. "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." - Dom Helder Camara, Brazilian archbishop
It is my opinion that no pure form of government or economic system can work. Pure democracy fails. Pure capitalism fails. And of course, pure socialism fails. What type of system do we need? We need one that is competitive enough to inspire people to work hard and thus be more productive. But, we also need a system that allows a person to be productive through hard work if they so choose. Currently for some people, that is not the case.
Personally, I have no problems with what the current administration is trying to do. The fact that we don’t have universal healthcare is completely absurd and one of the reasons we have some of the worst health care when compared to other first world nations. This is one aspect where democracy and capitalism just fail. While I’m not 100% thrilled with the economic choices, I don’t think anyone has a better idea. Eight years of republican mismanagement had sent our economy in a nose-dive. The global economy has set up a system that no one understands. Couple these together, and the decision making becomes quite difficult. But, I’ve known quite a few people who have benefited from the stimulus money in a way that I think is beneficial. It certainly helped people stay in school who will be tomorrow’s engineers, physicists and doctors rather than have them drop out and wait tables or whatnot in order to survive.
Returning to prostitution so the moderators don’t ding me, it’s not a profession that I think many would choose were they given all available options. For instance, if every single job paid a living wage and one could choose whatever one wanted to do, I don’t think we’d see many prostitutes. But, I don’t think we’d see many maids, garbage men, miners, etc. It would be nice if we were to live in a society where more people get to do what they want to do for employment, rather than what they need to do to survive. Ultimately I think that would lead to a more productive society, which is good for all of us.
RJB - I shall not respond to any of the political stuff but as for your remarks regarding prostitution, again you have good arguments. However, one must acknowledge that many girls go into prostitution because of the sexual abuse they suffered when young. All the romance of a sexual relationship is, in their world, non-existent. Again, not all prostitutes were abused children, but many were.
As for the living-wage argument. I think it is a matter of choices. One can live a poor and moral life and, even though we all strive in this country to better ourselves or certainly try to make the lives of our children easier, we cannot escape from the fact that some jobs will mean that a person might always be a renter and never a owner, never buy a new car but always a used one and that their retirement must be made easier by Social Security allotments. Is it fair? We are all given the chance to improve through education and hard work. For those who are not assertive or who are educationally challenged then, as a country, I think our social responsibilities include the regulation of rental housing, nutritional foodstuffs at cheaper prices, violent free public schools, etc. We cannot make all us all the same. No government could. We can only try to keep the status quo from limiting each of our opportunities.
Sorry, I have got to return my soapbox to the closet.