# A Theory of Prostitution **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 29, 2006, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658 "2006-08-29T13:31:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/1 "2006-08-29T13:31:28Z")
I stumbled across this paper by two economists, Lena Edlund of Columbia University and Evelyn Korn of Eberhard-Karls-Universitat Tubingen, which claims that wives and prostitutes, in an economic perspective, are essentially chasing the same resources, but wives from a male perspective offer a superior product in that they can produce children that with some reason can be assumed to be the fathers, and are socially recognized as being thus. Prostitutes on the other hand, have to be very well paid, in comparison to other unskilled female jobs, to compensate for not being able to marry. They also conclude that if you want to combat prostitution, rather than making it illegal, you should strive to enrich both men and women. Since when men have more money, even though they can afford more prostitutes, they’d tend to prefer to buy the superiour goods (wives) – which apparently is precisely what is being seen when you compare poorer countries with richer countries. Can essential human activities be reduced to mere economic theories, and are their conclusions correct? [A Theory of Prostitution](http://www.iies.su.se/seminars/papers/Edlund.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/2 "2006-08-29T13:43:55Z")
[QUOTE=Rune] They also conclude that if you want to combat prostitution, rather than making it illegal, you should strive to enrich both men and women. [/QUOTE] Wouldn’t it make more sense, if the theory is correct and the objective is to end prostitution, to enrich women at the expense of men? Then women would have no economic incentive to become prostitutes and men would not have the means to afford them. Of course this might just end up creating a lot of gigolos. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/3 "2006-08-29T13:54:01Z")
[QUOTE=Rune] They also conclude that if you want to combat prostitution, rather than making it illegal, you should strive to enrich both men and women. Since when men have more money, even though they can afford more prostitutes, they’d tend to prefer to buy the superiour goods (wives) – which apparently is precisely what is being seen when you compare poorer countries with richer countries. [/QUOTE] The flaw I see with this is it assumes that married men won’t visit prostitutes. Is this correct? I’d think that making a man rich enough would mean he’d “purchase” two or more goods: a wife and a whore on the side. Is there some Golden Mean of economic prosperity where a man can afford a wife but not a wife and a prostitute? How do you stop economic growth at that point? ---
**Author:** ![Menocchio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@Menocchio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Menocchio)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/4 "2006-08-29T14:13:23Z")
The flaw in this is that men don’t necessarily want children. In fact, some would see children as an added cost, not a benefit, to wives. The same goes for emotional attatchment (that is, love). Some men demand it, and see the added intimacy as a “service” of their wives. Some men shun it, and would see it as an added cost. And some men want to be loved some times, and fucked at others. Since their wives aren’t always willing or otherwise availiable, or for the sake of variety, these men would see prostitutes while married (or while persuing a wife). I do agree that the only way to eliminate prostitution is to make all women prosperous enough that they’d never enter the profession out of desperation (which is a degree of social support this country isn’t prepared to accept). I suppose some still would, because they like the work. And they’d be in very high demand, so they could make quite a bit of money, which would attract more women… ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/5 "2006-08-29T14:30:06Z")
Are prostitutes really all that well paid? Marc ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/6 "2006-08-29T14:34:53Z")
[QUOTE=Rune] I stumbled across this paper by two economists, Lena Edlund of Columbia University and Evelyn Korn of Eberhard-Karls-Universitat Tubingen, which claims that wives and prostitutes, in an economic perspective, are essentially chasing the same resources, [/quote] By the term resources, you mean male income and wealth. > [@](#): > > They also conclude that if you want to combat prostitution, rather than making it illegal, you should strive to enrich both men and women. I can see the socialization of sexual resources for men. Generate a healthy economy, and apply a sex tax on men and distribute the proceeds to women. That way the wealthier men can afford in house sexual help and housekeeping while the poorer men won’t be able to convince the now adequately state supported women to prostitute themselves for them. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/7 "2006-08-29T14:43:15Z")
I don’t see prostitution as ever going away completely. What my ideal would be would be if: (1) No one ever worked as a prostitite because that was all that they could do to survive. That is, all prostitutes chose the work, either because they preferred it, or because they liked the extra money it orovided over alternative work (or a combination of the two). (2) There were roughly an equal number of female prostitutes providing services to men, and male prostitutes providing services to women. (Though they might identify their services as “escort services” or “companionship” rather then just “sexual services” – as might many of the women prostitutes.) ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/8 "2006-08-29T14:53:30Z")
Illegal prostitutes, i.e streetwalkers, who are often looking for a quick score of cash for their next drug fix, no. Legal prostitutes, i.e. Nevada brothel workers, and semi-legal prostitutes, i.e. escorts ad “companions”, can pull down significant amounts of money for what is essentially an unskilled position. Forbes did [an article on the paper mentioned in the OP](http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/2006/02/11/economics-prostitution-marriage_cx_mn_money06_0214prostitution.html) and had some interesting things to say about it. > [@](#): > > according to data assembled from a wide variety of times and places, ranging from mid-15th-century France to Malaysia of the late 1990s, prostitutes make more money–in some cases, a lot more money–than do working girls who, well, work for a living. This held true even for places where prostitution is legal and relatively safe. In short, streetwalkers aren’t necessarily being paid more for their increased risk of going to jail or the hospital. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Menocchio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@Menocchio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Menocchio)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/9 "2006-08-29T15:02:10Z")
[QUOTE=Giles] (2) There were roughly an equal number of female prostitutes providing services to men, and male prostitutes providing services to women. (Though they might identify their services as “escort services” or “companionship” rather then just “sexual services” – as might many of the women prostitutes.) [/QUOTE] That’s making the assumption that female sexuality is roughly the same as male sexuality. That is to say, that women would patronize male protitutes if they could. I’m not sure that would be the case. Which would not necessarily make prostitution immoral or in unjust in and of itself. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/10 "2006-08-29T15:29:29Z")
[QUOTE=Menocchio] That’s making the assumption that female sexuality is roughly the same as male sexuality. That is to say, that women would patronize male protitutes if they could. I’m not sure that would be the case. [/QUOTE] Certainly, it’s an assumption. The differences in sex drives between men and women are influenced by many things, including societal expectation and by fear of unwanted pregancies. But my assumption is that economic equality, combined with men and women both having roughly equal sex drives, would lead to rough equality between male and female prostitution. (In some societies, it is generally assumed that women’s sex drives are actually higher than men’s, and that’s why it’s bnecessary to place resttrictions on women’s behaviour. And in any case, women who know about the difficulties of being pregnant, giving birth and then raising children are nevertheless motivated enough to have sex regardless. Men might equally feel responsible for raising children, but they don’t suffer equally through pegnancy and chilkdbirth. So I’m not sure that my assumption is all that crazy.) ---
**Author:** ![Menocchio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@Menocchio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Menocchio)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/11 "2006-08-29T16:36:06Z")
[QUOTE=Giles] But my assumption is that economic equality, combined with men and women both having roughly equal sex drives, would lead to rough equality between male and female prostitution. [/QUOTE] But equal sex drives does not infer equal use of prostitutes. Women may be just as desirious as men for sex in general, but may be more demanding of monogamy or a romantic context. But it’s an moot point anyway, since social and economic equality doesn’t exist and never has, and absent that we’ll never have an answer. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/12 "2006-08-29T16:38:17Z")
[QUOTE=Giles] Certainly, it’s an assumption. The differences in sex drives between men and women are influenced by many things, including societal expectation and by fear of unwanted pregancies. But my assumption is that economic equality, combined with men and women both having roughly equal sex drives, would lead to rough equality between male and female prostitution. (In some societies, it is generally assumed that women’s sex drives are actually higher than men’s, and that’s why it’s bnecessary to place resttrictions on women’s behaviour. And in any case, women who know about the difficulties of being pregnant, giving birth and then raising children are nevertheless motivated enough to have sex regardless. Men might equally feel responsible for raising children, but they don’t suffer equally through pegnancy and chilkdbirth. So I’m not sure that my assumption is all that crazy.) [/QUOTE] Mmmmm…I still think it’s crazy. 😉 Women may have very high sex drives, and we might have fantastic fantasy lives and enjoy sex with our husbands or boyfriends multiple times a day, but as a broad generalization, as well as a generalization about broads, we don’t like sex with strangers all that often. There’s exceptions, sure, but most of us want to have sex with someone we have more than a monetary relationship with. Besides, how are you going to regulate your system? Take a census every year and conscript more men into the industry? Issue a set number of “male” and “female” and “other” licenses to whore? Socialize the whole thing? I do agree with making prostitution legal, but I can’t see the genders ever having equal representation - unless you’re talking male prostitutes for male clients. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/13 "2006-08-29T16:50:51Z")
If one assumes an equal market among women for male prostitutes and among men for female prostitutes, why would there be prostitutes at all? Surely, in that situation, and given modern mass communication, the men and women who just wanted a no-strings-attached sexual encounter would simply seek each other out, and copulate without exchange of money at all? It’s only the fact that, in current society, men are more desirous of such unions that makes prostitution economical at all. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/14 "2006-08-29T17:00:18Z")
Two responses from me: [QUOTE=Chronos] If one assumes an equal market among women for male prostitutes and among men for female prostitutes, why would there be prostitutes at all? Surely, in that situation, and given modern mass communication, the men and women who just wanted a no-strings-attached sexual encounter would simply seek each other out, and copulate without exchange of money at all? It’s only the fact that, in current society, men are more desirous of such unions that makes prostitution economical at all. [/QUOTE] Because some people are less attractive than others. So (for example) the wealthy, but aging, single person can have the company of a more attractive younger person from time to time. [QUOTE=WhyNot] Besides, how are you going to regulate your system? Take a census every year and conscript more men into the industry? Issue a set number of “male” and “female” and “other” licenses to whore? Socialize the whole thing? [/QUOTE] No regulation at all to balance the sex ratio. I remember a time when bus drivers were all men, but now many are women (though there may not yet be exact equality). That happened because the bus companies decided that women could drive buses just as well as men. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/15 "2006-08-29T17:58:42Z")
I’d guess that as long as there are abusive dysfunctional families, there will be teenage runaways who become street kids, some of whom must turn to prostitution to support themselves and possible drug habits. No amount of economic theorizing is likely to analyze this away, unless one wants to unconvincingly propose that greater economic stability eliminates the stresses that turn some parents into assholes. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2006, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/16 "2006-08-30T11:57:37Z")
[QUOTE=Rune] I stumbled across this paper by two economists, Lena Edlund of Columbia University and Evelyn Korn of Eberhard-Karls-Universitat Tubingen, which claims that wives and prostitutes, in an economic perspective, are essentially chasing the same resources, but wives from a male perspective offer a superior product in that they can produce children that with some reason can be assumed to be the fathers, and are socially recognized as being thus. Prostitutes on the other hand, have to be very well paid, in comparison to other unskilled female jobs, to compensate for not being able to marry. [/QUOTE] I think that Lena and Evelyn are both female, and hold some very peculiar views about what women want. From that black art of ‘revealed preference’ we can see that quite a lot of women do not want to marry (or rather stay married). A nice settlement will do nicely. I would also widen the definition of prostitution, some years ago on an involuntary cruise I had a very interesting conversation with a very beddable female called Lady X, (the Lady bit is genuine,) she went to some lengths explaining to me that although her male companion was a bit of an old duffer, she enjoyed going on holidays with him. To be honest I rather fancied her, and I suspect that the feeling was mutual. We also have the Gambia, and that interesting film about Jamaica. Also I have heard about a place near my abode, but slightly off the beaten track, which runs as a sort of club. Reputedly the girls are very nice, it is more like a cocktail party, held in the afternoons so that the guys can spend the evening with their wives and kids. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2006, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-theory-of-prostitution/370658/17 "2006-08-30T13:51:52Z")
[QUOTE=WhyNot] The flaw I see with this is it assumes that married men won’t visit prostitutes. Is this correct? I’d think that making a man rich enough would mean he’d “purchase” two or more goods: a wife and a whore on the side. [/QUOTE] I think they assume that well off married men will divorce their wives and take a younger wife – while less well-off men will have to frequent prostitutes. > [@](#): > > Another possibility, closely linked to the observation that women are fecund for a shorter period of their life then men and hence are scarce on the partner market, might be that sex with an old woman is inferior to sex with a young woman.10 Consider a population of men and women who live for two periods: young and old. Following Siow [49], women are fecund when young, men are fecund both when young and old, and marriage and sex is only desirable with a fecund partner. Consequently, men can marry at either age while women only marry while young. If the only reason for divorce is remarriage, then men who married while young, remain married when old unless they can remarry a young woman. Since there will be more men willing to marry than there are young women, not all old men can remarry. These men would remain married, but seek sex with a young woman. If young married women are barred from extra-marital relations, only prostitutes can satisfy this demand.