It sounds like to me she’s saying legalizing prostitution would eliminate poverty among women and the burden of marriage among men.
As to the first, it’d be true only if poor women were pretty enough to make a living as prostitutes.
As to the second, it’d be true only if men were rich enough to support all those women, and preferred that arrangement over having a wife and a family.
…she didn’t say that at all.
To find out what she did say, why don’t you read the words she actually wrote? What a novel way to debate: attribute a false argument to someone else and argue against it! There is no way you can loose!
Your paraphrase is as ridiculous as Sage Rat’s cite that stated that “Legalized prostitution didn’t stop Australian sexual violence against women.”
Her:
Me:
Ok, so she’s not saying legalizing prostitution would eliminate poverty among women. Merely that spreading their legs would give them a leg up, so to speak. Out of the gutter, I mean.
I am saying that allowing those women who would choose to make money by having consensual sex to make money by having consensual sex would indeed allow them to make money, yes. Thank you for noticing that revolutionary statement of mine; I know it was radical out-of-her-box thinking.
…yep.
Nailed it.
mmm