Since men have pretty much been the law makers, through history and across cultures, and since it’s men that go to prostitutes, why is it usually illegal? (or is that an assumption?). How can it have occurred, at least in this country? Is it that most men really DON’T think it should be legal? It can certainly be argued that through history, many of our statutes have had a bias in favor of males. I understand that many laws make it illegal to BE a prostitute while not charging the person who partakes of the service. But why should a service that MEN use be against the law, if it’s men that make the laws? Nome sane?
Because the laws aren’t made to benefit one gender or another; they’re made (at times) to relect the mores of the society at large. And society on the whole (in the U.S.) apparently thinks prostitution is bad.
Because we have wives.
I have no idea precisely what the statistics are, but I’d venture a guess that it’s a small percentage of men that are regular clients of prostitutes. It’s not at all outside the bounds of imagination to picture legislators being opposed to the practice in part because the vast majority of them would be unaffected by the prohibition.
beleive it or not, not all men would or care to use the service of a prostitute, and some actually think that the exchange of money for sex is morally wrong.
Your question implies that individual positions on issues are binary (for or against)
In fact, while I expect most civilized people would prefer that prostitution did not exist; it is easy to imagine how it could remain illegal even if only a minority were against it.
There could be a large percentage of individuals who are not against prostitution but have no need for it. These people might not reject a politician who intended to make it illegal if he/she supported another issue they were more passionate about.
This is often the case with many issues. 99% of the people are negatively affected, but indirectly. 1% of people are affected directly and positively. Because the majority don’t see how the issue hurts them, it is largely ignored. The 1%, on the other hand, are so richly rewarded that they become a valuable ally providing labor and campaign funds. When you consider how few people actually get directly involved in politics, 1% can be a huge number.
This is how, often, the minority can rule.
“How can it have occurred, at least in this country?”
What country? The country of ‘not elsewhere?’
Prostitution is, or was, legal in some areas of the USA, you know? Seems to be a local ordinance thing.
These few posts lead me to begin to think that most people, if given the choice, would have prostitution be illegal (in the U.S., Handy). I think I had always assumed that most people, at least most men, would have considered prostitution to be a good thing, and if not a good thing, then at least something to be accepted. But these voices make me rethink that assumption. Discussion on that point probably belongs in the great debates and most likely has been there several times. If you’re right, and there must be SOME explanation for all the statutes against it, then it is still a curious matter that a form of commerce that is expressly designed to benefit and provide pleasure for men is outlawed by men. Something in it seems paradoxical, despite my inability to articulate exactly what it is. Thanks for the input.
It’s because it can’t be taxed by the local tax district. Thats why it’s a federal crime to make your own whisky, even for your own use. The feds can’t tax it.
… and daughters.
Cause if Momma ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.
"if men make the laws, why is prostitution illegal? "
Damn, that’s a good question…
Men: Write your state legislator today!!
From The Sisters of the Cross of Shame, a poem written by the Victorian writer Dana Burnet and set to music by Pamela Warrick-Smith:[ul]An old man tells his son the Truth,
Lest he should speak of Sin.
And every man cries “Oh, alas!”
And every man goes in.[/ul]
Dear child, ** patriarchy** is not merely the control of women by men, it is the control of younger men by older men.
By their balls is, in fact, the preferred method. As in “Oh, you wanna fuck some of that? Work for us. Put up with the conditions and don’t give us any backtalk and we’ll pay you, and with our money in your pocket you’ll be eligible. We made it necessary for you to have our money in your pocket before you’re gonna get some (except rarely and/or by accident), we put the women in a circumstance where they have little choice about that. You, my boy, have a choice. You can play along with us and get laid, or you can opt out and do without.”
Read your feminist theory.