I think it could seriously hurt the economy - people spend a LOT of money on stuff which is, at least indirectly, supposed to help them get laid. If prostitution was legal, easily available, and inexpensive, you would probably see a lot less money spent on sports cars, drinks in bars, designer clothes, etc.
Ah wring - once more unto the breach, eh? It seems like we have to dredge up the same arguments every few months to different people. And I’m tired… so very tired…
Anyway…
Rather than present all the points at once and have to fight ten wars at the same time as different people argue with different bits, let’s concentrate on one thing at a time.
I’ll start with… the idea that legalisation would make everything sparkling clean. I particularly like Ronin’s idea (something that apprears commonly in these discussions) that if we make brothels legal but outlaw streetwalking then everything will be A-OK.
The simple fact is that if streetwalkers could afford the brothel set up, they probably wouldn’t be streetwalkers. If you keep streetwalking illegal then frankly you change virtually nothing. Streetwalking will still exist just as much (possibly even more if attitudes towards prostitution in general become more relaxed) - illegal in your scenario, illegal at the moment, so why should it disappear?
If you just legalise brothels, you don’t help the fight against streetwalkers. And if you search for the last time we went through this (battle royale with Stoid, IIRC), wring had oodles of statistics to suggest that streetwalking is by far and away the most common form of prositution.
When this point is laid to rest, we’ll get into the arguments against legalised brothels. Or the arguments against legalising streetwalkers, if that’s the way it’s going.
pan
I seriously doubt that. Any information about the percentage of men in Holland who visit prostitutes? How many of those brothels are actually visited by foreign tourist vs. the local population?
Marc
Only the advocate of a command economy would want to protect sports car makers, bars, makers of fancy clothes. But why? Money spent on prostitutes would make its way into the economy by other ways. That’s just capitalism. Let’s make computers & cars illegal, so we can rescue the typewriter makers & horse breeders.
Not many studies have been preformed about the type of customers visiting prostitutes in Amsterdam, but a fair percentage are tourists. (I would guess between 25% and 50%)
According to the Mr A de Graaf stichting, (which is dutch only, sorry), The Netherlands has about 2000 ‘window’ prostitutes (what’s the name for that anyway, I can only find raamprosititutie), 700 clubs employing about 3500 to 4000 prositutes and 320 streetcorner prositutes for a grand total of around 6000 prostitutes.
Another study published on the same site lists that the Nethelands has around 25000 prostitutes of which about half are working on a particular day. Of these 12500 prositutes, around 45% works in clubs, 15% works as escorts and 5% works out of his or her own home. There are no figures listed for window- and street prostitution.
Most of club-, street- and window- prostitutes work out of the major cities or around the German and Belgian border. A lot (i think around 50%) of the windows are in Amsterdam.
Interestingly, prostitutes (here) make far less than what some of you sugest. Going rates for window- and street prostitutes is fl 50,- (around $23) entrance fee (first half hour)and around fl 25,- ($12) for every 15 minutes after that. Earnings for A window prostitute is around $8 an hour, a club prostitute around $14 and a street prostitute around $24 an hour.
If I may make a WAG: assuming around 5 customers per prostitute per day and between 6000 and 12500 prostitutes that would make between 30,000 and 67,500 customers per day. For a country of 16,000,000 that comes down to around 1 customer for every 273-533 people. How does this compare to the US?
OK, I’m a John looking for a good time. I can go down the street to Lulu’s Happy Fun Time Palace, which, while admittedly kinda skanky with all that neon and red velvet, has hookers who get tested regularly by the state and bears me no risk (however small) of being arrested.
Or I can go out on the street and pick up a streetwalker - untested for disease and illegal.
Hmm, now where will I go?
Certainly, legalizing brothels won’t eliminate the supply of streetwalkers, but will certainly take a bite out of the demand for streetwalkers, even if streetwalkers were cheaper. And with a lessened demand, the supply would shrink.
Let’s look at booze. You can still get moonshine, and you would save some serious money that way. But you have the risk of being arrested, and you run the risk of getting wood alcohol or impure hootch and getting seriously ill. Because of this, the overwhelming majority of people purchase legal liquor, and there are a hell of a lot fewer moonshiners than there were during Prohibition.
Sua
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN???
I’ve always wanted to write that, though it has no bearing on the current argument.
Anyway, legalize all the way. There is no doubt I’d be there in no time. I’m no scum, but everyone gets an itch to scratch now and then, eh?
I’m thinking the reason it is illegal currently (in the US) is that there is fear that the legalization of prostitution will lead to the end of society as we know it.
I’m 23, and JUST broke up with my girlfriend and again I’m seeing that beside the female companionship I enjoyed from her, I’m REALLY missing the sex on a consistent basis.
I may end up getting grilled about this, and I love the company of women, but I can’t help feeling it would alter man/woman relationship fundamentally. Read below.
Basically. Man, jarbaby hit this one on the head. I’ll take it a mile or two farther and say that the only reason many men get into relationships is to get regular sex (not the word “many” and not “all”). Then what ends up happening is that the man ends up falling in love with the woman once he gets to know her. This is the natural way.
By legalizing ways for men to get sex, stable relationships suffer, along with society’s view of women. And it’s one less leverage point women have over men.
Example: Guy been married to woman for 10 years. She starts to fatten up, he’s not attracted to her anymore, wants to bang other women (which most guys in GOOD relationships want to do anyway) and so he goes and engages in a legal act of pay-for sex with a hot prostitute.
Now, his wife feels betrayed because he cheated on her, and they can’t afford the water bill because of the money spent.
Worse yet, the tried and true strategy women use: “Do such and such, or no sex for you…” loses all potency.
Now I know the above example is a dramatic, but I hope you all can see my point —> that the man/woman relationship would be altered.
BTW, I’m sorry if I sound crass… but I’m trying to show WHY prostitution hasn’t been, and never will be, legal.
That should’ve been note the word “many” and not “all”.
Sorry 'bout that…
Now now Sua - I think that to compare the supply-demand curves for prostitution and moonshine is a little disingenuous. I would have thought that there is a great deal to suggest that sex is a far more elastic good than alcohol at the price levels we are talking about. Compare $20 vs $200 for instance - the pervert who likes to persuade women to sleep with him for money* may well choose the cheaper option. On the other hand if you can buy a beer for $3 then the possibility of buying one for less than a dollar is less likely to seem such a big deal. (And yet there are those who do illegally produce their own spirits…).
Also you are making assumptions that said loser views the sex he manages to extort from a brothel prostitute as being better than from a streetwalker. But you have to look at the reasons why he decided to visit the prostitute in the first place - a streetwalker, especially a cheap one, may well fulfil his needs as well as if not better than a brothel worker.
Anyhow, brothels exist now and yet streetwalkers are prevalent. Why do the borderline-rapists** go to the streetwalkers and not the brothels at the moment? Presumably the brothels are closer in price to the streetwalkers now than they would be if one were illegal and the other not
pan
*oops, showing my disgust with this expression of purist capitalism rather than arguing rationally there - naughty kabbes
**obfusicatist’s argument, IIRC. Money is power abstracted. Therefore using that power to persuade a woman who otherwise wouldn’t want to sleep with you that she should sleep with you is little more than rape abstracted.
I’ll note that this argument is even more forceful when we consider the number of underage girls being used in prostitution.
why use WAG’s when we can use facts:
Amsterdamlands 80% of prostitutes are foreign, 70% w/o papers which suggests they were ‘trafficed’
would legalization end such trafficing?
(from the coalition against trafficing women - so admittedly they don’t like it)
legalizing prostitution does not improve conditions for prostitutes
more data from the Netherlands re: children
Data from Netherlands submitted to suggest that legalizing prostitution does not suggest that there’s an end to exploitation of people in the sex trade.
Re-read one of the last threads on the subject and caught an excellent point by kabbes that got passed by.
One effect of legalization to think about:
In order to collect unemployment and social service benefits, the person must make attempts to secure work and cannot turn down a job that’s offered. Person has been layed off from work, is collecting public assistance so their kids don’t starve but are required to seek employment and not turn down offers for work. And the local brothel is hiring. Does that prospect give you reason to pause?
I find it fascinating that we can have seven death penalty threads on the front page of the Dope at any given time, we can argue abortion every damn day of the week, bush vs. the world, god vs. no god, but I bring up a topic that I haven’t seen in a while and am curious about and I get this.
You didn’t have to post to it if it was so tiring, you know. Jesus. I’m just trying to look for information, and trying to search on this subject yesterday was akin to finding a unicorn.
jarbaby
No. Because if prostitution were legal and a recognized mainstream profession, what would be the problem?
What if you were a life long vegan and the local slaughterhouse were hiring?
Wring, I understand that there are a vast number of people forced into prostitution, and that’s something that needs to be curbed. However vast does not mean all. And because some people are forced into it, that means all must be restricted from doing it regardless of whether they want to or not?
Surely you believe some women and men WANT to be prostitutes?
jarbaby
Good god jarbaby - learn to take a joke. Didn’t the big grin signify anything to you? Touchy, touchy. And “I’m tired… so very tired…” is hardly a serious comment. I was merely saluting my as-ever comrade-in-arms in this debate, wring.
Sheesh.
pan
Then exempt prostitution from the law. Given our society, I would be very surprised if currently legal jobs like stripping and phone sex work aren’t already exempted from the welfare requirements.
kabbes
- Let’s leave aside elasticity for the moment. You make a very good point (one I hadn’t thought of, but no, I wasn’t being disingenuous - I got a D+ in microeconomics ;)), but I don’t think either of us are going to be able to find studies of the elasticity of prostitution demand. If you do, I’ll certainly concede the point.
- Sure, brothels already exist. However, were they legal, more would exist, introducing more competition to streetwalkers. Further, I forgot to dispute your earlier point that streetwalkers will remain on the street because they wouldn’t be able to afford to move into brothels.
That’s not how it works in Nevada. There, the madam or whoever bears the cost of the brothel and its upkeep, and recoups that through fees from the hookers. So, the hooker doesn’t need up-front money to join a brothel. - If illegal streetwalkers compete with legal brothels on cost, streetwalking becomes less lucrative, giving streetwalkers less incentive to get into the business and, perhaps more importantly, giving pimps and sexual slavetraders less incentive to force women into the business. They’ll move into more honest fields like drugs and armed robbery.
- Further, your and wring’s position seems to be that legalization won’t stop the admitted horrors currently associated with prostitution. Even conceding this point (which I don’t - I think it will lessen them to at least some extent), so what? What has that got to do with the issue of whether women, if they so choose, should have the right to sell sex for profit? What has that got to do with the issue of whether the government should be legislating morality? And what has that got to do with the fact that whatever hookers who manage to get into a legal, heavily regulated brothel will have a better and safer life than they have now?
Just because legalization doesn’t solve all the problems doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done. Hell, welfare doesn’t solve all the problems of the poor, and in fact in some instances causes additional problems. Should we eliminate it?
Sua
Well I apologize kabbes. To me the big grin signified a little knowing glance between you and wring about how silly I am to bring it up. I’m sorry if I got defensive.
The fact is that admittedly I don’t have my position 100% worked out with all the data on this subject and I started this thread to learn more about it and other people’s thoughts on it, and to have it shot down was sort of deflating.
carry on.
jarbaby
First of all, if I may speak temporarily for kabbes the ‘tired, so tired’ isn’t directed at you for starting a thread, it’s just going through it again. And, I almost didn’t post again, just 'cause well, sometimes you get tired of saying the same thing over and over
I suspect that you aren’t really going to contend that should the government declare prostitution legal tomorrow, the next day everyone would have totally different opinions on it, right? And, frankly I do see a very real and important difference between telling a person who is a vegen they must work at a slaughterhouse or risk loosing benefits vs. telling some one they must have sex with strangers for money. The former, while it may be a repugnant job, is still legal. the latter is still (even where prositution is legal) a crime.
Regarding the numbers in prostitution - there’s no way to document numbers. Yes, vast does not mean all. But vast is still a problem, n’est ce pas? Do I think that it’s remotely possible that there are some people that exist who are in prositution completely voluntarily and think it was a great choice? well of course there are. Stoid’s step mom for one. But the ‘vast’ numbers do seem to be there through less than completely voluntary methods. (trafficing numbers cited already plus drug addicts) and you’ll note, that even where prostitution is legal, they still have a problem with people being forced into the trade.
wring, I do not believe that making prostitution legal will change everyone’s minds about it immediately. My initial point is that legalizing it is one step down the road to not finding it repugnant.
I can’t live in a dream world where I think everyone is only having sex with people they love in committed relationships and that it’s always a wonderful, intimate, romantic coupling. Plenty of women and men have sex with people four hours after they meet them and then never speak to them again. It’s called “a frat party”
I just don’t understand why I can’t get $100 for doing it.
jarbaby
OK - all friends again. Hurrah.
Sua - it sounds as though you want to move onto talking about some of the juicier aspects of the debate - namely the Right to Legislate Morality (I think that is going to need a TLA - so RLM it is). Believe me, I’m looking forward to that bit as much as you are. But I’m not sure we’re done with the relative levels of streetwalkers and brothels yet.
What you have to remember about prosititution (and the reason you can’t think of it as just another business) is that it attracts desperate people in desperate situations. The decision to sell oneself is exceedingly rarely a sober, rational career choice. Furthermore the participants will often tell themselves that it is for a short time only. As such the chances are that a new prostitute will not march into the local brothel and sign up for a season - they’ll attempt to turn a few tricks to get enough rent money for the week. Still more will not want to cede money to a brothel.
But the most crucial point of all is that you are talking about heavily regulating and licencing brothels. But where are the women who are deemed unfit for the brothel going to go? Just give up on the dream? No - they’re going to go straight out onto the streets to attempt to attract such money as they can that way.
And the more you try to “clean up” prostitution by regulating in this way, the more you’re going to do no good. A woman who decides to be a prostitute now is going to decide to be one in the legalised brothel scenario - this kind of regulation will fix nothing.
In regards to your reply to my point that wring resurrected from the previous thread (phew!) - the issue is not so much about whether the law can patch over such problems, but about showing that prostitution is not as other jobs. Many people have real social, moral and ethical* problems with prostitution that renders the usual arguments against industry regulation inappropriate. But we’ll get onto that proper when we enter the RLM phase of the debate.
In the meantime I’m looking for recognition that legalisation won’t significantly alter the demographic makeup of those currently practicing prostitution. In particular, many streetwalkers will remain streetwalkers and those coerced into the business will still be coerced into the business.
Once we’ve come to some agreement about that, I can discuss why I think that legalisation will actually make things worse.
Then maybe we can talk RLM.
pan - attempting to unashamedly dictate the parameters of this debate.
*unless moral and ethical are the same thing. But these things always work better in threes.
When scanning through those links wring provided, I realised that it was elucidator not obfusicatist that made that prostitution = abstracted rape point I referred to earlier.
pan
ps I also read something from dal_timgar - whatever happened to that guy? Talk about your one-trick ponies!
My wild-assed guess is, way, WAY back when, prostitution became looked down upon in genteel society (and was never made widely legal) out of a perhaps misplaced fear that it would unravel the societal foundation of family.
If I guy can get some of the good stuff any time he wants, why should he get married? That type of thing. (Keep in mind that casual sex, while definitely going on hundreds of years ago, was considerably more frowned upon.)
Doesn’t give much credit to us menfolk, does it?
[aside]I’m picturing non-traditional people in prostitution roles, once it is legitimized. Picture a small, mousy, balding, insurance-agent looking guy on some game show. The host asks him what he does, and in his geeky little voice, the guy says, “I’m a pimp, Bob.”
Or, what if the government runs it? Picture the automated complaint line.
“If your prostitute did not get her freak on to your satisfaction, press 1. If she failed to back that ass up, press 2.” [/aside]