I know this topic has come up before, but it seems like it’s been a few years, and the sociopolitical climate has changed.
Cannabis is now legal and freely available in several states. The apocalypse has not ensued. I know prostitution is orders of magnitude more complex – starting with the fact that the “product” is a living, sentient person, not a dead plant – but ISTM a state could find ways to regulate the practice so sex workers could safely and of their own free will make a living.
(Full disclosure, if it’s relevant – my wife and are ex-swingers, reluctant to get back into that scene but sort of jonesing for a bi-gal to play with. It’s really hard to connect with one and establish that kind of relationship the old fashioned way, so we’ve thrown around the idea of hiring someone for a night. Problem is, there’s no good, legal way to find one.)
So, is this a realistic scenario? A conversation worthy of GD? What factors make it more or less likely to happen in our lifetimes?
I think it would be more apt to ask why other drugs are still illegal. That’s a much better comparison to weed. Prostitution inherently involves another human being, with all the complications that entails. Ultimately, just taking drugs doesn’t directly impact anyone else.
Sex work has been legal in New Zealand since 2003. Full decriminalization. Sex workers are safer, have more autonomy, are better protected.
It wasn’t complex. The legislation is actually quite simple, and hasn’t caused any significant drama.
In the United States?
Not as it exists right now.
Because its all about “keeping women in their place.” Nevada, where sex work is legal, also has one of the worst models you could possibly have, putting all the power in the hands of a small number of brothel keepers. And if sex work ever would be legal, it would be via a patchwork of local and possibly state-wide initiatives that are likely to adopt the Nordic model as opposed to the framework that we have here in NZ. The Nordic model is rubbish, it isn’t evidence based, and has been found in many cases to make it even more dangerous for sex workers.
We got the laws changed here because sex workers and feminist allies fought for it. And the legislation reflected that, with a strong emphasis on the evidence and with significant input from sex workers themselves.
In America it would be unlikely sex workers would be able to contribute much to the conversation. They are pretty much treated like trash by society in general.
I tried to link to some youtube videos about “prostitution stings” to demonstrate the general moral panic and “glee” that you see from news reporters, the cops, that they get when the arrest sex workers. But unfortunately youtube links are still kinda broken, but a search will find you plenty.
Prostitution limited to the individuals involved is very difficult and costly to ban, so the what were talking about is solicitation of prostitution. That would involve advertising services and companies offering facilities and taking a portion of the money exchanges. Commercialized prostitution of that kind shouldn’t simply be decriminalized, it should be regulated to prevent abuse of the participants. We’ve seen a very slow process sometimes in legalization of marijuana as legislators are reluctant to pass the regulatory laws needed, and they’re all too often incompetent to do so.
We had legal ‘indoor’ prostitution here in Rhode Island for a little while. This was the result of our courts striking down part of a prostitution law. It manifested in a bit more of existing and largely uncontrolled practices of people meeting and engaging in sexual activities privately, and the use of private rooms at strip clubs. The loop hole was eventually closed, strip clubs pretend private rooms aren’t used for outlawed sexual activity, and not much else change.
Though I find prostitution personally distasteful, I tend to agree. One problem is that no one wants a brothel anywhere near their neighborhood, so where to allow them and under what circumstances is a big problem. Another problem is political. Any politician supporting legalization is going to be demonized by the opposition and will probably be voted out of office.
That is a good question! I think you’re right. An online or telephone accessible service would be infinitely more discreet for both the customer and the provider.
Substantial evidence in favour of their positions are available at the links. Decriminalization has shown to be effective in giving sex workers autonomy, and better protection. And our experiences here show that sex workers are much more likely to go to the police if they have been assaulted. The NZ police work hand in hand with the Aotearoa New Zealand Sex Workers’ Collective on policies like this:
Sex workers can even sue their employer for sexual harrassment: and win.
Our framework allows sex workers to work in a brothel. The brothel owner must have a operators licence and is required to comply with relevant legislation. Sex workers can also work in a “sex-worker-owned brothel” with up to four other sex workers, and as long as there “isn’t a boss”, and each worker is in control of their own income, they don’t need an operator’s licence. And of course, sex workers are free to work on their own.
I suspect when you say that “Commercialized prostitution of that kind shouldn’t simply be decriminalized”, that you are thinking in terms of the sort of framework we have here. But what we have here is decriminalization. The distinction:
If you are in favour of legalizing sex work, that is a position that isn’t supported by any of the major human rights organizations.
They still exist here, and I don’t think they will ever go away. Again it comes down to autonomy: some sex workers prefer to “come into work” as opposed to “managing everything themselves.” We have the same issues here of people “not wanting a brothel in the neighbourhood.” This is typically managed at the City Council level, with each council having their own bylaws that decide where a brothel can be situated. (This mainly impacts brothels, while small owner operated brothels and independent sex workers are more likely to be affected by rules governing “working from home.”)
IMO, the issue right now is not prostitution but sex trafficking and states would find it difficult PR to promote the former while cracking down on the other.
Does decriminalization (as opposed to legalization) allow the government to establish registration and fees? Because a big part of the appeal of making cannabis legal here in the US is that it generates serious revenue for the states, and I imagine that would have to be part of the deal for sex work, too.
…the goal of decriminalization here was to establish a framework to allow sex workers to work safely and to allow them to work with dignity. It prioritised protection and basic human rights.
So this:
Just doesn’t compute for me. I just can’t imagine it. It makes my brain explode.
There honestly couldn’t be a worse motivation for decriminalizing sex work. It would put all the power in the hands of people who have no interest in human rights, but just want to make a profit. It would be dangerously exploitative. No good would ever come of this.
Just…no. Nope. Just a great big NOPE.
And the answer to your question is no, outside of the normal tax regime sex workers don’t have to register, they don’t have to pay fees. If you want to do independent sex work, as long as you are of age, are not being coerced, and follow the health and safety regulations about safe sex, you can start working just like any other independent contractor. No registration, no fees, no tracking, no compulsory health tests. Its just work, like any other job.
The only registration fees is if you apply for an Operators Certificate, which costs $250.
With weed, it’s not so much a motivation as a justification. “We’re letting people buy what they’re already buying, taking shady operators out of the equation, and by the way taking in millions to help offset deficits.”
Of course, when the “product” is living people and not dead plants, I can see where the motivations and interests get a lot more complex.
…lets be honest here though. When people say “shady elements” (I’m not talking about you) what they really mean is “black people.” Because:
Its a billion dollar market dominated by white people. While millions of black people are still being locked up in the never-ending “war on drugs.”
Of course, it’s an easy sell. As long as you ignore what is really going on.
“Shady elements” wouldn’t go away. Because “both sides” will be shady, except one side would have graduated from Harvard and be wearing a shiny suit.
I can’t say this enough: listen to sex workers. If they aren’t allowed to have a voice and to drive the direction of relevant legislation, then it will be a disaster.
