Some feminists (for example women involved in union efforts for prostitutes in San Francisco during the 70’s and 80’s) believed that prostitution may not be so degrading for women, but rather a matter of choice. Of course, pimps, underage, lack of insurance and health care choices, and fair taxation for services were also on the table here.
The comment about women being the main group against prostitution, because it cashes in their economic bargaining chip- with sex for married status- is a good point, but is basically saying that married women are socially acceptable prostitutes.
And does anyone remember that Italian situation, years back, where wives were demanding pay for sex and services from their husbands? Perhaps, marrying does not offer as much clout to women as does keeping it independent and coarsely economic.
Well I support banning abortion.
Legalizing prostitution would encourage more people to take such jobs by legitimizing it instead of honest jobs which may pay less.
Now I’m confused. According to that map, prostitution is illegal in Thailand. Isn’t Thailand one of the big destinations for “sex tourism”?
I clearly have something to say about this. 
Society doesn’t want it to be legal. Women don’t want their husbands or boyfriends paying for sex, people don’t want to deal with the higher STD rates, there’s a lot of crime in prostitution, etc. A lot of hookers have drug issues, pimps, or started underage. Even a call girl/escort has an agency.
There’s something about sexual exploitation that’s just wrong to us.
I think you’re reversing cause and effect. There was a lot of crime in booze when it was illegal.
That’s the problem I see with it. In western society, a person is considered to have an absolute right to refuse sex - or remove consent for sex - at any time, for any reason. This is at odds with the idea of having a legal obligation to have sex with someone.
Sure, and there still is crime in money.
But if you legalize prostitution, it won’t take away the pimped out hookers. It just means that more girls will have the opportunity to be the oxymoronic “classy escort” and police will stop busting pimps and sex trades.
Maybe you are being a little whorephobic–not to see honesty in sex work. Just look at the supply and demand aspects. How much work do you think must go into dealing with sexual fantasies and desires? What with social stigma and safe working conditions running against the supply side, while the demand side goes along mostly unapologetic.
Since it is not illegal in all countries, I wonder if legality reclassifies prostitution as honest work?
Is being a used car salesman who sells lemons “honest work”?
Sir, I think you are comparing apples and lemons. Selling bad used cars is not the oldest profession in the world? A used car salesman is perhaps telling a lie about the condition of his product. Where is the lie in prostitution? Most buyers probably know exactly what they are getting, when they go out to solicit this particular product.
No, that’s actually a fairly recent argument. Which can be shown by the fact that traditionally it’s the “lady” who is prosecuted rather than her exploiter (if she has one). Traditional justifications had more to do with bourgeois notions of family and home, and there was often a racial component as well - see Elizabeth Bernstein’s Temporarily Yours and Laura Agustín’s Sex at the Margins for more thorough discussion of this.
That argument came later, and has been used to justify both criminalisation and legalisation. It’s actually not really accurate though. In much of the developed world (and even some Global South countries) sex workers have very low rates of HIV/STI because they are careful to protect themselves; the exceptions in these countries are usually injecting drug users and often it’s the drug use rather than sex work that leads to their infection.
Criminalisation of sex work is actually widely recognised in the health sector as a risk factor for HIV/AIDS. Most of the global health actors, from the WHO to UNAIDS to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health and beyond, support decriminalisation for that reason.
As I understand it, the Thai authorities pretty much turn a blind eye as long as the sex worker is overage. Which makes sense, really, given the realities they’re operating under. Why divert police attention to consenting adults when you’ve got so many paedophile tourists to worry about?
That’s far from universally true; many escorts operate independently (as indeed do many street workers). Criminalisation actually makes it harder for them to do so - they are more likely to need a middleman for things like physical protection (since they can’t go to the police if attacked), bail and protection money, arranging contact with clients and looking out for police. If you want to promote sex workers’ ability to work for themselves, decriminalise their work and give them labour rights.
I believe that a major factor behind prostitution being illegal is that it is in essence a price support system for access to feminine sex. You see behaviors of that kind all over the world (such as female genital mutilation; FGM designed to destroy female sexual pleasure is almost universally imposed by women on younger girls, not by men), and even in the animal kingdom. The scarcer the supply of willing women is, the more women can demand in return for sex (whether it’s gifts they demand, or something less tangible like love and devotion). I’ve never seen a study, but I strongly suspect that women who have no problem with engaging with sex just for fun are also much less likely to care about suppressing prostitution. I also suspect you’ll see less opposition among career minded women, financially independent women. As opposed to traditional women, who when you strip away the pretty language treat sex as a product they are selling*; the traditional no-sex-before-marriage setup basically differs from prostitution in that in one case you are renting, in the other you are buying.
*Or that the men who control them are selling; there’s a reason why traditional marriage is sometimes likened to a father selling his daughter to the husband
The main reason is probably (like said before) that no one wants to be the posterpolitician (I’m not gonna say ‘child’, now am I) on this issue. Prostitution (and visiting prostitutes) is still not done in our current societies; even the ones that have legalized.
This also generates problems for the actual process of legalistion. The whole infrastructure behind prostution/sexclubs is (still) closely connected to criminal organizations and the fact that society (and politicians) does not like prostitution, means that this doesn’t really change. They just get charged taxes.
In countries that have legalized prostitution there are still plenty of ‘guardian angels’ that get rich because of the girls’ efforts. Unless you’re a local, it is very difficult to get started in the business by yourself. The only way to stop this is for government to play a bigger role, but there is little political will there. It’s easier to just close a club or a window street once in a while (especially when new apartments need to be built). Still, this limited control and taxation is better than no control at all, but it gives non-legalized enough reason to keep it illegal at their end.
Thank you for correcting a foreigner, that does not know your language well.
Shaw said it well almost a century ago: Sexual morality is the trade unionism of the married.
You could say the same thing about labor (you have an absolute right to refuse to do labor at any time for any reason. Forcing someone to work against their will is slavery), yet we have no problem with people contracting for labor.
The legal system has a really good way of enforcing contracts when people don’t want to do what they contracted to do, without resorting to rape or slavery: the person who breaks the contract has to pay damages for not upholding their end. So, under the same basic principle, a legal prostitute can still refuse to have sex. She’s obligated to fulfill the contract or pay damages. She just can’t keep the money and refuse to have sex.
Pretty much every store or restaurant I’ve ever been in has a sign saying something to the effect of “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”. Why do you think that a sex worker wouldn’t have the same right?
I think a large part of it is because those who wish to legalize prostitution think so more along the lines of libertarian political thought instead of an intense desire to actually have legal brothels in the community. Those opposed will fight tooth and nail.
It is one thing over a few drinks to have an intellectual discussion about freedom of contract, and why can you give it away but not sell it, etc., but the next day we don’t organize a PAC and demand that the legislature change the law. Plus, deep down it is sad to see these women forced to work in those environments (hell, I feel bad for strippers) and when it comes down to it, we have other things to worry about.
The Repeal Prostitution Laws bill gets saved for another day just like changing the light bulb in the far corner of the attic. You always mean to do it, but never will.
I know what you mean. When I was younger, I attended a national feminist conference, and a group of prostitutes arrived; having organized a effort to improve their own legal status and quality of life.
I was happy to see their efforts, and could fully understand their desire to unify with feminist causes.
At the same time, I was shocked to see many of the so called feminist sisters recoil from these women. I had idealized feminism at the time, and did not realize- until then- how intolerant, condescending and puritanical even the progressive feminists could be on this issue.