I agree with you on everything except this, for a number of reasons:
In jurisdictions with mandatory testing, sex workers who don’t want to be tested don’t stop working, they simply work outside the legal system. You then continue to have an illegal sex industry, and the workers in that industry face all the dangers that illegal sex workers everywhere face.
Sex workers in these jurisdictions have complained that mandatory testing can remove clients’ incentive to use condoms. Clients think the sex worker must be “clean” if he or she is allowed to work - and since it’s often only their own risk of infection that they’re concerned with, they then don’t think they need to use a condom and they pressure the sex worker to allow them do without it.
Mandatory testing stigmatises sex workers as carriers of disease, even though (as I discussed earlier) they often have low prevalence rates, and are often at greater risk of receiving an infection from a client than transmitting one *to * a client (yet clients are never subject to mandatory testing!)
Mandatory testing is also unreliable, since a person can test negative for a period of time after a new infection.
Finally, the cost involved in mandatory testing simply isn’t justified by the available evidence on its effectiveness. UNAIDS has gone as far as to say there is no public health justification for it. The WHO also supports making testing voluntary. The amount of money it costs could be put to better use in real preventive measures.
I am sure that negative stereotyping and discrimination of transgender people is a whole new thread. Just read statistics about the rising numbers of assaults, rapes, murders, and general hate crimes- committed against them.
In fact, I have read about a legal defense tactic that some of their perpetrators use- to try and get away with the crime–that they do it in a panic, after discovering the wrong gender. Sorry to way lay the thread, I was just responding to the post.
I have no idea. Such a thing won’t be settled until someone sues, of course. As I said upthread, at the moment it’s simply a thought exercise. A “what if”.
I think this is a bit of a blind alley re: the discrimination bit. There are plenty of services where it’s possible to discriminate without Discriminating. I think Whynot’s analogy of being a nurse and being able to refuse to work in an environment where she doesn’t feel safe, but a rat would be smelt if that happened to be the house of every black client is a good one. There are a lot of industries where it’s possible for someone to discriminate without it being an overt “I refuse to serve you” but industry regulation or just market forces can make that hard.
For example, I’m a self-employed builder but I’m deeply racist and refuse to work in the house of anyone who isn’t white. I can’t necessarily tell who is what race on the phone so I turn up to give my quote and if it’s one of “those folks” I don’t do the work because I’m too busy, or I’ll get back to you, or it’s not my speciality or insert another excuse here. Fine, my choice, and good luck trying to prove that it’s racial discrimination. However in doing this I wouldn’t be able to work as a subcontractor (because I can’t choose my clients), I can’t get good word of mouth because I’m massively reducing my client base, and it makes me hard to be part of associations or trade organisations that make clear they don’t discriminate and comply with equality law.
To extend this to hypothetical legalisation/regulation, you ask a racial minority turn up to a brothel and ask for a girl and she refuses for unclear reasons - bang, good case for discrimination, and if the brothel is run as a legitimate business (and why wouldn’t it be in this scenario) it lays itself open for a nice lawsuit, or just bad word of mouth. Easy way around this is the manager establishes if anything is off limits to a particular sex worker, but if they say “I won’t do non-white guys” I’d probably not employ them as they’ve just limited their commercial utility.
This door works the other way - someone may specialise in working with disabled clients and be happy to do so. As BSweet69 says, being a sex worker is not comparable to choosing to have sex with someone and then happening to get some money at the end, it’s more like an entertainment service and needs to be seen in that context. I read an article that was looking at the recognised good practice of brothels in NZ (where it’s legal) and they cited things like asking the client to have a shower before sex, being clear on limits for things beforehand, a worker can refuse to see someone she doesn’t feel safe with, and generally the establishment can refuse service to someone who they think are drunk/high/threatening the same as most bars/restaurants can. The women working in these places aren’t expecting to have great sexual experiences with their clients, they just want to be safe, feel supported and not have to fuck smelly/dirty men. Them being old/unattractive comes with the territory.
The distinction between alcohol and marijuana is not purely a matter of social convention. Rather, one argument is that alcoholic beverages are often consumed for their flavor, whereas the only non-medicinal purpose behind smoking marijuana is to get high. That’s why there are wine-tasting parties, for example – because people want to enjoy the flavor of these beverages and their purpose is not to get hammered.
Now, I’m not trying to argue for or against the legalization of either alcohol or marijuana. That would obviously be grist for another thread’s mill. Rather, the point is that we shouldn’t be quick to assume that these are purely matters of shallow social convention.
Reading Illuminatiprimus’ response, I’m a bit surprised I must say. It’s funny how most actual punters don’t see being refused as a problem at all. It might sting for a second, but that’s easily prefered over te unavoidable average ‘date’ that is the alternative. In the scene I’m part of, there’s plenty of girls who have some personal ‘rules’ on not being with guys over 60, under 30, not of the same nationality, race etc. In many cases they will give you another reason - they will rarely say: you’re too fat - but when talking to other men they will often have little problem in explaining their limits. I’ve talked with quite a few girls who told me they don’t ‘do’ too hairy, fat, over 60, turkish guys, etc. Since I’m none of these, it doesn’t affect me.
I don’t really - from my experience - agree with equating prostitution with the ‘entertainment industry’; it is more personal than that. This may have to do with the scene in Europe, where there are a lot of Eastern European girls that move to Germany or Holland for the job. These girls are young and besides the other girls and the clients, they have few contacts. So besides the sex, you quickly get to the situation where the girls are also spending a lot of time with the guys they like (or that are regulars). Come to think of it, the term profesional is usually used in a negative manner between guys.
But all this may have to do with the clubs I visit. Since there are many girls and many guys, punters that are turned down have plenty other options and (popular) girls can afford to be picky. I’ve seen it happen that a (very!) beautiful girl, was really cherrypicking her clients and turned down the majority of guys coming up to her. This doesn’t have to be about looks perse, maybe she was just waiting for the guys who spend a lot (extras, longer dates). In the end, it will just mean she’ll make less. For most girls the last paragraph of Illuminatiprimus’ paragraph rings true: old/unattractive guys are part of the job. That doesn’t mean there aren’t differences in ‘service’ between the 25 year old they really like and the 68 year old with a beergut…at least for some girls.
To date I haven’t spoken to any punter that has complained about thee freedom the girls have in deciding which clients to take on…no matter what they base this on. I’ve talked to a black guy who complained about girls assuming he’d be too big (which he claimed wasn’t true), but that ws more about the ‘assumption’ bit.
Thanks, Pagan White Woman. I’m an Atheist. Are you really a Pagan? We can discuss that on another thread.
To answer your thoughtful question, all businesses have the right to refuse service to people who do not follow the rules of the establishment. If a jerk shows up in my haircutting chair, I cut his hair, but the next time he tries to rebook I simply am too busy to see him. I think the same rules should apply to prostitution as haircutting or massage.
I don’t have to like someone to take their money, but in such an intimate environment, the client should seek a provider who DOES like him. Wouldn’t that make sense as a consumer? I prefer to have a hairdresser who “likes” me. If I was paying for sex, I would want to think the person was at least not repulsed. So, part of the responsibility lies in the hands of the consumer.
As a prostitute, your job is to facilitate the comfort and release of the gent in your presence. I am personally very non-judgmental. Those guys are paying me to be pretty, not the other way around. I really don’t care what a gent looks like. I want him to be happy and go home safe.
In McDonalds - No shirt, no shoes, no service.
At my apartment - No manners, bad personal hygiene, no service.
Making abortion legal did stop the alleyway abortions, although I am sure somewhere someone is doing illegal abortions.
IMHumbleO…There will always be a dark undercurrent of almost every business. By testing and regulating, you can greatly reduce the occurrence. Most girls…MOST…would prefer mandatory testing and paying taxes as opposed to being shunned by society.
Yes, there will always be some sick, sad person who will do it anyway. Yes, there will be men who will use these women. But if we shine the light on them, it will be more difficult for them to hide.
Even Jesus said there will always be poor people. I am trying to think of ways to reduce the amount of those people. You can never truly eliminate misery, but if you aren’t working towards that ultimate goal, you will certainly never reach it.
I absolutely cherry-pick my clients. You bet. I charge more than the average girl. I have a certain type of gent I am looking for.
If I were selling a certain type of house, I would show it to prospective buyers who had passed the minimum financials. Right?
Cherry-picking my clients is brilliant business. In no way do I sell hamburgers cheap to all comers. Oh hell no. If you want hamburger sex, see somebody else. I’m steak and lobster.
Well, I can only go on the experiences I had, but really I don’t think the model of business I was in was really conducive to me saying “sorry you’re not my type”.
One was me being an escort through an agency meaning that I turned up to them and did what they asked me to. If I’d turned up and said “yeah, you’re not my type, sorry” then I wouldn’t have got any more work. Similarly in the brothel you’re sitting in that waiting room for hours waiting for a client to come in and choose someone, and you hope it’s you as you only get paid per client. If you start being picky about who you see you don’t get paid, plus your worth as an asset to the establishment is minimal.
If I’d been working for myself as an escort that would probably be different, I could of course exercise my right to discriminate in clients, but as BSweet69 says, you’re the one paid to be pretty, not them. In the instances where I’ve bought sex myself, I don’t want to have to consider whether I’m going to meet the expectations of the prostitute. It would be a bit like going to a nice restaurant to treat yourself to a nice meal and the chef coming out and saying he’ll cook for you if you can create something he approves of first to show you’re worth it.
polar bear - IIRC you mainly see girls in a fairly large brothel setting where there is a large availability of clients and workers, so I think your experience of the dynamic of the business is probably different to mine.
If abortion was made “legal” only under limited circumstances then you can bet it would still be done illegally under others.
That’s a false dichotomy. Being “shunned by society” is neither the only alternative to mandatory testing, nor does mandatory testing prevent shunning - look at Nevada, where legal brothel workers are still highly stigmatised.
That’s simply not borne out by the reality in jurisdictions that have “legalised” prostitution subject to strict regulations such as mandatory testing. Those places still have a huge illegal industry - Nevada; Victoria, Australia; Greece, to name just a few.
As you yourself said - “Prostitution being illegal is a pretty small deterrent.” That goes for sex workers who can’t or don’t want to meet the conditions of legalisation just as much as it does where there is no legalisation.
Decriminalising the sex industry, and seeking to ensure that all sex workers have maximum control over their working conditions, is a better way to go about that - far preferable to giving the right to work legally to only a privileged few and subjecting everyone else to the dangers of working underground and without the protection of the law.
BSweet69: My point. Decriminalize/legalize and regulate. I don’t see how you get “privileged few” out of any of my statements. Indeed, it should not be a privilege to have basic health care for someone in the sex industry. It should be a norm at least. I believe it should be absolutely shocking and of rare truth that a sex worker feels they don’t need or deserve to be regularly tested. If for no other reason than personal self worth and preservation, and possibly even out of concern for the person the sex worker is having sex with!
Well, to answer that, I think you first must answer why someone would desire sex with another person rather than a machine or just solo. One of the answers is companionship, and people have a problem with selling even temporary companionship. I mean, paying someone to pretend to be your friend is not considered legitimate work, either.
The other thing I’ve seen is fulfilling a fantasy that you feel uncomfortable sharing with someone who is actually close to you. Well, if you’re ashamed of that fantasy, does it not makes sense that you’d also be ashamed of the person who indulges that fantasy for you? In other words, the distaste towards prostitutes is partly the same as the distaste towards many sexual fantasies that you yourself don’t have.
Then there’s how much of our social lives are bent around sex, and how prostitution seems to take an end run around all the game. It makes that people of both genders would be miffed around what seems like cheating. Heck, there are several people who want to have sex with someone else, but absolutely do not want to do so with a prostitute. Therefore it’s not just about having fulfilling some inherent desire.
These are just my thoughts on the issue. I honestly don’t know if prostitution should be legal. I know that I find the idea of visiting one distasteful.
To address the OP, I think it’s a combination of:
[ul]
[li]the western world’s puritanical yet frequently hypocritical attitude towards sexuality — the U.S. has no shortage of draconian sex laws, and I’m convinced the same-sex marriage opposition has little to do with “protecting marriage” so much as “revulsion of butt-sex.”)[/li][li]well-meaning concern for the welfare of women who are either legitimately victims or are perceived as such.[/li][li]the stigma of these factors create is enough of a political death-wish that most legislators/politicians won’t touch it with a 10-foot pole (except for ol’ Ron Paul, kind of).[/li][/ul]
Personally, while I think we ought be able to do what we want to with our bodies so long as it’s not hurting anyone; the primary deciding factor for me is the welfare of the people who are engaging in it. Stories of women who are sold into sex slavery or women who are abused and treated like shit are the things that give me the most pause when figuring out how I feel on the matter. That’s why I find the first-hand accounts by BSweet69 and Illuminatiprimus so valuable.
In addition to their contributions, I strongly recommend another ex-sex-worker Maggie McNeill, “The Honest Courtesan” who is a prolific and really intelligent writer on the subject. There was also a an interesting (and frequently frustrating) Intelligence Squared debate on whether “It’s Wrong to Pay for Sex.” A firsthand account of a “John” provided the basis for an interesting graphic novel Paying for It.
Thanks, Pagan White Woman. I’m an Atheist. Are you really a Pagan? We can discuss that on another thread.