Why is prostitution so wrong?

Great Debates
41

Frankly if an adult makes an informed, non-coerced
decision to exchange sexual acts for money, I don’t have a problem with it. However, if you view Stoid’s thread you’ll see that I and a bunch of other Doper’s believe that prostitutes are often forced into sex work.

I believe that legalisation would remove many of the problems faced by prostitutes.

 Regarding the Op-do you have a site that johns go unpunished so often? I would say that opposite is likely true. The Philadelphia phone book has plenty of listings for businesses that are clearly fronts for prostitution. Most of the ads in the 2001 edition are unchanged from the first phone book I received when I moved to my appartment 3 years ago. 3 years is plenty of time to raid the Oriental Express spa. My guess is that the cops prefer to let prostitutes continue to work in exchange for free services.

Johns on the other hand can only offer a bribe. Accepting a bribe leaves evidence and draws a harsher penalty if punished.

42

When johns are caught by police in San Francisco they have to attend a day of “John School,” a venture that was started by a former prostitue named Norma Hotaling. While they are in the school, the johns hear “war stories” from streetwalkers, about their (the prostitutes’) drug habits, physical abuse from customers and pimps, the dangerous situations streetwalking brings, STDs, and so forth. (Please realize I’m not making a value judgement about this program, but am just repeating what I saw on a tv program about it a year or so ago). The John School serves as a model for similar programs in other cities, but I don’t know which ones and couldn’t find an online cite.

However, the program has come under fire from organized sex workers’ groups who feel that the john school concentrates too much on castigating the johns and does not do anything to help the prostitutes themselves get job training, drug therapy, and other the forms of counseling and help they so badly need to get out of the game and move on if they want to. And I’m tempted to agree with this point of view. If the john school promoters think they can shame prostitution to its grave, they are greatly mistaken.

43

I think the Netherlands is a prime example of legalized and regulated prostitution that works. Law from those who would exploit them protects the women.

In Asia, prostitution is not legal anywhere. It is just overlooked by law enforcement. Unfortunately, the lack of interest from the police and the resulting ease of trade in this business have created a market in women. Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong are some of the countries “importing” women. Thailand, China, Philippines and Indonesia are some of the countries “exporting” women. Local organized crime groups such as the Yakuza and Triads run it. In the exporting countries, the women are promised work abroad. They sign up and are sent to the importing country where they are met by local contacts that take away their passport and force them into prostitution. The passports are held until they have paid back an exorbitant amount, which the local pimp claims was their cost for bringing them over. To make matters worse, the amount owed gets padded for room and board costs, a vicious circle that can go on and on. If prostitution were to be legalized and regulated, it would take the business away from the mob and put in the hands of the women. The exploitation would end and the women could decide for themselves if they wish to get into the trade. Perhaps this is overly simplified, but I believe this is the only way to solve this situation. The problem is, in a country like Japan, the ruling LDP party has ties to the mob and they obviously do not want the current situation to change. So bribes from the mob, keeps the trade going. It is a sad situation.
In Japan, you occasionally see small articles about some nameless south Asian girl being found in a river. The victim is always nameless and never identified and the murderer is never found. One can only speculate what happened to her. Perhaps she tried to flee? Perhaps she was a victim of some sick sex game? However she died, the only people who will miss her is her family back in the Philippines or Thailand who wont even know if she’s dead or alive.

Legalized and regulated prostitution is the only way to protect women from being exploited.

44

Cite please? I asked before if anyone could demonstrate that areas that have legalized prostitution don’t continue to have a problem with unregulated prostitution as well.

Isn’t Coldfire from the Netherlands? how about it? Any problems associated with either the legal trade or problems with unregulated prostitution?

45

Since no one has come up with anything, how about:

this which explains that the Netherlands voted to make brothels legal to"police to focus their crackdowns on the employment of illegal immigrants and underaged girls".

and, as for those improved working conditions:

this describes the lifestyle of the sex worker in this burgeoning business, as “The woman waits for male buyers in a room with a window that looks onto the street. The room contains the bed where she has sex and also lives and sleeps. In some establishments two women share a kitchen, a room for eating, a bathroom and toilet” …In others, up to four women may use the same window room, share a single toilet, an improvised shower and no kitchen. “In some cases, the women receive one towel and two sheets for use throughout the week. On the average, the women work between 12 and 17 hours a day, receiving from 10 to 24 clients, at a usual charge of 50 florins for 15 minutes sessions”, … and “pay rent for the windows, about 150 florins (US$ 90) a day.”

That article also noted that many of the countries registered prostitutes are from other countries, notably Russia and other places where the economic conditions are abysmal.

The problems that women face are through poverty. Perhaps if the women involved had other means to earn a living, I would consider the choice to have been freely made. I don’t see it yet. (yes, I participated in Stoids thread, and apparently her step mom felt that her choice was freely made. The existance of a couple of people who made a free choice does not alter my opinion based on documented evidence that suggests that the great percentage of women involved in the sex trade are not making the choice freely. ).

this also quotes an official saying that the new law on brothels was needed “This proposal overturns the ban on brothels and replaces it with a ban on child prostitution and exploitation of involuntary prostitution” (emphasis mine), which seems to lend evidence to my position that to legalize and/or decriminalize prostitution will not mean that problems with the activity cease.

46

Let’s take a look at those reasons then shall we?

Nope. Legalisation per se would not affect this. Insisting that prostitutes use brothels would, but some are not going to be able to afford the infrastructure of (or will be otherwise unable to be involved with) a brothel. Basically, streetwalkers may well still fall foul of this point.

Whoo-ee! This still very much would be a problem. In fact, as I will pick up on in a sec, I think that this objectification is the most critical problem with prostitution.

Again, legalisation only fixes this problem if all prostitutes can be guaranteed to be moved to brothels. There is nothing to suggest that this would necessarily be so.

So you think that a legalised brothel wouldn’t lower the house values of a neighbourhood. Have you never heard of NIMBYism? I suppose that strip clubs don’t lower house values either?

Having dealt with that, I’ll go back to my biggest beef with prostitution - objectification.

Prostitution goes way beyond the feminist ideal of sexual liberation for a woman. Way beyond and, indeed, full circle. It suggests that a woman’s only worth is as a sexual object. “Come choose from our lovely selection of bodies. Ignore their humanity.”

Furthermore the suggestion is that we have physical power over another human being, so long as we have the money to get away with it. In the last of these threads (link in earlier post), this was referred to as “abstracted rape” and that seemed to me a pretty good description. If a woman wouldn’t sleep with a guy out of choice, but is doing so for money, then a form of coercion has taken place. Money is power, power leads to her sleeping with him. To the extent that money is abstracted from physical force, prostitution is abstracted from rape. But the connection is still there. To “Come choose from our lovely selection of bodies. Ignore their humanity” we can add “And don’t worry about what they think of you.”

I’m all for sexual freedom. But this isn’t just sexual freedom, it’s also about attitude. An attitude that stinks.

pan

47

Hmm - not sure that I really made it clear what my biggest objection to tracer’s response that everything would by fine and rosy if we just erected nice big brothels in non-residential areas is. Basically, that other societal problems would pretty much guarantee that streetwalking would still exist.[list=A][li]Some men will prefer to go to an out of the way backstreet to pick up a cheap whore than a more expensive brothel-prostitute[/li][li]Some women will act to feed this supply. In particular the current disenfranchised and coerced will be those who will still be trapped in this lifestyle.[/list=A][/li]
The above should be read in context of my specific comments on wring’s 4 points.

pan

48

still
think
it’s a

victimless

crime?

49

I have never been to the Netherlands, but since Amsterdam is a popular destination for college students I know several people who have visted there. Perhaps someone out there has had different experiences, but everyone I know who has seen the city’s red light district said that they were shocked by how unkempt and underfed the prostitutes looked. Their working and living conditions were clearly very poor.

What’s more, Eastern European women have been tricked or forced into prostitution in the Netherlands. The stories tend to be similar to those of Southeast Asian women forced into prostition in Japan. Women are promised good jobs in the West, but once they get there they find out that the job is prostitution and that they are deeply in debt.

Legalized prostitution has not protected these women. As I said in my earlier post, it may be possible to have a system of legalized prostitution in which the prostitutes are not exploited, but I do not believe that such a system currently exists anywhere on earth. Legalization is not a magic bullet.

50

Why is prostitution so wrong???

Simple - cause along time ago some “Holier Than Thou” faggot said so and someone believed him (or her) and made it against the law.

Personally - like many have said. “Legalize it, tax it. Control it”

The same arguement can be used for Drugs - Legalize them, tax them. Gawd, i can’t believe the Govn’t is so blind they can’t see the revenue potentials here. Not to mention the savings in Law Enforement.

51

And so NghtCrwlr demonstrates just how easy it is to ignore evidence presented in a Great Debate…

So you think legalized prostitution would be responsible for no societal ills then? No problems at all? Notes on how shitty a legalised prostitute’s life is are irrelevant. Thoughts on the consequences of objectification are “Holier than Thou faggot”-making. Psychological problems associated with self-esteem issues should be ignored. Just so long as the government can make a quick buck.

Have you an actual rebuttal to make, or is it just to be more self-aggrandising posturing?

pan

52

Legalisation isn’t a cure-all, but it sure is a step in the right direction.

From one of wring’s links

If they are being so exploited then why do they still work there? Obviously, the benefits of being a prostitute outweigh the negatives or else they would quit and do something else.

It’s hard to find evidence of benefits of legalised prostitution because there is such a small sample set. The only place where it is legal is in selected counties in Nevada (We are talking about America here, you can’t compare it with legalised prostitution in other countries because the socio-economic factors are much different … it would be like judging the working conditions in American factories by looking at the conditions of Tawainian (?) factories.)

When the industrial revolution hit, many workers were exploited by factory owners. Eventually, through a combination of natural processes, goverment intervention, and organised labour, the system smoothed out. In many countries today, factory workers are exploited, does that mean they will be exploited everywhere in the world?

53

All excellent points, Monocracy.

Certainly legalization is not a cure-all, but that is actually evidence to support it: exploitation, low wages, and bad working ocnditions are hardly the exclusive province of illegal businesses.

That anyone can try to argue that keeping prostitution a crime is in any way a benefit to ** anyone ** , * much less * to the prostitutes themselves, is beyond me.

Actually, I can think of one category of person who would prefer to keep prostitution illegal: pimps. Just like drug dealers want to keep drugs illegal. The minute it’s legal they lose control.

Legalize All Vice Now!

stoid

54

Hmm, I’m sure we’ve been through all this before. Still, here we go again.

Stoid - the trouble with that argument is that as a society we decide that some things are Bad. We wish to stop people from doing Bad things, so we make them illegal.

On balance, I believe that prostitution is a Bad Thing, for the reasons I’ve outlined in earlier posts. I believe that it is an activity that does harm those not actually engaged in it*. As such I don’t want it to be legal.

Saying “legalize it, since we can’t prevent it” is like saying “legalize theft, since we can’t prevent it” or “legalize insider dealing, since we can’t prevent it”. It is a position that is morally indefensible to me due to a “Bad Things must be Stopped” argument.

Ya see? You don’t see the problems inherent in prositution as an activity, so just want to address the surface problems associated with it being illegal.

I think that it is fundamentally wrong, so just addressing those second order affects isn’t good enough for me.

pan

[sub]* I note that when it comes to some other currently illegal activities, such as smoking pot, I do not think that society is harmed from the activity and so would wish to legalize it. I see Stoid’s argument in similar fashion and as such I understand it. I just don’t agree with it.[/sub]

55

**

Do you really need help understanding this? Ok. when exactly would the woman look for another job if the job she had she worked ‘21 days straight in 12 - 14 hours shifts’, had to split her earnings and still earn enough to live off of, and extra to carry her over until she found another job? But, no, you assume that the woman continues to do this 'cause the “benefits outweigh the negatives”. No, it couldn’t possibly be that she has no TIME or Energy or work related skills.

Rubbish. You (the others here, if not you personally) make the assertion that all will be better with legalization. I asked twice for some evidence to support that assertion, you fail to show anything at all, I submit what was it, SEVEN cites showing serious problems with prostitution, even where it’s legal, and you dismiss them as being irrelevant 'cause it’s not in the US, AND go on to proactively say that any evidence of problems in the US where it’s legal won’t be good, either because of the small sample size. And yet, you continue to believe that your arguement is supported. Wrong.

Submit some evidence please. Last chance.

56

One other point.

Why the assumption that if we legalize prostitution, the criminal element associated with it will suddenly wither away? When Nevada legalized gambling, it didn’t drive the criminal element out of gambling in Nevada. The great Las Vegas casinos were up to their necks in Mafia control and influence from Bugsy Seigel until the mid-80’s*.
Do you really think that saying, “All right, brothels are legal” will mean that pimps shrivel up and die? Or will they just have to pay Social Security taxes on the money they make for ensuring that neither the whores nor the johns get out of line? Does turning prostitution into a regulated industry mean that less prostitutes will be strung-out junkies selling themselves for another fix? Where do you get the logic for that conclusion? If they’re junkies willing to do anything for money, why aren’t they just going to sell themselves unregulated rather than go through drug/STD testing? As long as they’re willing to sell cheaper than regulated prostitution, they’ll have clients.

57

You are wrong, wring. The reason that they work 3 weeks straight is because of health and disease issues. The 12-14 hour shifts is just “on call” time. They only work when selected by a john. And seeing as prices average around $300 an hour (i’m not sure if that includes tip, which is 20% and up usually [which is also split with the ‘house’]), working one hour a day, they make over $3000 in the 3 week period, and their room and board for those 3 weeks was already taken care of. They usually take one or two weeks off between the working weeks. If they wanted to, they have plenty of opportunities to find a different occupation, so i restate that “the benefits of being a prostitute outweigh the negatives or else they would quit and do something else”.

Most information composed from many different sites, including this one.

Also, from http://www.sfbg.com/SFLife/34/30/lead.html

“I’ve been working in this brothel for the past week. The inspiration for this trip came from an acquaintance who told me she’d made $10,000 in two weeks.”

“These women weren’t forced into prostitution by poverty or drug addiction. Many of them chose whoring over straight work precisely because they found that prostitution was less exploitative than their straight jobs.” <-- !!!

And, from http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/1998/Oct-26-Mon-1998/news/8448140.html

“Brents [a sociologist studying legalised prostitution in Nevada] said most prostitutes they talked to said they work in brothels because the money is good. “A lot of them indicated the worst part of what they do is the stigma attached to it,” she said.”

It is hard to find evidence on some of the effects of Nevada’s legalised prostitution laws (such as the effects on street-walking). Two sociologists, Barbara Brents and Kate Hausbeck, have studied (or are studying) this. I couldn’t find any of their finished documentation, but there are a few articles which were written when they were starting their study, which state how this topic is seriously under-studied and the problems they had getting the study moving. link, link

Brothels are an economic boon for all counties where it’s legal. In some counties, brothels alone account for a huge portion of the county’s revenue (1/16th in one particular county). Although there is no state tax in Nevada, sales tax from brothel customers is beneficial to the state. link, link

The spread of disease, especially AIDS, is greatly reduced with legalised prostitution.

From http://www.tahoe.com/bonanza/stories.8.6.99/news/storebroth17505Aug9990.html
“Flint [a brothel lobbyist] said Las Vegas, where prostitution is illegal, has many prostitutes with infections diseases. On the other hand, legal brothels in 10 Nevada counties have a clean bill of health. “We have about 300 prostitutes,” Flint said. “This is the only place in the United States where there is no AIDS among prostitutes.””

From http://www.wfu.edu/Academic-departments/Pre-Law-Advising/vegas/hisbgrnd.html
“The Felony/Aids Law stated that any woman arrested for prostitution would be tested for HIV [in Las Vegas, where prostitution is illegal] … At the middle of this decade [1990s?], 239 prostitutes had tested positive for HIV.”

And from http://www.worldsexguide.org/nv_legal.txt.html
"The researchers say successful avoidance of unsafe sex [among legal brothel prostitutes] may contribute to “the absence of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases among this population.’’”

I couldn’t find any information about a decline in street walkers in the presence of legalised prostitution, but with a little knowledge of economic models, we know that with the introduction of an alternative (brothels), both the supply of and the demand for prostitutes will diminish, resulting in fewer streetwalkers.

58

Hells bells, Monocracy, where the hell were you a few months ago?

Kabbes, I went back and looked at your reasons. Others have addressed several of them, there’s only one I wish to address: your issues with objectification. We could argue the truth or falsity of this all day long, but what’s really important is this: if I choose to be objectified, it should be my right. And in fact IS my right…I can legally be objectified any number of ways: porn, stripping, or modeling for Calvin Klein or a beer ad. Your thinking is tantamount to making thought a crime. There is no other “crime” I can think of that is illegal for what could be called “ancillary damage to cultural attitudes”. And frankly, with all due respect to what I’m sure are strong feelings on the subject, I find your argument completely outrageous.

You want to set yourself up as the judge, by law, of the way men and women think about each other. No thank you, I prefer to do that through education, not by controlling private, consensual acts.

stoid

59

**Monocracy **
You consider the ‘newsflash’ that there is money to be made in prostitution to be a support of your argument? Well, certainly there is $$ to be made. That’s why organized crime was involved. The fact that the state of Nevada has found a way to profit from it does not alter any other reality. For example, if we allowed ‘murder for hire’ but taxed it as a profession and taxable income, the state would profit, but so far no one is persuing that, are they?

Regarding the data on AIDS infections, etc. - well I’ve not mentioned the disease aspect of this issue, but since you bring it up, exactly what do you think happens to the woman who tests positive while working at a brothel. Yes, she’s fired. She then goes to… what? Working at McDonalds? or is the more likely scenario, that she goes to an unliscenced prostitution activity (which is the thrust of my argument - that liscensing prostitution will not do away with the problems associated with it - there will still be unlicensed activity going on, which may then be more difficult to deal with)

And, actually, as I stated before, I understand that you will find a few instances of women saying they liked the work (Stoids step mom for example). This does not negate any negatives from the practice as a whole.

You have still not submitted any of the evidence that was requested. I’ll repeat it for your benefit. Home owners and other business owners near prostitution activity:

  1. they find it offensive and harmful to their neighborhood to have people engaging in sexual activity in the cars on their streets.

  2. They find it offensive, frightening, harmful, stressful etc. that if they are a female living in an area where street walkers ply their trade, that even walking to the corner store can elicit attempts to pick them up.

  3. They find it distateful, harmful, dangerous, offensive etc. to deal with the physical litter involved (used condoms, tissues, drug paraphenalia etc.)

  4. They find it harmful financially when they attempt to sell their home and find they cannot or only get very low offers due to the activity in their neighborhood.,

Although most refer to streetwalking issues, #2 and 4 is of concern regardless of how the activity is conducted. Your own sites tend to agree with those concerns. Nevada specifically only allows legal prostitution in remote, uninhabited areas. For example, what are the property values near the brothels? similar to other similar areas? or are they stuck out in the middle of nowhere?

Why would that be? if they are such a boon to the economy and have no problems associated with it, then why aren’t they all over? One reason listed on your site was the concern that they’d detract from the other business in the area (one only has a finite amount of disposable income after all).

However, it also would seem to be, from the current placement and issues, that the neighbors of the brothels are happy to take the $$, but certainly don’t want them any closer.

Your own sites, also show a pretty negative lifestyle, and the comment was made that ‘decriminalization is wanted, but not legalization’, since then all these rules come into effect.

Decriminalization would not give the ‘economic boon’ that you’re pointing out. Nor would it lead to the highly regulated testing and relative safety only of those working in the legalized settings.

So, let’s see. If we decriminialize it, we don’t increase the revenues to the state, nor do we decrease the relative threat of disease from the activity. But we would then loose the only tool that’s effective in attempting to decrease the activity in areas where it’s causing problems. (the problems listed above).

If we legalize it, we still don’t have proof that the illegal activity wouldn’t still thrive, and the cites you show demonstrate that the living conditions for the prositutes are improved only in that they don’t risk arrest. So, we’d have the economic boon from the taxes, but no reduction in the illegal behavior, no demonstration that the other issues associated with it wouldn’t follow (for example, New York City doesn’t have a desert handy nearby to stick the brothels into, so, it would be competing for space with other businesses and homes).

The only difference that I see is that those plying the trade, under either decriminalization or legalization, would not risk arrest. So, I understand totally why those plying the trade would want that. However, since there still are other legitimate concerns from the rest of us that will not be improved under either legalization or decriminalization, I fail to see the advantage. Still looking for proof that legalization and/or decriminalization does eradicate the problems associated with the trade.

60

Addressed but not, to my mind, dealt with. But Wring seems to be doing a more than adequate job with those, so I’m willing to concentrate on the following.

You see - here is where I think that the vast majority of people don’t really understand exploitation and objectification. You do not have that choice. My sister does not have that choice. My girlfriend does not have that choice. When my sister walks down the street and workmen hoot and whistle at her, whence her choice? Society tells men that it is OK to do this. This message comes from the pervasiveness of images in the media of women as sexual objects. The lack of empathy required to treat strangers in such a way can only come of not really seeing women as people first, sexual beings second.

It is not the woman in the ad, the strip joint, the porn mag or the brothel that is the woman I am suggesting is being exploited or objectified. As you say - she has made that choice. It is the myriad of other women that never made that choice whose lives are undermined and who are made to feel uneasy simply walking down the street by such a culture.

This argument is ultimately about power. Traditionally men have had it and women haven’t. We are slowly unwinding this inequity - legally we’ve come a long way. But attitudes amongst many men in particular have still got a long way to go.

Stoid - what puzzles me about this argument is that I know that you agree with me on many of these issues. I’ve seen you argue vociferously against the style of images of women the general media choose to brand their products with. I’ve seen you take up arms such diverse power imbalances as the choice of contraception available to each gender all the way to the effect of anti-abortion bills on women in subservient positions. And yet on this issue alone you seem to fail to see the harm associated with the perception of a woman as a cunt first, person second. Do you not see the inherent lack of consistency?

Firstly, please separate my reasons for wanting prostitution to be illegal from my reasons for finding prostitution morally repugnant. Wring’s analysis of the harms arising from prostitution is why I would wish to see prostitution remain illegal.

But as for “ancillary damage to cultural attitudes” - what about hate crime laws? What about sexual discrimination laws? These both have elements of such damage limitation in them.

Well actually I, like you, want to set myself up as judge, by education, of the way men and women think about eachother. I also wish to control public, commercial transactions that would seem to have a detrimental effect on their surrounding neighbourhoods. The fact that my moral attitude ties in so well with my attitude towards the law on this occassion in merely a happy coincidence.

pan