SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Bytram
Around the world, there's a growing movement to decriminalize sex work. Last year, Amnesty International, the largest human rights group in the world, came out with a recommendation that governments should decriminalize consensual sex work and develop laws that ensure workers are "protected from harm, exploitation and coercion." A United Nations commission has also come out in support of legalizing prostitution.
But the idea is a divisive one, stirring impassioned debates and concerns about the ways varying approaches could harm sex workers. Amnesty's recent policy drew strong support from public health advocates and intense backlash from those aiming to end prostitution completely.
Understanding the scope, harms and public health implications of policies addressing the world's oldest profession is really tricky. While prostitution - the buying and selling of sex - is a multibillion dollar industry, the sex trade is clandestine by nature. It's taboo. That makes it really hard to study, especially in the United States.
That's most often the case, except in this one part of the country, where the laws of prostitution were totally upended. It's a peculiar story that's largely left out of the current discussion. The place in question is not Nevada, where there's a small number of regulated brothels in certain rural counties.
It's a whole state - Rhode Island.
For several years, ending in 2009, indoor prostitution such as in massage parlors, strip clubs and through online escorts, was not a crime in this tiny New England State.
The whole thing happened somewhat unintentionally. But at the time, it fueled a heated public debate about sex, crime and health.
Years later, some are revisiting the lessons learned.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Thexalon on Thursday August 10 2017, @02:40AM (11 children)
The best approach is, according to somebody who does a lot of charity work for prostitutes in my area: Make both the buying and selling legal, and make the pimping illegal. The fact that prostitution is illegal is part of what gives pimps control over the prostitutes. And that means that when the cops catch a prostitute, what they can then do is say "We want to get you out of your situation if you were forced into it. We can connect you with people who can get you a place to live that nobody else knows about, food, any psych help you need. Your job is to tell us what you know about the person or people controlling you."
Another thing to think about: In a black market, the only way to enforce contracts is through violence or a credible threat of violence. If you make prostitution legal, you take away the black market, which means that pimps no longer provide a useful service to anyone.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 10 2017, @04:30AM (10 children)
I disagree. In a legal market, a pimp is just a manager. While they're not everyone's favorite class of people, they've been legal in every legal labor market forever.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday August 10 2017, @09:25AM (9 children)
Right, and to what extent does a prostitute need a manager? Most of the time we are talking about lone workers who need to arrange and attend meetings with clients, manage the money they earn and keep well stocked up with condoms. It's not rocket science. As long as the worker is at least moderately intelligent and organised, and not completely smashed on drugs/ booze (removing the pimps will help enormously here) then there's no reason a sex worker needs a manager any more than a self-employed mobile hairdresser needs a manager.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 10 2017, @10:49AM (8 children)
Given how prevalent pimps are now? That indicates to me that pimps are needed quite a bit.
There we go. That's some useful pimp activities right there. When legalized, the "lone worker" will also need to keep up with the paperwork and testing.
But on the other hand, most hairdressers aren't self-employed or mobile.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday August 10 2017, @11:25AM (7 children)
Given how prevalent threadworms [wikipedia.org] are in the human population, that indicates that threadworms are needed quite a bit.
No, those are things anybody with half a brain and who takes their work seriously could deal with quite competently on their own. Just because someone is working in the sex trade, it doesn't mean they are an idiot.
SOME people might want / need somebody to take care of these things for them, and in that case a legal, licensed, regulated, professionally-run brothel would probably be the best place to get the necessary support services. There might be a limited market for "managers" like you describe, but they would need to be at least as carefully regulated as the workers themselves.
So?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 10 2017, @01:13PM (6 children)
I suppose you have something of a point. But then I can actually list numerous benefits to pimps. In addition to the benefits we've already described, pimps offer protection - from law enforcement, aggressive customers, and other criminals.
Why? When prostitution is legal, it's just a standard manager-entertainer relationship like the rest of the entertainment industry. There's more than enough regulation of that already via contract law and the courts. Sorry, but prostitution is not a unique thing that requires unique laws. It has a lot in common with other high risk entertainment jobs like adult films, stunt actors, and adult dancers. Contract law and basic criminal law already covers most of the problems that could happen between prostitute and pimp.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday August 10 2017, @02:43PM (5 children)
A lot of that is "protection" as in "racket". Once decriminalised, protection from law enforcement stops being a thing, and "other criminals" become just "criminals". In fact, law enforcement becomes the protection against aggressive customers.
I see where you're coming from and I'm not ruling it out completely, but what you don't want is a framework whereby the same old nasty pimps can simply rebrand themselves as "entertainment managers" and carry on, business as usual. These people would have to be very carefully regulated and scrutinised. I mean let's face it, there are enough sleazy, abusive "managers" in the entertainment industry as it is, it wouldn't exactly be a huge leap.
In theory, yes. In practise, there would be a crucial transitional period after decriminalisation when you'd want to really clean things up - clear out the pimps, identify and help the abused - and special laws or special initiatives would almost certainly be required to make sure that the future you're heading for is the best one possible, rather than letting bad old habits and practises reassert themselves.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 10 2017, @08:56PM (4 children)
Two questions here. Why would business carry on as usual? Legalization is a huge sea change. The illegality of prostitution is the key reason that such egregious abuse of the pimp-prostitute relation is possible. The prostitute doesn't have anyone to complain to. In the legal world, they have the court system, law enforcement, and various government-side labor regulators.
Second, why shouldn't those "old nasty pimps" have a chance at legitimizing their business? If they rebrand themselves as "entertainment managers" and then clean up their act so that they are obeying the laws of the land, then I'm fine with it.
I disagree that there is any need for special regulation to cover pimps. It's straightforward to apply the usual labor regulations and laws.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Friday August 11 2017, @12:13AM (3 children)
Pretty much all of the questions in your post above can be answered with "because pimps work on intimidation and psychological abuse." OK, so now the worker can legally go to the police and courts and whatever to report abuse. But a lot of the time, she won't, because she's under the thumb of a vicious, brutal little man and she has been for so long that she hardly knows any different any more. And now he tells her that hey, he's legit now, he's her manager and the law can't touch him and he has business cards to prove it and she'd better not fucking disagree...
The law is only half the picture. People's histories and traumas and lives and the things that drive and control them don't magically change overnight all over the country with a single signature in the capital. If you can clear the field now, then maybe in twenty years things will work the way you envisage but all the shit needs to be swept away first. A clean start, a solid foundation. Old wrongs need to be righted, old crimes need to be shown justice, the rot needs to be cut out. Once that's done, THEN you can talk about "entertainment managers"
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 11 2017, @12:41AM (2 children)
Put him in jail and his attitude will improve. Threats and extortion are still illegal. And where prostitution is legal, the prostitute has the venues to pursue justice. And for those unwilling to protect themselves? I'm unwilling to protect them as well. I believe it will massively backfire to attempt a rescue of a supposed victim that doesn't want rescuing. It doesn't matter if it's a drunk fratboy pulling a dangerous stunt or a messed up woman who refuses to leave an abusive relationship.
And I can't help but notice we've gone from "anybody with half a brain and who takes their work seriously could deal with quite competently on their own" to "because she's under the thumb of a vicious, brutal little man and she has been for so long that she hardly knows any different any more".
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Friday August 11 2017, @01:24AM (1 child)
It's not so much a case of white-knighting in to rescue the women, it's more a case of locking up the bad guys and making the problem go away. OK, people in those kinds of relationships almost certainly have other problems too, but get rid of that one and at least they have a chance of dealing with the others.
And yes, there are both kinds of women (and men for that matter) in prostitution and every one in between. The former know what they are getting into and can handle it. The latter got tricked or forced into it and really shouldn't be there. I'm just saying that you have to be careful that in creating an environment where the former can operate safely, you don't create an environment where the latter can be easily exploited. You need checks and safeguards, you can't just leave everyone to their own devices and hope everybody acts the way you think they ought to.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 11 2017, @02:58AM
Well, I still think that a normal legal environment does that well enough. But thinking about it, my real beef is that temporary laws generally aren't temporary. If you pass laws to protect clueless women from pimps now during a transition from illegal to legal prostitution, there's a good chance those laws will still be on the books 50 years from now, long after any conceivable reason for their existence has died of old age. So I think here that we're creating long term law for a short term problem that present day law would already deal with as well you can expect (after all, you can't outlaw dysfunctional personal and work relationships that people willingly enter into, right?).