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: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 10 2017, @03:01AM
Sorry, that's nonsense. What you are saying here, is that because various disadvantaged people go into prostitution, we must nerf prostitution's income potential and these sex workers' ability to improve their lives via their work. For their own good, of course. My view is that full legalization will do more to protect these workers than this pathetic half-legality will. And "problematic" is a trigger word for me. I get whiny over it especially when an "incredibly problematic practice" doesn't actually have a lot of problems to go with it (this lack of descriptiveness seems to be the problematic problem with "problematic" as currently used).
People want to fuck. I don't see some vague concern about alleged moral corrosion as a reason to get in their way, even in the situation of the usual prostitution transaction.
Now, you might get the impression that I really dislike your argument. That would be correct. It's a typical reaction of mine to moral arguments that make things worse. Prostitution is a particularly notorious target for counterproductive morality. Lots of people, including the prostitutes themselves, suffer because people want to help, but don't care about the consequences of their actions.