SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Could Prostitution Be Next to Be Decriminalized?
Marijuana has gone mainstream, casino gambling is everywhere and sports wagering is spreading. Could prostitution be next? Lawmakers across the country are beginning to reconsider how to handle prostitution, as calls for decriminalization are slowly gaining momentum.
Decriminalization bills have been introduced in Maine and Massachusetts; a similar bill is expected to be introduced to the City Council in Washington D.C. in June; and lawmakers in Rhode Island held hearings in April on a proposal to study the impact of decriminalizing prostitution.
New York may be next: Some Democratic lawmakers are about to propose a comprehensive decriminalization bill that would eliminate penalties for both women and men engaged in prostitution, as well as the johns whom they service. "This is about the oldest profession, and understanding that we haven't been able to deter or end it, in millennia," said Senator Jessica Ramos, a Democrat from Queens who is one of the plan's backers. "So I think it's time to confront reality."
[...] At a recent rally in Albany to repeal a statute criminalizing loitering for the purposes of prostitution, former sex workers stood next to lawmakers like Senator Ramos and Assemblyman Richard N. Gottfried, the chairman of the health committee. Organizers of the protest cast their efforts as a civil and economic rights battle — reflecting a broader progressive passion for gay and transgender rights, as well as criminal justice reform — that was also defending the rights of minorities and illegal immigrants, and even "bodily autonomy," the ability to make ends meet by any means necessary.
See also: Net worth of Americans aged 18 to 35 has dropped 34 percent since 1996: study
Previously: Prostitution Decriminalized: Rhode Island's Experiment
Washington, D.C. Bill Would Decriminalize Sex Work
(Score: 4, Insightful) by HiThere on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:57AM (61 children)
The problem is ensuring that nobody is being forced, that nobody is carrying disease, etc. This isn't a simple problem, and most simple answers are obviously failures. This doesn't mean that they'd be as bad as the current system, of course.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by KilroySmith on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:12AM (11 children)
I think I'd go to the counties in Nevada where prostitution is legal, and investigate how they handle these issues. No need to re-invent the wheel.
Frankly, I think it's something that the government should simply stay out of, other than the inter-personal issue of dumping every pimp into a most unpleasant dungeon. IMHO, the government shouldn't have much business regulating morality between consenting adults.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:22AM (2 children)
I'm given to understand that Nevada is *not* a good case study. The brothels are only in rural counties. The women are under strict control of the owners, to the point where it's being compared to prison. They aren't allowed to mix with locals, etc., etc.
Nevada's system is broken. It doesn't work. There's a reason most hookers ply their trade in Vegas and other big cities despite it still being illegal there--they're more likely to be in control of their own lives; but it still comes with all the problems of illegal prostitution in any other city.
tl;dr, Nevada's legal brothels are like California's legal pot, only worse. Too tightly controlled, too regulated, still has a thriving black market, and not a good model.
I think some European countries have decriminalized but not totally legalized and are a better model.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:28AM (1 child)
Fucking Mormons, or, more appropriately, Mormons fucking? So, you have to have your spiritual wives, in order to get enought green stamps to get your own planet Kolob, but where does all the extra male libido go? Why is it that it is only in a Mormon majority state that fucking someone for money is legal? Now, I have no problem with people fucking other people for no money, that has gone on for a long time. But this making of a business of orgasms, well, there is just something wrong about this. On the one hand, khallow gets none of this. On the other hand, the power of women to produce "happy endings", regardless of anyo other circum-cum-stances, is just a power that no one in a free market should have. Here, let me give you a hand with that. See? Not even close, unless you lean that way.
So, back to the fact that Mormons have taken over the Boy Scouts of America, and now we have the file of pederasts, in the Boy Scouts, before they were taken over by the "family values" Mormons, but we can expect the same abuses to continue?
The Peshawar school of thought: For children, a woman; for pleasure, a young boy; for pure ecstacy, a Melon. Afghanis, yo!
(Score: 3, Touché) by khallow on Thursday June 06 2019, @11:43AM
Hi. Because there's nothing to get. Humans get weirded out all the time by strange and new things. News at 11.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by driverless on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:55AM (4 children)
Not just Nevada, most(?) other countries on earth. It's been legal here for ages, is regulated, safe working conditions, healthcare, etc, it's treated as just another job with all the worker protection and rights that come with it. Just treat it, and regulate it, like any other job.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:38PM (3 children)
This is one of those cases in which we mock the Puritans who settle large swathes of this country. Whatever else they may have been, they were the most uptight sons of bitches to ever walk this earth. ANYTHING that might make one or more people happy had to be banned.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by cmdrklarg on Thursday June 06 2019, @08:36PM (2 children)
Puritanism: The uncontrollable nagging feeling that someone, somewhere is having fun.
Answer now is don't give in; aim for a new tomorrow.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 07 2019, @02:16AM (1 child)
I thought that was Progressivism. *ducks*
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Friday June 07 2019, @05:09PM
You jest, but I suppose it would depend upon your definition of "fun".
Answer now is don't give in; aim for a new tomorrow.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:23AM (2 children)
You are 100% wrong, and I could if I care troll through your post history to whip out an easy example where you argued the exact oppossite but didn't realize it. But since I don't care that much how about this: If one of these consenting adults is married, that's still OK with you?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by KilroySmith on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:55AM
>>> If one of these consenting adults is married, that's still OK with you?
Sure. If I'm one of the consenting adults and married (presumably not to the other consenting adult), it's not your (or the government's) business whether I've informed my spouse or not. If I have and they're OK with it (lots of reasons why this might be true), it's truly none of the governments business. If I haven't, it's simply grounds for divorce when the spouse finds out, and not the governments business other than to dutifully adjudicate and record the dissolution of the marriage. Would you ban pornography because I look at it without telling my wife? How about alcohol, because I drink when she's not around? Home Depot, because I buy tools on the sly when I can sneak a twenty out from under her watchful gaze?
(Score: 2, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:42PM
Dude - it's not the size of your tool, it's how you use it. If you can't keep Mama home with you on the weekends, it's because you're not stroking her right. Maybe you should tag along, and take lessons from the prostitutes she hires!
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:15AM (17 children)
When you're not treated as a criminal, you are usually more comfortable going to the police if you're being forced, intimidated or trafficked.
What's more, just as they do in the porn industry, regular STI testing can be mandated by law.
Making things illegal always draws the unscrupulous, as regulation and oversight are much more difficult.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:13AM
That's definitely the case. Plus, with decriminalization, local, community-centric exchanges [phys.org] can reopen, producing logical results [npr.org] in the interest of public safety. It looks like progress :-)
(Score: 2, Troll) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:51PM (11 children)
I think that may turn out not to be the case [harvard.edu], as human trafficking typically goes up in countries that legalize prostitution.
The study the Harvard link above references [sciencedirect.com].
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:03PM (8 children)
That's as may be. And when you traffic someone into a country where you don't necessarily speak the language and your captors take your passport, things become much more difficult.
However, at least in the US, most of the sex trafficking is of Americans. As such, when you aren't afraid of being arrested/jailed/deported for reporting such trafficking, more folks will do so.
As for trafficking from outside the country, guaranteeing refugee status for trafficked individuals can help to alleviate that issue.
As I said, where things are illegal (whether appropriately so or not), in the absence of legal remedies, unscrupulous people will step in and try to exploit others.
I'd point out that drug prohibitions prove that in spades, as most of the violence, and negative impact are due to the black market created by the prohibitions, not the drugs themselves.
Would the legalization of prostitution solve all the problems of the world? No. Would it even solve the problems of trafficking/coercion? No.
However, it would give us a framework which *could* allow us to limit the abuse and suffering of those caught up in the black market created by illegal prostitution.
I don't pretend to have all (or even most) of the answers, but it seems to me that wherever there is coercion and abuse, we should seek to limit it as best we can. Are there unintended consequences? Probably. But that doesn't mean we should just throw up our hands and say, "well, my daughter hasn't been trafficked into a nightmare world of abuse, exploitation and misery, so it's all good."
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Insightful) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:11PM (7 children)
First of all, trafficking is trafficking. The source I gave you was indeed on importations, however, the patterns exist whether it is a foreign individual, a runaway, or someone who is pimped by a family member.
What's your data for suggesting that: A) if it is legal, people won't be afraid to report trafficking, B) More people will report trafficking if prostitution is legal? Besides thinking that's they way you think it should be?
One of the points in the article that I submitted to you is that when prostitution is illegal there is suppression of demand. People fear getting arrested, so some people weigh that they would rather not take the risk to be arrested and therefore do not engage prostitutes. Make it legal, and your demand will spike and to meet a needed growth in supply.... you get increased trafficking. (This point is arguable, and the study makes note of that by citing the study where points in the economics of trafficking are argued. This study took the ground that this is the model which is shown to occur.) It would be interesting to look at the other side of that dimension: How many people stay out of the hands of pimps because they know it is illegal? But that is not as measurable. And sorry if this is a red herring, but the reality is that trafficking has been measured to go up when prostitution is legalized, so it isn't a matter of "well maybe legal supply will increase to meet demand!" That doesn't seem to obtain, for the simple and obvious reason that most women do not want to be prostitutes. Go figure.
Second, you assume that making things legal that black market illegal prostitution will be eliminated. It will not. You assume it will be reduced. This is unproven, but again because of the above there is no reason to suspect it will and the contrary is likely from the available evidence.
Third, you assume that if someone is safe to report that they are trafficked they will if they know they won't be busted for prostitution. Generally they do not currently, as people do become psychologically attached to their conditions. There are individuals who feel safer staying in abusive relationships than seeking help for the abuse - this is a VERY common pattern in abuse relationships. Freedom is scarier than slavery to such people even when it is perfectly possible to achieve. There's a lot more that can be said on this topic and the complexities in the United States of what rescue groups find when trying to liberate people from sex slavery.
Before approving a solution for which there is already data suggesting it will increase it would be nice to see proof rather than speculation of what might happen. Equating to other forms of activity like drug trafficking are not equivalent. (And we haven't even begun to collect enough data on that one yet, anyway. Black markets still exist in places where legalization happens, though, if you want a thumbnail on it).
So, if wherever there is coercion and abuse it should be limited... Maybe the response isn't throwing up our hands to legalize it but to say, "Prostitution should stay illegal, for our measures to support its victims are not anywhere near good enough to change it yet." Or, better still: Any attempt to make prostitution legal should carry with it a robust program for persons to leave it or prevent entry into it in the first place by allocating resources to allow people the ability to restructure their lives so they can live without having to sell their bodies. Robust like the country hasn't seen yet with support for housing, food, job training, and placement services better than we currently do for the homeless.
It's like people think there will be some kind of ideal world where, "Yeah, I could have done this, this, or that, but I decided to become a prostitute because I like the job better!" Such people may in fact exist, but will not be the majority if it is legalized. For every "Happy Hooker" you will have more who will have turned to it out of desperation - just as today. That's what the voices opposing it in TFA, completely ignored in the summary, are saying.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @07:14PM (1 child)
The study simply noted an increase in reports of human trafficking, but did not concretely identify the cause. It's the same for the other concerns. Without rigorously demonstrating causation, it is of limited use at the moment.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday June 06 2019, @08:50PM
No, I didn't ask for your critique of my data (although you are welcome to supply it). I asked for counter-data to an otherwise unsubstantiated claim. Not surprised that it isn't readily to hand for you, AC. And if you're looking for rigorous causation studies, then you can make yours that. Good luck. In the meantime I've provided what I feel is the best available data which happens to be congruent with the experience of those who work for the exploited in the sex trade, and certainly something above anecdote or opinion.
What you've proven so far is that the status quo should be maintained. Thank you.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @07:16PM (4 children)
Well, I'm sure miners and plenty of other people don't like their jobs, either.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday June 06 2019, @08:55PM (3 children)
Not sure if you're trolling. But miners and plenty of other people don't have to fuck their clients or blow them in order to survive. That's the difference. Do you really think that's not different? Maybe some of the voices here should listen to the voices of those already exploited instead of the ones saying it'll all be OK and that it will all become a magical fairyland if only we decriminalize it.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @10:01PM (1 child)
No, they just get sent into the hole without adequate safety gear and regulation. Then they get dumped when they can't come to work because of the blacklung.
On the whole, I think I'd much rather do those other things you mentioned.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday June 07 2019, @01:40AM
I think you're wrong [pbs.org].
Very. [pbs.org]
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 11 2019, @12:17PM
As a long-time consultant, I've found that consulting is very much like prostitution. You charge by the hour and your job is to make the client happy. The difference is that consulting is usually less degrading. Usually.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:07PM (1 child)
Seems counter-intuitive but this is why we do science. "Common sense" often isn't.
From the 1st link:
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:20PM
That is correct. And from the 2nd:
And in that study's conclusion (the same where your quote is lifted wholesale):
In other words, Harvard pulled discussion from inside the article but ignored the conclusion that said what you quoted was outside the study scope and therefore may or may not be true. Which is why I included the second study.
But basically, yes, I agree with you that science should be brought to bear on the problem. Not anecdote. Which is what the proponents of legalization seem to rely upon.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by Muad'Dave on Monday June 10 2019, @02:01PM (3 children)
> regular STI testing can be mandated by law.
Honest question: How often is often enough? How narrow can we get the window of vulnerability? I have no idea how the whole system works - how many customers/day, how effective and common are showers/washing between customers at preventing STI transmission, are condoms required, which STIs can be transmitted by contact with 'leftover' fluids vs which require blood for transmission, etc.
It still seems to me like too much of a crapshoot.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday June 10 2019, @02:30PM (2 children)
Not honest questions, IMHO. You can get those answers in a few minutes at most. That you haven't done so tells me you're not actually interested in the answers. I suppose I could be wrong, but that's the clear implication I'm getting.
California (as I mentioned) has mandatory testing for porn actors, and Nevada has mandatory testing for prostitutes. I imagine the CDC has studies, recommendations and guidelines about this as well.
You could begin your search there. But doing so just gives you the information you claim to seek, and isn't very satisfying when you just want to be contrary, push your own puritanical views or have everything spoon-fed to you.
The same questions can be asked about going to a bar (or using tindr or Craigslist) and going home with someone, when there is no financial transaction involved. Shall we make those illegal too?
Besides, you can get diseases from door handles and public restrooms, buses and other peoples' cars.
If you're that concerned about disease, my suggestion to you is that your cover your entire body in a thin layer of latex and use air tanks and fine air filtering equipment to maintain an "undiseased" atmosphere.
Yes, I'm being snarky. But all the questions you asked about testing and disease risk are easily answerable without my help. As such, I suspect you're just against legalization of prostitution (for whatever reasons), regardless of disease risk.
I don't patronize prostitutes (nor do I sell my own body for sex), but I recognize that I have no right to demand that others do things my way. What's more, I'd like to see less suffering, abuse and coercion. Do you think that keeping prostitution illegal will result in *less* STI transmission, given that no testing can be required in a black market?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Muad'Dave on Tuesday June 11 2019, @11:11AM (1 child)
Well, you got it wrong. All wrong.
It's not something I partake in either, but if we're going to consider legalizing it I want the FACTS out there before people choose to partake in something that could result in an otherwise preventable infection, some of which can be life-long.
> Yes, I'm being snarky.
Yes, and aside from your apparent projection, you didn't provide any answers either, so your post was essentially useless and exposed your distain for anyone you perceive to have ideas and beliefs other than your own.
Next time provide some informative links so people like me whose sole 'knowledge' of the industry comes from TV so we can make decisions based on fact, not TV.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday June 11 2019, @12:09PM
Why should I? Am I your personal assistant or something? I'm not here to be your google-bot.
I did give you plenty of information to go on:
I guess I wasn't wrong at all when I said:
Do your own research or pay me a fair-market wage to do it for you. In my case that'd be $150/hour, Six hours minimum. Fees paid in advance. Your choice.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 5, Insightful) by anotherblackhat on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:18AM (15 children)
Nope, that's not the problem at all.
It's easier to catch forced prostitution when normal prostitution is decriminalized, and it's a bald face lie that prostitutes spread disease.
(When prostitution was accidentally decriminalized in Rhode Island, rape dropped 31% and gonorrhea dropped 39%. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/07/17/when-rhode-island-accidentally-legalized-prostitution-rape-and-stis-decreased-sharply/ [washingtonpost.com] https://www.nber.org/papers/w20281.pdf [nber.org])
The "problem" is that a certain percentage of the population believes it has a moral obligation to prevent other people from having sex the "wrong" way.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:58AM (2 children)
We decriminalised that ages ago as well in the Homosexual Law Reform Bill. Absolutely nothing happened, no collapse of law and order or civilisation, everyone just went on with their lives. The police now take part in the gay pride parade.
(Score: 3, Funny) by krishnoid on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:19AM
Besides, the "wrong" way seems to be a matter of some dispute [youtu.be] (note, lyrics are definitely "wrong").
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @07:45AM
That proves it was video games all along. BAN!!!!
(Score: 5, Funny) by edIII on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:11AM (9 children)
Uhhh, still a problem. We regulate meat that we eat at fucking Burger King for safety, we can monitor prostitutes vaginas if they want a license to do business. This is case where you want regulations.
Don't wish to be licensed? Then you can't advertise services , and certainly can't work for Fuber, the inevitable gig economy that will swallow up more hope.
I'm not a prude, nor do I wish to regulate morality. I wish to regulate freshness. There should be a licensing body I can trust, and hopefully a block-chain based solution to verify vaginal/anal freshness. I want to know how long ago that asshole was inspected before I eat it, and how many people have camped their balls there before the last overhaul.
We need VerifiedVag.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday June 06 2019, @05:21AM (1 child)
RobotVag is easier.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday June 06 2019, @07:25PM
Three Robot Laws of Prostitution?
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:53AM
I'll alert the USDA.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:23PM (2 children)
Uh huh. What do you plan to do about the ones who will sell it cheaper without being licensed?
What do you plan to do about the pimps and the abuse that will still be ongoing after licensure? (Besides magical thinking that they will all go away because "it'll be legal!")
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:23PM
You assume that unlicensed will be as attractive as licensed.
Maybe it will, maybe it wont. If the new approach improves safety, it will be worth it. I mean, yeah, someone will always break the rules. You have to ask, are we better on whole with this change? I'd say this would at least be no worse than what we have now, and it could improve things. Worth trying.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:29PM
Q. What do we do about unlicensed plumbers undercharging?
A. You get what you pay for (your pipes dripping green fluid).
Q. What do you do about forced labour?
A. Criminal charges (kidnapping, unlawful detention, etc.) for the work-masters, and liberation for the victims.
Farming isn't illegal, but even the UK has had recent cases of modern-day slavery in the agriculture industry. The problems you cite, and solutions thereto, already exist and are nothing specific to prostitution.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:46PM (1 child)
Well, E-Verify isn't doing much good for illegal immigrants. Just take it, and use it for pussy.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @10:07PM
What are you talking about? It's working great at the Trump properties where they've been hiring all those undocumented people.
(Score: 2) by DavePolaschek on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:34PM
that is all...
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:45AM
It would be interesting if there was economic stimulus information, considering how Rhode Island's small area could amplify any effects.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:19PM
Or a version that isn't a PDF or behind a paywall
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-rhode-island-accidentally-legalized-prostitution-2014-7 [businessinsider.com]
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pipedwho on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:38AM (1 child)
These problems are magnified where prostitution is illegal. If the goal is protecting victims of coercion, making the actions of the 'coercee' illegal only entrenches the problem. Where prostitution is legal, the laws stipulate things that are illegal, such as coerciion, trafficking, 'pimping', etc. That doesn't prevent criminal 'standover men' and organised crime completely, but it at least gives the victim some way out.
When prostitution became legal here, much of the coercive behaviour either evaporated or turned to making sure their victims did something else illegal (eg. drugs, immigration defaults, etc) so they could maintain the control they previously had. This is why having illegal substances is a bad idea. When nothing that affects the person themselves is illegal (ie. not hurting anyone else), then the crime lords have far less power to keep their charges in fear of the law. This may seem non-obvious, but those 'crime lords' generally try to avoid flagrantly violating the law themselves. Keep your charges fearful of 'the enemy' and you can control them under the guise of protection and still not look like 'the bad guy'. As a more present example of this, look at the government and how it uses propaganda to keep the populace docile and in check.
A well regulated prostitution industry will provide facilities for disease detection and prevention, education, and a path for workers in the field to report and deal with any issues they may have. It should have a way of dealing with immigration issues for 'trafficked' victims. When 'sin laws' are on the books they make the person themselves effectively a persona non-grata, and it makes it impossible for the government to provide effective and positive solutions. It leaves charitable outreach programs as the only (partial) solutions, and even then there is constant fear of the local jack booted constabulary causing further grief.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:31AM
In the US? You lost me.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PinkyGigglebrain on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:41AM (8 children)
The laws in the USA are not very well thought out.
Consider that the current laws are supposed to protect women (mostly, sometimes males) from being "victimized", but what happens when they are arrested? They get jailed, fined, and end up with a criminal record that will preclude them from ever getting a job that pays well enough for them to stop prostituting themselves. What? you think all of them do it for fun? No, sometimes they are trying earn money for rent because they can't get a regular job, or they got laid off, or they just need to make up that shortfall in the budget at the end of the month. Other times its because their spouse/significant other or pimp gives them the choice of earn money or get hurt. And yes, some do it just for extra spending money.
While the John generally gets a fine, maybe some community service, a possible misdemeanor criminal record that is considered by society as "meh", and possibly even no criminal record if they attend a class about how bad prostitution is.
Right now in the USA if someone is being coerced into being a prostitute what can they do? If they go to the police they have to admit to being a prostitute and will get arrested and charged, and there is nothing they can do because they admitted it to a police officer so its a slam dunk case for the cop and prosecutor, one more conviction for the resumes. Yes, that is what really happens more often that not.
So, who is the getting the worst end of the deal in the USA and other countries with similar laws; the prostitutes of those "victimizing" them?
I've heard that most of the Nordic countries have a saner approach to prostitution. Offering sex for money is legal, but offering money for sex is illegal. So the only people who get into trouble are the Johns who are actually doing the "victimizing". The biggest advantage of that system is if a woman if being threatened or otherwise coerced they can go to the police without fear of arrest. If their client steals their money, gets violent, or doesn't take "No" and "Stop" as valid responses the woman can go to the police. And since people who commit rape, assault, and theft are more of a danger to society as a whole the police are more likely to do something about it.
And finally to answer your question about health issues the answer is simple, do what they do in Nevada. Prostitutes have to have a permit to work, and to get it they have to get regular checks for STDs. Another thing to keep in mind is a woman who's livelihood depends on avoiding STD's is going to be a lot more careful about using a condom and practicing safe sex than a woman who is just having fun.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:58AM (2 children)
That Nordic rule sounds stupid. Why have either forbidden. It means a cop could pretend to be a prostitute and start arresting people that offer money. Very lame, and not helping the issue. The 'Johns' need a middle man to broker the transaction safely, and in comes the pimp in shining armor to provide that service. A prostitute threatens to complain about the 'John', well John now has to worry about going from pounding pussy to being pounded in the ass. The prostitutes are no longer surrounded by a safety net in a safe place of their choosing, but by a bunch of unsavory characters in some illicit dungeon. A win for no one.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:29PM (1 child)
The Nordic model exists because Sweden is a feminist cuck state.
Men are always the problem. It's hateful, discriminatory, and not effective
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:51PM
The Vikings were women. The men were only there for the women's amusement.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @09:16AM
Unless the perp is muslim. Then they walk.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @09:43AM (3 children)
Why regulate what people do with their own bodies and in their own beds?
A woman should be able to be with whomever she wants and she should be free to charge any price the market will support.
Men are obligated to pay for sex all the time and women. We may not admit it to themselves or the world at large, but we all accept or pay cash for sex literally all the time.
No matter what your moral stance is, it is impossible to argue against the fact that we all trade money for sex if we are in any degree not celibate.
Get into any long term relationship where you're the primary breadwinner and you're still forking over cash, every single day.
Even marriage is a money for sex transaction, just one that takes place over decades instead of a few hours.
Lose your job for more than a few weeks, become a financial burden, see how often you get nookie.
Become a big enough burden by staying unemployed too long and she'll give your nookie to someone else, either via divorce or an affair.
So the only difference is if payment occurs by forking cash over directly, or by getting dinner and a movie first or whether she is just given carte blanche with your visa.
Yes I've had my share of one night stands and even a handful of situations where the woman was sexually aggressive with no effort on my part to strut.
But come on, these are the outliers. Don't believe me? Try going on a dating site and marking "unemployed" as your profession and see how many dates you get.
Women, you'll see a ton of hits because you are female, at least moderately attractive and in a situation where the male believes his employment status will increase his odds of sleeping with you. Men, you'll see no one interested in you except possibly a cougar looking for a cub. And in those situations the man is the prostitute, but again this is rare.
So just admit it and be honest with yourself, sex requires money. Anything else is just intellectual dishonesty and breeds cognitive dissonance.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:39PM
The difference is that, usually, sex in relationships is part of a package deal, rather than the product being sold itself.
It's a bit like how "member's clubs" can get away with providing things to paid-up members that would be illegal to sell directly to the general public. The most recent example that comes to mind is the Beverly Hills tobacco ban, which exempted "cigar clubs".
(Score: 4, Informative) by NotSanguine on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:41PM
I'm really glad I don't have the outlook on life that you do. It must be really lonely, as we most often get back what we give.
Sex is part of a romantic, caring relationship. Sharing your life with someone isn't a job or a commercial transaction, it's a choice made by people who genuinely care about and enjoy each other. If that's not the case, you're doing it wrong.
For me, I want to be around people who want to be around me. And not all of those, either. As for relationships, I need to be desired for *who* I am, not what I have. And that goes *both* ways. When you're involved with someone, all involved need to have their needs met. I posit that honesty, good communication and a desire for everyone to get what they need and want makes a big difference.
If caring, physical contact, love and sharing are transactional financial quid pro quos for you, I suggest you shack up with your bank account.
Decades ago, when I traveled a lot for work, I did patronize prostitutes on occasion and found it to be really unsatisfying. Because the best parts of physical intimacy are about sharing and emotional intimacy. As such, putting a financial transaction into the mix is a real turn-off for me.
As I said, I want to be around (and with) those who want to be around (and with) me. If that isn't the case, doing it all by myself is much more satisfying.
Other humans aren't objects to be manipulated for one's benefit, or to be bought and sold. Down that road lies loneliness, pain and sociopathy.
If your experience has been otherwise, I have pity for you. I hope you can find a healthier kinds of relationships that are satisfying and allow you to open your heart to others. If not, I fear you will be sad, lonely, angry and unsatisfied in your life. And that's the greatest tragedy of all.
As to prostitution, I have no problem or issue with that at all, as long as there is mutual consent and no coercion. I believe it should be legal, safe, above-board and voluntary. Anything that obviates those should be vigorously prosecuted. I have no interest in buying or selling sex, but I'm not other people and they should be allowed to make those choices for themselves.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday June 06 2019, @07:29PM
Counterpoint: I've encountered total losers who have no money and few skills and still get laid. They can't afford dinner, drinks, fees-for-service, or sometimes even their own upkeep, but they're still getting laid.
In my own experience: Some women are interested in sleeping with me, some aren't, and the reasons for that are many and varied but often have nothing to do with money. If you go into encounters with women expecting to exchange cash for sex, those are the ones that will stick around, because the rest don't like being treated like whores. If you're trying to end inceldom, the first step is to treat your would-be partner as a friggin' human being with a brain, and one thing that their brains will tell them is that desire is different from desperation.
Also, for whatever it's worth: Women on dating sites get tons of attention regardless of who they are, but they're hits from people who they really really don't want. That's because the same lousy 1000 guys who can't get a date because they're terrible people often follow the strategy of messaging every woman in town in a desperate attempt to get some sort of attention from somebody.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Thursday June 06 2019, @11:05AM
We could simply use the same legal infrastructure we use for any other job to ensure they're not being forced either. It's not a perfectly solved problem, but it is a mostly solved problem.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:15PM
No, the real problem is that no one gives two shits for prostitutes RIGHT NOW. Few people have ever been concerned about prostitutes, except a few preachers who were hoping to get a freebie in exchange for a shoulder to cry on.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:29PM
The black market only makes those problems even worse, as we've seen with drugs and alcohol. You think it would be hard to solve those issues if prostitution were legalized and regulated? Try doing it with a dangerous black market. Opponents of legalization (as opposed to decriminalization, which is weaker) only have the 'it's not perfect' argument, which is a fallacy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @08:33PM
hmm, maybe i can blockchain the hell out of this shit!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ilPapa on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:41AM (2 children)
Interesting that the states with legislatures trying to legalize prostitution are all states within driving distance for New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft.
Just sayin'.
Also, just let me say that it's a shame that the judge in Robert Kraft prostitution case won't make public the security camera video of Mr Kraft getting a strip mall tug job. I was hoping someone would dub over the music from Curb Your Enthusiasm onto the video and it would go viral. You gotta admit that would be fun.
https://youtu.be/Ag1o3koTLWM [youtu.be]
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:52AM
Aren't all the New England states within driving distance of each other anyway?
That's gotta be nice -- when you're rich enough to own a football team, you can probably helicopter anywhere you want in that area pretty quickly anyway.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:52PM
He only went there to get his balls deflated.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Thursday June 06 2019, @09:44AM (11 children)
Having prostitution illegal is presumably a remnant from religious folk legislating morality. There are still plenty of people around who want to dictate how other people live. On the right, it tends to be the religious types, outlawing anything they consider sinful. On the left, it's the progressive types, outlawing anything politically incorrect (gay wedding cake example).
In the end, basically any activity freely agreed to by mutually consenting adults should be legal, as long as it doesn't affect other people who have not consented. Prostitution pretty clearly falls under that umbrella.
As the first comment on the article notes: the trick is ensuring consent. However, this will be easier with a legalized activity, because you can concentrate on the problem cases. Forbidding the entire activity drives everything underground. The nasty cases of human trafficking, child prostitution, and such get lost under all the trivial cases, because everyone in the mileau is hiding their activities.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:40PM (1 child)
Efforts to curb Prostitution, just as with Marijuana, will result in people protesting saying: it's none of the government's business what I put into my body.
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:58PM
Efforts to curb prostitution? It's been illegal since forever in the US.
The efforts are to *decriminalize* prostitution. It's important to know the direction of the current you are swimming against.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:15PM (4 children)
as a churchgoer, what Christians need to realize is that each individual is responsible for not participating in sinful activity. It is a personal responsibility. You can't rely on the state to get rid of all Temptations or activities that are harmful.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:57PM (3 children)
OK. Let's just drop the laws on murder then. Also usury and theft. Isn't each individual responsible for not participating in it? And if you don't want to take care of your Mom & Dad, screw it, just let them die.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:06PM (1 child)
If you can't distinguish the level of harm done to others in your examples versus prostitution... I can't help you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:11PM
Prostitution, unlike the examples GP gave (except for usury) is a straightforwardvbusiness transaction.
The prostitute and the customer both "benefit."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @09:37PM
You do realize that usury has been legalized in quite a few states and for most transactions the everyday person will do in the rest of them. Also, there isn't a law that requires you to take care of your elderly parents. So, half of your examples aren't even illegal.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Thursday June 06 2019, @09:49PM (3 children)
Cleary?
In Thailand or the Phillipines examples perhaps of the libertine Utopia, prostitution (although nominally illegal) is effectively uncontrolled. As a result something between 10% and 20% of girls are selling themselves at some period of their life, mosty to to foreign sex tourists. Large numbers of them have babies by unindentified and untraceable fathers. You think no-one else is affected by this scenario? How about the young local men, I wonder how they feel about the best, and a significant proportion, of their girls being put out of their reach, sold instead to wealthy ugly old gits. Then there are the fatherless children with a mother who is out of a job and destitute from the age of 30. There are some very sad stories that can be and are told by your "unaffected" other people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 07 2019, @12:03AM (2 children)
The women do it because they can make so much more money than any other way.
It's a dirt poor country. They can do other jobs much shittier than prostitution for less money.
Many Third World Asian women score a longterm win by marrying a Western man and leaving the country.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 07 2019, @02:19AM (1 child)
Honest question: how man of those end up being (life)long happy marriages? I'm guessing not many but I'm genuinely curious to know.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Friday June 07 2019, @08:07PM
Probably no worse than other marriages. Depends how careful you are in choosing them. Asian women are traditionally more obliging than western ones are these days, so they are more likely to make the marriage work than go off in a hissy fit. However you need to be careful of their motives, as it might just be gold digging or an escape from their country, and they are not really interested in you, so it will be you that wants to end it.
I dated a Malay girl for a time, really sweet and shy, and she was already in the West as a nurse. I learned that she came from a wealthy family so no issues about sending money home. We liked doing similar things so I think it would have worked OK, and sometimes I wish we had stayed together. Not sure her parents would have been happy though as she was a Muslim and I am not.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday June 06 2019, @01:35PM (4 children)
If brothels can be found everywhere, this may seriously harm existing established ones. Especially ones that can successfully masquerade as, say, a hotel or resort. Or maybe a legitimate hotel or resort that is known to secretly offer other, ahem, services on the side.
If such an establishment offered, say, ahem, "unusual" services which allowed the rich and powerful to avoid the time and trouble of sex-tourism, they might still continue to have rich and powerful clientele, because the brothels used by common folk won't offer such 'exotic' things.
Simple fact: when an establishment, like the winter white house, can offer access to exclusive things, like having dinner with the president, as a world crisis unfolds during dessert, that establishment can charge premium membership prices.
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:13PM (3 children)
Also think of the consequences to people who use sex as leverage against people who are rich and would be able to buy sex on a whim? They’re screwed. The other people, not the rich people. ;)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @02:54PM (2 children)
Didn't seem to hurt the current U.S. President all that much. His staff, yes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:17PM
-A
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Thursday June 06 2019, @06:00PM
I said NOT the rich people. Or “rich” people as the case may be.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday June 06 2019, @03:11PM (1 child)
Prostitution has been decriminalized for a long time. We call it "Congress."
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 06 2019, @04:12PM
They are talking about sex, dear.
Oh.
(Score: 1) by easyTree on Thursday June 06 2019, @11:55PM
How is 'the system' meant to extract your soul if everything is no longer illegal? wtf?!?