OhHey Posted June 12, 2012 Posted June 12, 2012 I'm sure my father would be horrified to! Many of my client's say if there daughters did it they would be heartbroken too. But everyone is someone's daughter. Yes.....I don't think I could accept it if my daughter chose this TBH.... I mean you have to agree too right? I may be able to work up to it slowly as long as I see you're happy 100% and I'd keep an eye on you. Just waiting for the phone to ring saying you got hurt..would make me nervous all the time. Also what about BF's and a husband, kids? I'd like my daughter to have a nice relationship with a son in law I could accept as a son and carry my fat ass when I get old:laugh: Stay safe, Casey and if this makes you happy then that is a good thing.
Furious Posted June 12, 2012 Posted June 12, 2012 I'm sure my father would be horrified to! Many of my client's say if there daughters did it they would be heartbroken too. But everyone is someone's daughter. Casey Don't you see, what your client's say is a direct insult to you. Why would you allow these men to put their daughter's on a pedestal and then use you in that way.
casey1989 Posted June 12, 2012 Posted June 12, 2012 Would I actively encourage my daughter to do it? No, but i would respect her decision. but then it's hard for me to say because I've been there you know? I have a boyfriend. I will get married one day and have children (but by that point I will have finished training in my other industry). It's a complete misconception that prossies have to choose between a relationship/ work. As long as you are completely honest with your partner, and they accept it then it's possible to have a happy relationship and work. Thanks OhHey.
denise_xo Posted June 12, 2012 Posted June 12, 2012 IMO, what is more f-cked up is the fact that the government has a right to control what goes on between consenting adults in their own bedroom. As far as I am converned the government needs to get the "f" out of our bedroom's. Can you explain? I'm just curious and I'm not American, so I'm not sure what you're referring to.
D-Lish Posted June 12, 2012 Posted June 12, 2012 Can you explain? I'm just curious and I'm not American, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. I'm not American either. The government has NO place in the bedroom. No government should be given the right or control or tell consenting adults what they can, or cannot do when it comes to sex. 2
mario_C Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 When my pop up blocker is turned off, I get a myriad of ads, but none for sex sites. I don't block it, and it's not here. I do have some annoying Levi's ads popping up right now. They're kind of zeroing in on a guys crotch area … maybe they are nasty, after all. CITIZEN'S ARREST! Use Firefox with an ad blocker; Ad Block Plus is awesome. And dump your cookies regularly! If you use a Mac, then it's all good, but if you're a Windows person, then you all need a good anti-virus: AVG is free, Norton is a premium (I work as a support tech, so I'm biased but AVG is quality for free). But those popups are spawned by an executable on your desktop which could be harvesting your information. Thank you. Now back to talking about fcking.
Author Leigh 87 Posted June 13, 2012 Author Posted June 13, 2012 But, KATHY - you have not answered my question: what if a person CANNOT survive, with their current skill level and job prospects? And - they do NOT have ANY means, from which to further their skills, which is needed to get a better paying job? It happens a LOT. People cannot survive on their low paid job - and canot even afford to do any courses that will further develop their skills. In australia, the government funds once free course per year - UNFORUNATELY, I do not think it happens in the states. KATHY - why on earth is a prostitute a " bad person", if their only choices are: live on the street and literally starve to death or live a short, miserable life being malnourished, because they cannot afford to live off of their current wage? ....So, a person who cannot afford to live, and has no means to further thsie skills and get a better paying job, is supposed to accept a life of malnousishment or starvation? Being a prostitute is some peoples ONLY way out of this hell hole. Kathy - you are a piece of work. You should be ashamed of yourself, for saying all prostitutes are " bad people''. Furthermore, your very ignorant. You do not seam to realize that there are a LOT of factors, that determine weather a person is " good" or not......... .... A prostitute could work for charity for free in their spare time, be a loyal, devloted, and fantastic friend, and a loving wife who makes their partner extremely fulfilled and happy.. She happens to make money in a way that is not IDEAL. This is just ONE aspect to her personality. - lastly - it is 100% the HUSBAND who cheats. a prostitute haas NO bearing, over a mans cheating ways. EVERY ONE HAS SAID : a man will cheat REGARDLESS of weather prostitutes exist. Why is it so hard for you to understand, that: a prostitute DOES NOT influence a person to cheat!!!!!!! People cheat, because they want to cheat. Not because of hookers. A truly loving partner who is into their girlfriend/wife, and who has no intention of cheating - will NOT CHEAT. ......For the LIFE of me. It is bizarre to me, that KATHY believes that, because a MAN decided to cheat, it is firstly: a hookers fault, and she is just as bad as the man for her involvement - when the man will cheat REGARDLESS of prostitutes. And lastly, that all hookers are " bad people" is SOOOO IGNORANT it makes me.... saddened that people can be THAT narrow minded.
Author Leigh 87 Posted June 13, 2012 Author Posted June 13, 2012 and, Chaucer - the reason I do not care if my partner has ex with hookers, is quiet simply... we are young, immature in our development, inexperienced with relationships - it is not likely to last for our lifetime ( although we very much wish it to!). I am going to explain this one last time on here, as I am sick of people assuming my partner is not into me, is not in love with me, and I am some loser with no self esteem - so as to allow a guy who is not satisfied by me, to seek out other women. Like it is a regular thing he needs, to keep him satisfied... that if a guy is " in love", he will not be able to have meaningless sex with another women, once in a blue moon. I like people to have INFORMED opinions, of real life situations, rather than just ASSUME all men who see hookers, are not in love or crazy about their partners! First of all - I want to clarify that I only permit hookers, in the context of ; he is away for extended periods of time, and cannot get sex from me. I just do not feel anything - nothing.... about him seeing a hooker, purely for his sexual pleasure. They are a hooker. It has no reaction for me. Although when I first got together with him, I was not ready to settle down with one person, and encouraged 2 threesomes, with a hooker, before we settled down. I wanted some meaningless fun, and when I asked him about it, he agreed, thinking it was wonderful that I was the ONLY women he met, with these beliefs. I do not think it is the best way to go about a relationship - I think each individual decided what works for them, no way is " better". I just believe that a man can be truly in love with a women, and still get sexual varity on rare occasions. It is just a body - and males crave varity in bodies, with sex. It is natural. Although apparently, some men in love cannot bring themselves to ever have sex, even meaningless sex, when they are truly in love. This is obviously true for some men, but not for ALL men. That said, I want to stress: I do not think it is cool for a guy to go around, having sex with other girls whenever he pleases. I am a great girl, and not a doormat, that lets their partner run around town, having sex with women. That is not what he wants. He wants a close, monogomus relationship. Hookers, for me, is a risk free way to appease males natural incination for sexual varity. Not something for men who are not satisfied with their partner, and " need" it. My partner does not " need" to see a hooker. Ever. I just do not care and think it isnecessary for a man to only have sex with one women for their entire life, IF they remain together for their lives..... It makes no sence to me, I do not think meaningless sex every couple of years means a man does not love his partner, is nto satisfied, and that if he " met the one: for him, he would not enjoy another body to have sex with occasionally. I was really annoyed and upset, about a person on this website, a couple of them in fact, who told me that my boyfriend cannot possible me in true love with me - if he is able to carry through, with having sex with another women. I believe a man can be truly in love, and enjoy sex with another body once in a blue moon. I think men in love, some of them ( not all) can separate sex and intimacy, and purely enjoy their natural urges, which I do nort believe die when a man is in love. At least not for all men. I just had to put this out there - I am sick of people who assume my relationship is half @sses, cr@ppy, and that my partner does not think I am enough for him, and therefore needs other women.... he would rather never have sex with another women again, if it meant losing me. Finally - it is not something he thinks about often, if at all, or " needs". There is no emphasis on hookers in our relationship. He never askes me to see one, or thinks about being with other girls. It is just a thing I encourage him to do once a year or so, because I do not think a man in love, has to be with one women for many years, sexually. It is limiting, in my opinion, and pointless, to stop a man experiencing another body purely for sex, when the urge is verty natural,a nd strong in certain men. NOt to do often, but in general. ... Anyone who thought it was totally crazy and not true that a guy can be comitted and crazy about a girl, sexually and otherwise, could be ABLE to have sex with another women - have now heard my story. I am like any other women with self respect - if my partner needs other girls in order to be happy, I have other options, and do not need a relationship in order to be fulfilled and happy in life. I would leave a man, if he did not show that he was totally crazy about me. Hookers in my relationship, are a " privilage" not a " need" my partner has. No hookers would not bother him. If it did, as I said, I have men who would only " need" me.... I only allow hooker privilages for men who show they only " need" me, and any hookers are a happy bonus.
William Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 Moderator note: A number of posts have been merged into this thread from a now closed thread which went off-topic. My apologies if it reads less than as a smooth merge. I tried to preserve continuity as best possible. Also, this thread will be more closely moderated for civility and respect and to remain relevant to the topic of opinions of prostitution in general. Be mindful of that. Thanks for your attention.
Feelsgoodman Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 Matthew 7:1-6 “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. …" Matthew 21:31. "I tell you the truth, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you." A feminist quoting from the Bible? How amusing A few more quotes for you to ponder: For the lips of an immoral woman drip honey, and her mouth is smoother than oil; but in the end she is bitter as wormwood, sharp as a two-edged sword. Her feet go down to death, her steps lay hold of hell. (Proverbs 5:3-5) And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.(Leviticus 21:9)
somedude81 Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 So what's the going rate in the U.K? How come when ever I hear of prostitution in Europe, it's always about Amsterdam? What other countries allow it?
carhill Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 From Wikipedia: In eight European countries (Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Greece, Turkey, Hungary and Latvia) prostitution is legal and regulated. Here's a map There are also places where it is legal and unregulated
somedude81 Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 From Wikipedia: In eight European countries (Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Greece, Turkey, Hungary and Latvia) prostitution is legal and regulated. Here's a map There are also places where it is legal and unregulated Hmm, so it's legal in most of western Europe. Now why is the US so behind?
casey1989 Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 So what's the going rate in the U.K? Its not as simple as the going rate. You could obviously pick up the very few streetwalkers up from £10 Then there are girls that work in a parlour, prices range from £50 for half an hour. But the parlour will take between 30-50% of that money. You then have the agencies and indies. Indie's charge whatever they like. The 'standard' figure tends to be £150 for an hour. This is the figure that most people see as mid-range and price them self accordingly. Agencies in the UK charge about this as well. Agencies take around 20-50% of a girls earnings. However in central london an agency will change clients anywhere between £200-500 an hour. Some independent girls do as well. As an independent the biggest consideration regarding price is how many client's you want to see and how much marketing you are prepared to put in. For example the girl that charges £250 an hour may only have one or two bookings a week, whereas the girl charging £100 per hour may see 5 or more clients that week. The girl charging £250 though will be expected to be in some way better than the £100 girl. This is usually through marketing oneself as upmarket, and providing a better experience for clients (i.e a luxury flat, champagne etc).
somedude81 Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 Its not as simple as the going rate. You could obviously pick up the very few streetwalkers up from £10 Then there are girls that work in a parlour, prices range from £50 for half an hour. But the parlour will take between 30-50% of that money. You then have the agencies and indies. Indie's charge whatever they like. The 'standard' figure tends to be £150 for an hour. This is the figure that most people see as mid-range and price them self accordingly. Agencies in the UK charge about this as well. Agencies take around 20-50% of a girls earnings. However in central london an agency will change clients anywhere between £200-500 an hour. Some independent girls do as well. As an independent the biggest consideration regarding price is how many client's you want to see and how much marketing you are prepared to put in. For example the girl that charges £250 an hour may only have one or two bookings a week, whereas the girl charging £100 per hour may see 5 or more clients that week. The girl charging £250 though will be expected to be in some way better than the £100 girl. This is usually through marketing oneself as upmarket, and providing a better experience for clients (i.e a luxury flat, champagne etc). I'm assuming that you are in indie? £150 = roughly $233. Heh, that's pretty close to the average rate over here. Of course the cost can fluctuate depending on the girl. Thanks for sharing.
123321 Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 I'm aware of that, dear girl. I mentioned my computer was password protected so people wouldn't start saying someone else was using my computer, searching for prostitute websites, and that is why those pop-up ads were appearing. I use Chrome and the only time, literally, I ever see those sex banners is when I look over my GF shoulder while she's surfing porn. I would expect sex adds on a porn site. If you are getting a lot of sex popups, your PC may be infected. So you've never gone on Craigslist, but yet you seem to know several hookers and the marital status of all of their clients. The local sports bars here are stuffed full of hookers, why would I go to Craigslist to try and have a beer? I don't know several, I think I know ... dozens for sure, maybe hundreds, but not in the Biblical sense. When I went to Craigslist, I saw a bunch of CE adds but the dozen or so I perused were not advertising for prostitution, and CL policies in fact proscribe this. So where do you see this? I'm well aware of what fornication means. You are the one who started throwing that term around, trying to make this a wider issue than the legalization of prostitution. Prostitutes commit fornication for money. If you are anti-fornication then fine but it seems like your views are logically inconsistent, in that you complain about the effects of fornication, but condemn prostitution but not fornication. So is it the getting paid or the sex you have an issue with? When my pop up blocker is turned off, I get a myriad of ads, but none for sex sites. I never get anything I don't have respect for women that have sex for money, but I respect their right to have sex for money and I support the legalization of prostitution. I like it when people are logical and concise. As much as I love Casey's honesty and overall written words here....I gotta say I agree with Furious. I don't believe any dad would want his family into this ... I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, and I would probably welcome reasonable efforts to repurpose some of the wasted effort we currently have into something constructive to assist folks in exiting the work if they want.
Els Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 The golden question that needs answering IMO Yeah, I'll try to steer the thread back in that direction. Re: Johan's question, I honestly think that some (not all) of the strongest voices against prostitution are using infidelity as a crutch. Even if there were a law requiring that prostitution businesses do a background check on every person who goes in to make sure that they are not married, I doubt everyone would be able to come to terms with the profession being a legal one. I have a feeling that they would pull out the next most convenient argument against it, and it would never end. It is a case of having a pre-set opinion on certain things due to upbringing or religion, and pulling out reasons to support that opinion, rather than the other way around. Hopefully I am wrong, though. 1
denise_xo Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 I'm not American either. The government has NO place in the bedroom. No government should be given the right or control or tell consenting adults what they can, or cannot do when it comes to sex. OK, I thought you were referring to a proposed legislation or something, sorry.
JustJoe Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 The government has no right to be in the bedroom, as long as the bedroom is being used for free. The government has every right to regulate commerce as a source of revenue (taxes), or in a public health capacity. If sex is being used as a commodity, then it should be regulated , just like any other commodity. 1
zengirl Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 Well, apparently you live a very sheltered internet life. All I have to do is go to Craigslist if I want to buy or sell something, like used sporting equipment, electronics, household goods, etc., and there, on the same front page is "Casual Encounters", on which prostitutes advertise their services and often post their pictures. But you have to click on Casual Encounters to get there, and anyone with any understanding of the English language would understand what was there. It's not ALL hookers, as I understand, but it is all sex. I advertise jobs on Craigslist sometimes, and I've bought things on there, and met roommates on there, and I've never ONCE clicked on Casual Encounters. No one is tempting me or encouraging me to do so. I've also never clicked on loads of other sections that don't apply to what I'm looking for! Craigslist is an ad site where you go LOOKING for what you want. I get pop-ups for "Get Laid Tonight", or any number of other ones, based on links or websites that I have gone to with no intention of finding a hooker. So it's pretty easy to be tempted, and for hookers to advertise their services online. I've seen stuff for webcam sites or whatever occasionally if I clicked the wrong site (i.e. typed in the wrong "love shack" or something -- the name of this site is evocative) but it's all malware, as Elwsyth says, or phone sex chat lines, which are legal anyway. And I see them pretty rarely. Let's not kidd ourselves. If a husband is going through a rough patch with his wife, he may be tempted to click on those links or websites some night when he's feeling low, and as long as there are women ready and willing to help him betray his vows, the threat will be there. The "threat" in that situation doesn't come from prostitutes in my view, but from the people involved in the marriage. I honestly don't believe Hubby would go to a prostitute because we had a rough patch or fight. Or any of the men I know, really. Of course, if there weren't women out there purposely trying to seduce him, and sell their sexual favors to him, knowing full well he was married, then we wouldn't have this problem, would we? What an ugly view. Why the need to compete sexually with other women? That's what I see when people write that sort of thing. I also just don't get the "seduction" thing. Hookers aren't trying to seduce anyone generally; they usually are perfectly able to find willing men who need no seduction. Hell, there are far less adds for prostitutes and probably would be even if they were legal than any good and service out there, and I don't see anyone saying McDonalds is trying to seduce me to buy a frappe. Seduction and paid sex have little in common, I'd say. 1
Ross MwcFan Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 Okay, weird, my last post was suposed to have gone into the 'Why do people think lowly of theives?' topic. Somehow I posted it in this one by mistake.
Scottdmw Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 So what do you think about the rape statistics that I linked, that encompass and compare entire countries? . . . Data when taken without context and appropriate real-life pragmatism is meaningless in social sciences, is my opinion. I am still interested in what you think about the rape statistics that I posted. I would agree to you that I don't believe the rape incidence is so different in those countries, and that this demonstrates a peril of collecting such statistics. I also agree that it is perfectly possible the statistics I posted have flaws. If you would like to talk about those flaws I'm open to that. But, the point I'm trying to push back against is the idea that we can just throw all the statistics out the window and rely on personal experience instead. No, actually, not if you're intent on debating that issue, as you seem to be attempting to do. Otherwise, sure. For instance, I don't have a stand on which political party I feel is best suited to dredge America out of its current economic situation. That is why you don't see me getting into debates with people about that in the politics section. What is the purpose of debating if you don't even KNOW what stance you're taking? Other than to ruffle feathers, that is. That may be true for debating. I prefer discussing to debating, where we talk about arguments and evidence with a somewhat open mind to try to understand the truth. If your mind is so made up that no amount of evidence or argument is going to change it, that seems undesirable to me. I agree with this. What do you feel about all the points that have been made about the OTHER benefits of legalization, leaving trafficking aside? I think some of the advantages you talk about are real. At least some prostitutes would have better protections. The point I've been trying to make is that I'm not convinced that's how it would work out for the majority of prostitutes. I think that legalization of anything tends to drive up demand. Men who would not go to a prostitute before might go if they were located in the local strip mall and there was no stigma or chance of legal prosecution. If the demand is driven on, that pressures the supply to increase. Based on the evidence I've looked at, I suspect that most of that supply is going to come from trafficked or forced women. It doesn't help to say you will legally regulate that. What would likely happen is that prostitutes who can will get into the legal brothels with the protections, and service the men who are willing to pay more for the legal service. All the men who don't want to pay more, or who want to visit underage women or not use condoms or whatever, will continue to go to illegal brothels. Some of the evidence I presented suggests this is true. If you would like to have a discussion about the evidence, I'd be happy to post more. Scott
Els Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 I would agree to you that I don't believe the rape incidence is so different in those countries, and that this demonstrates a peril of collecting such statistics. I also agree that it is perfectly possible the statistics I posted have flaws. If you would like to talk about those flaws I'm open to that. But, the point I'm trying to push back against is the idea that we can just throw all the statistics out the window and rely on personal experience instead. What are you using to debunk those rape statistics, though? Are you not using common sense, general knowledge, logic, and personal experience? You have said that you do not believe the rape statistics, but you did not need me to cite opposing studies for that to be the case. Why then do I need opposing studies to debunk your statistics, and nothing else will suffice? That may be true for debating. I prefer discussing to debating, where we talk about arguments and evidence with a somewhat open mind to try to understand the truth. If your mind is so made up that no amount of evidence or argument is going to change it, that seems undesirable to me. Yet, is that not the case with yourself and Kathy? Nothing in this thread has swayed your stance on prostitution one bit. You do not express your exact stance on the other issues surrounding it clearly, and those may be changing, but your root belief on prostitution in and of itself will never change no matter what we say. Surely you can see that? I think some of the advantages you talk about are real. At least some prostitutes would have better protections. The point I've been trying to make is that I'm not convinced that's how it would work out for the majority of prostitutes. It depends on the way it is done. I think that legalization of anything tends to drive up demand. Men who would not go to a prostitute before might go if they were located in the local strip mall and there was no stigma or chance of legal prosecution. If the demand is driven on, that pressures the supply to increase. Based on the evidence I've looked at, I suspect that most of that supply is going to come from trafficked or forced women. It doesn't help to say you will legally regulate that. What would likely happen is that prostitutes who can will get into the legal brothels with the protections, and service the men who are willing to pay more for the legal service. All the men who don't want to pay more, or who want to visit underage women or not use condoms or whatever, will continue to go to illegal brothels. Some of the evidence I presented suggests this is true. If you would like to have a discussion about the evidence, I'd be happy to post more. Your two bolded statements contradict each other. If the men were afraid to go to illegal brothels before prostitution was legalized, why would they not be afraid to go to illegal brothels after prostitution was legalized? Going to illegal brothels in a legalized state still ends up with legal prosecution.
Scottdmw Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 Those are separate types of criminal acts tangential to the practice of prostitution itself. If customers of prostitution want underage girls, or to not use condoms, that is not tangential to prostitution. It is an inseparable part of the issue. In the U.S. I don't imagine there would be a problem supplying willing prostitutes were it legal. I've known women who were in an economic pinch and have mentioned they were thinking of doing some light "escorting," and these were normal women, not crazy or drug addicts. This is your personal opinion based on talking to a few women in one location. Do you have any evidence? I presented evidence that in Australia when they legalized prostitution it didn't get rid of the illegal prostitution or trafficking, demonstrating that they were not able to fill the demand otherwise. This is evidence of poor enforcement and even possible government corruption, not that legal prostitution attracts illegal prostitution and trafficking. Same goes for Amsterdam. Solution? Clean up government, not restrict the freedom of the citizens. It is evidence that points to the fact that legalizing prostitution does not particularly get rid of illegal prostitution. Sounds like a baseless assertion; feminist infused academia is going to pump stuff like this out. As 123321's post demonstrates, the "trafficking" issue is an exaggerated feminist issue all over the world. This is just another example of feminism promoting its self-interest in maintaining sacred cows over addressing public issues in a reasonable way. So, you are willing to believe the word of one person posting on an anonymous forum over a study in a peer-reviewed journal? Look, I agree with you that feminist statistics can get inflated. But, we can't use this approach of governing the policy of nations by people's personal experiences with prostitution. Some kind of large-scale studies are necessary. If you don't like the study I posted, post your own. If you're not willing to look at evidence, I guess I'm not really interested in a discussion of how your personal experience or that of some other poster should determine public policy. No I don't, but do know the extent the "trafficking" issue has been exaggerated as part of a political agenda of asserting the victimization of women, and that when that happens, all sorts of bogus stats and studies are the result. The only real proof of whether legal prostitution attracts trafficking in the U.S. is currently in Nevada, and it's the burden of folks who claim increased slavery traffic will result to prove such with data from the well-established industry in that state. How do you “know” that? It sounds like it's just your opinion. I don't think it's worth it providing you data from Nevada. You have made it clear that for any data I provide you will just dismiss it as “feminist” propaganda. If you want to have a discussion post some data of your own, as I already have, and we can talk about whose data is better. Based on every feminist statistic or study I've ever read being a lie or based on lies, am not going to spend time looking into the trafficking issue as I know it will end up being exaggerated, and know no reasoned analysis presented here will change anyone's mind. Such are the results of crying wolf for 50 years, people stop listening to it. Every single one huh? That's quite a claim. There's definitely a lot of that which goes on, but to say it's all wrong? It sounds like you have already made up your mind to the point of not being interested in any evidence to the contrary. Scott
Scottdmw Posted June 13, 2012 Posted June 13, 2012 What are you using to debunk those rape statistics, though? Are you not using common sense, general knowledge, logic, and personal experience? You have said that you do not believe the rape statistics, but you did not need me to cite opposing studies for that to be the case. Why then do I need opposing studies to debunk your statistics, and nothing else will suffice? I have admitted more than once that statistics are not perfect and are subject to problems. If we really wanted to get to the truth of rape statistics in the US versus Kazakhstan, we would have to do a lot more digging. I would never claim in any discussion or debate that I know for a fact those rape statistics are wrong, because I don't, I simply indicated my offhand suspicion. Nor would I claim I know which way they are wrong. It is true that common sense and logic play a role in interpreting statistics, but that doesn't mean that they can completely trump all possible statistics or free one from the necessity of looking at and discussing statistics. Yet, is that not the case with yourself and Kathy? Nothing in this thread has swayed your stance on prostitution one bit. You do not express your exact stance on the other issues surrounding it clearly, and those may be changing, but your root belief on prostitution in and of itself will never change no matter what we say. Surely you can see that? What we have mostly been talking about is the validity of statistics versus personal experience, not even really prostitution. You're right, no one has swayed my mind on the idea that personal experiences do not trump evidence. With regards to legalization of prostitution, we have mainly been discussing only a narrow part of it dealing with whether it affects trafficking and coercion or not, and that discussion has mainly consisted of me trying to present evidence and others saying that the evidence is meaningless. The two of us originally had a discussion more directly about prostitution itself which was relatively brief. I think we largely agreed that to an individual it is self-destructive and better avoided. It is true that my basic ideas about that have not changed. Very little has been presented addressing that though. That is the main discussion I wanted to have. Lacking that, the second discussion I wanted to have was regarding evidence of whether legalization is going to overall harm or help people. I presented some indicating it would overall harm. It's not impossible I would change my point of view on this question, but I’m not going to do it because somebody presents anecdotal evidence from their personal life. Your two bolded statements contradict each other. If the men were afraid to go to illegal brothels before prostitution was legalized, why would they not be afraid to go to illegal brothels after prostitution was legalized? Going to illegal brothels in a legalized state still ends up with legal prosecution. Some men who would not go to prostitutes before would likely choose to start if legal brothels were available. The ones who were already going to illegal ones would continue going to either legal or illegal ones. The demand would increase. Scott
Recommended Posts