Why Do People think Lowly Of Hookers?

[123321]

Just like there is data that says most human trafficking in US is for farming and not for prostitution.

 

That may be true, I know that slavery in the modern world is predominately for traditional labor, not sex work. The term trafficking has been twisted so much now that it's almost perfectly useless.

 

In fact most of the trafficking I'm personally aware of isn't even morally objectionable to most people.

 

 

I'm not forcing the link. There IS data and statistics that show the majority of customers of hookers are married men, hence the main part of their "occupation" involves helping married men to cheat on their wives.

 

If fornication and adultery are to remain legal, it follows that outlawing prostitution on the grounds that it promotes either or both is illogical. If one wishes to outlaw adultery, why not just argue for that?

 

Is that what you would like to see, or is adultery really just a red herring here?

 

 

You are proposing that the proscription of prostitution is just because:

1. it is harmful to marriages and families
2. it is degrading to women and children
3. it promotes human trafficking and exploitation of women and children, and puts them at risk of abuse and violence.

 

Since you cannot bring yourself to commit to those simple points, I will proceed without you. If I was incorrect, be aware that you should correct me if I am wrong on what you believe, but claiming I am forming a strawman or otherwise putting something in your mouth would be disingenuous at this point.

 

 

One by one.

 

Prostitution should be proscribed because it is harmful to marriages and families. There are many logical problems with this argument. First, you haven't established any sort of causal link between prostitution and damaged marriages. This is the most basic and alone it utterly flattens the argument at it's foundation.

 

On top of that is the fact that many things are correlated with or can contribute to damaged marriages and/or adultery that we don't proscribe, such as expensive or time consuming hobbies, women in low cut blouses, expensive sports cars, consuming alcohol, clubs to consume the alcohol, gym memberships, business trips, allowing women outside the house, short skirts, mixed gender workplaces, hotels, cash money, passwords, broom closets, manicures, and so on.

 

Further, some of the above listed (and unlisted) do not involve the right of a person to control their own body.

 

 

Prostitution should be proscribed because it is degrading to women and children. The first issue I have with this is simply the gratuitous inclusion of "children" in the specious argument. No one is proposing the decriminalization of child prostitution, and children in this context is usually a misnomer anyway. Like a criminal attorney who refers to his hulking 6' 2 230 pound 17 year old client as "the minor child" every chance he gets, most of the "children" in prostitution are late teens and sexually mature, not little kids.

 

Second, I find the lack of concern for men and one assumes boys in the argument a matter of concern.

 

Finally, if one finds particular work degrading one should abstain from doing it, no one here is promoting slavery. This alone annihilates the argument.

 

 

Prostitution should be proscribed because it promotes human trafficking and exploitation of women and children, and puts them at risk of abuse and violence. Human trafficking is a term that has become so twisted by those who wish to control the morals of others that it's almost useless. In fact I wouldn't consider all trafficking evil, although I would never promote lawlessness myself. For instance several women I spoke to a few weeks ago were trafficked into a bar that allows them to prostitute themselves. The trafficking was simply the act of relatives or friends who helped defray the cost of travel or otherwise facilitated their new employment so they could come to a new town for work.

 

Since prostitution is illegal, any assistance like this is trafficking. It is fairly benign and is nothing at all like human slavery, which is the image most people who use the term "human trafficking" are generally trying to dredge up.

 

Human slavery is predominately for farm and other unskilled labor. How do you feel about taking the resources devoted to enforcing prostitution laws and using those limited resources to directly combat human slavery instead?

 

Exploitation is a buzzword in this context.

 

As for abuse and violence, people who are marginalized by society because their working conditions make them outlaws are always going to be vulnerable simply due to the fact that availing themselves of the police protections the rest of the people have is not an option for them.

 

This may be due to immigration laws, anti-prostitution laws, or any number of other reasons, but proscribing prostitution makes this situation worse, not better.

 

 

My arguments are simple:

• The acts themselves are legal.
• It should be legal to sell anything one can legally give away.
• A person has the right to control their own body.

Edited July 10, 2012 by 123321

[KathyM]

Just like there is data that says most human trafficking in US is for farming and not for prostitution.

Not true. More than 80% of human trafficking in the U.S. is of women and girls for the purposes of prostitution. I posted an article published in the Washington Times showing these statistics, but the moderators are reviewing it before they will post it. But I posted something similar in this thread previously showing that same statistic--more than 80% are for the purposes of prostitution.

[KathyM]

And I can easily say the opposite – that prostitution has helped marriages and relationships. And why can I say that, because like your beliefs, there’s actually some truth in what I say. But, as most people know already – the overwhelming truth is that prostitution has little impact on relationships overall. The small truths you and I highlight are inconsequential next to the larger picture.

 

Prostitutes know as much about their customers as any service provider. Pont is moot.

 

Most service providers and sales points aren’t interested in the personal lives of their customers. If you have an issue with that – with the lack of caring they all have towards their customer welfare - then you must also have an issue with almost every other service provider and sales point in operation. But so far you have not shown any inclination to spread your stance any further a field than this one industry. Thus, your argument is not really about caring for the family unit (because so many other industries that you simply ignore can be harmful to families also), your argument is simply a vehicle that you choose to use to attack an industry that you dislike with.

 

Many cleaners are looked down upon. Cleaning can be a demeaning job. That’ the point. It is one of many jobs where people often look down on those employed within them. Prostitution does not have a monopoly on demeaning employment. And I say again, the cleaning industry alone absolutely dwarfs the prostitution industry and it’s oft mentioned near neighbor – porn.

 

My country’s record blows your view right out of the water. No prostitution trafficking cases reported so far in the six odd years prostitution has been legalized. Nonetheless, I believe that trafficking, of all types, increases with immigration whereupon some of these recent arrivals see business opportunities through offering goods or services (most legal, some illegal all sourced from their homelands) to their newly arrived community. My country alone has had a huge influx of Asians within the last two decades. They make up 10% , more or less, of our population already. Now, the overwhelming majority of all this is good, but you’re always going to get your bad elements, namely drugs, organized gangs, gambling and while it has yet to be reported – I’m sure trafficking has reared its ugly head already. But the latter, the trafficking, no matter how heinous that is, is obviously insignificant in size relative to prostitution in general and certainly relative to the other crimes mentioned given that those other crimes have been numerous and thus received a lot of attention here in recent years. Points being, immigration is a major driver of trafficking in my view and trafficking overall makes up only a small proportion of those involved within the industry.

Somehow, I doubt any wife is going to be happy about her husband cheating on her with a prostitute. But I guess you don't really know much about women and marriages, do you? Funny how some people just pull out comments out of their ass and try to pass them off as fact.

 

Actually, I have compared the prostitution industry to the illegal drug industry. Some people claim illegal drugs should be legalized also. Fortunately, the lawmakers in Washington have a bit more common sense than some of the posters on this board. But since other industries are not the topic of this thread, I have not debated about them.

 

It's a proven fact that countries where prostitution was legalized resulted in human trafficking for the purposes of prostitution to rise. Those studies and statistics were posted earlier in this thread. But, of course, you are just making claims with nothing to back up your comments.

[123321]

It's a proven fact that countries where prostitution was legalized resulted in human trafficking for the purposes of prostitution to rise. Those studies and statistics were posted earlier in this thread. But, of course, you are just making claims with nothing to back up your comments.

 

Some countries. Not all. You will find that in those countries where "legalized prostitution increased human trafficking" several factors are consistently in play in whole or part. First, the definition of human trafficking for the purposes of collecting the statistic will be very broad. Second, the "legalized" prostitution is usually still highly regulated. Finally, people who report this sort of info will shy away from looking hard at the human slavery numbers, while implying that trafficking is the same thing.

 

For instance, Australia. Prostitution is legal but highly regulated and restricted. If a prostitute wants to ply her trade the same way a ditch digger would, she will be working illegally, and anyone who assists her will be a trafficker, and she will be considered trafficked. Anyone who aides a foreigner to enter the country to work illegally will be considered a trafficker, and the person they assist is considered trafficked. Even when the person trafficked is complicit in the "trafficking".

 

If you want an honest look at the figures for people being enslaved, look at the human slavery statistics (/captain obvious) and ignore "trafficking" as a measure of slavery.

 

Now if you are concerned with the business of helping people travel illegally and so on, well that's trafficking but it's not all abusive. Most people and organizations that are concerned with trafficking claim to be concerned with what amounts to slavery, but they report numbers for trafficking because those numbers are much bigger and reflect a demographic that is more likely to bring in donations.

 

 

By the way, I highly doubt prostitution is illegal in the country you live in.

[123321]

Not true. More than 80% of human trafficking in the U.S. is of women and girls for the purposes of prostitution.

 

80% of US citizens is what I read. The majority of foreigners trafficked in America are for forced labor.

 

The citizens trafficked are runaways and anyone who is engaged in illegal activities and travelling or otherwise being facilitated. For instance if you and 3 of your best friends decided to travel to New Orleans to turn some tricks during the Mardi Gras celebrations and get caught doing something illegal, well congrats, you are a trafficker and they are trafficked, if authorities choose to so charge.

 

The fact is that most of the people in the prostitution business are not enslaved, they are working at will in a crappy job, like a lot of people do. Most slavery is for labor, worldwide and in America.

 

So what are your concerns with regard to trafficking? If its the human slavery subset, well OK, if not, please explain so we can discuss it logically.

[KathyM]

Some countries. Not all. You will find that in those countries where "legalized prostitution increased human trafficking" several factors are consistently in play in whole or part. First, the definition of human trafficking for the purposes of collecting the statistic will be very broad. Second, the "legalized" prostitution is usually still highly regulated. Finally, people who report this sort of info will shy away from looking hard at the human slavery numbers, while implying that trafficking is the same thing.

 

For instance, Australia. Prostitution is legal but highly regulated and restricted. If a prostitute wants to ply her trade the same way a ditch digger would, she will be working illegally, and anyone who assists her will be a trafficker, and she will be considered trafficked. Anyone who aides a foreigner to enter the country to work illegally will be considered a trafficker, and the person they assist is considered trafficked. Even when the person trafficked is complicit in the "trafficking".

 

If you want an honest look at the figures for people being enslaved, look at the human slavery statistics (/captain obvious) and ignore "trafficking" as a measure of slavery.

 

Now if you are concerned with the business of helping people travel illegally and so on, well that's trafficking but it's not all abusive. Most people and organizations that are concerned with trafficking claim to be concerned with what amounts to slavery, but they report numbers for trafficking because those numbers are much bigger and reflect a demographic that is more likely to bring in donations.

 

 

By the way, I highly doubt prostitution is illegal in the country you live in.

I live in the U.S. Prostitution is illegal here, except for a few remote areas of Nevada.

[joystickd]

Not true. More than 80% of human trafficking in the U.S. is of women and girls for the purposes of prostitution. I posted an article published in the Washington Times showing these statistics, but the moderators are reviewing it before they will post it. But I posted something similar in this thread previously showing that same statistic--more than 80% are for the purposes of prostitution.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Human Trafficking/Trafficking in Persons From department of justice and its interesting

[123321]

I live in the U.S. Prostitution is illegal here, except for a few remote areas of Nevada.

 

No, there is no such Federal statute. Prostitution is likely illegal in the State you live in, but until Texas (or wherever) becomes a sovereign nation it's not a country.

 

Now let's move on and address the rest of the post.

[joystickd]

Not true. More than 80% of human trafficking in the U.S. is of women and girls for the purposes of prostitution. I posted an article published in the Washington Times showing these statistics, but the moderators are reviewing it before they will post it. But I posted something similar in this thread previously showing that same statistic--more than 80% are for the purposes of prostitution.

the link i posted from department of justice says otherwise, but i wonder if you even care about the actual facts

[123321]

the link i posted from department of justice says otherwise, but i wonder if you even care about the actual facts

 

"OVC data are compiled through the Trafficking Information Management System (TIMS). Between 2003 and June 2009, the OVC initiative provided services to a total of 2,699 precertified foreign national suspected victims of trafficking. TIMS data consistently show that the majority of victims served are classified as labor trafficking victims. Between January 2008 and June 2009, 64% of the victims served by OVC-funded service providers were identified as victims of labor trafficking only, 22% as victims of sex trafficking only, and 10% as victims of both labor and sex trafficking. Among confirmed victims of human trafficking identified by high data quality task forces in the HTRS, approximately 43% of undocumented aliens and qualified aliens were victims of labor trafficking, compared to 64% of the foreign national suspected victims of human trafficking served by the OVC task forces."

 

However I'm not clear on the restriction to "foreign national suspected victims of trafficking", it appears that about 87% of the total people trafficked are for sex, but the vast majority of those are minors and should be excluded from any reasonable discussion of legal prostitution. They are also almost all US citizens, not foreigners.

Edited July 10, 2012 by 123321

[A O]

Somehow, I doubt any wife is going to be happy about her husband cheating on her with a prostitute. But I guess you don't really know much about women and marriages, do you?

Point remains the same – just how destructive is prostitution to marriages and relationships. Answer is it’s about as destructive as it is constructive or in other words the effect prostitution has on all relationships is insignificant.

 

But since other industries are not the topic of this thread, I have not debated about them.

If your true focus is really on relationship and family welfare, then every other industry, every other service and sales point that has potential to harm these units should be of concern to you. Thus far no interest outside of prostitution has been forthcoming. Therefore, is your argument really about people welfare or is it about a practice that you take exception to. Evidence so far points to the latter.

 

It's a proven fact that countries where prostitution was legalized resulted in human trafficking for the purposes of prostitution to rise. Those studies and statistics were posted earlier in this thread. But, of course, you are just making claims with nothing to back up your comments.

Again, my country’s experiences disprove your facts, or more importantly gives context to your claims, that being - legalization may increase demand for prostitution and trafficking may increase as a consequence also but neither are certainties to happen. And I add to this my belief that immigration, not legalization increases the likelihood or the frequency of trafficking occurring. But all of this is small bananas.

 

The bigger picture in all this is that trafficking makes up a tiny percentage of those involved within this industry and that prostitution has very, very little impact of any sort on relationships overall. I primarily base that on this observation – in close to ten years of actively following human interaction (this place been one of many sources of material for me) I think this is the first, certainly one of the first prostitution threads I’ve ever participated in. Heck, I still can’t even spell the term “prostitution” without an electronic aid of some sort yet, despite typing it out a gazillion times of late. But my point is, if your concerns had any real validity to them, namely the impact this practice has on relationships and trafficking, then prostitution discussions and or news about your concerns in particular, would be here, there and everywhere. But alas they are not. There is always news about the welfare of prostitutes – it is without doubt a dangerous occupation. There is always news and discussions centered on that but your claims put in context, and certainly compared to their well being are insignificant in comparison.

 

 

Human trafficking in New Zealand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Prostitution reform has little effect - National - NZ Herald News

 

Legalized brothels

[123321]

I'm not forcing the link. There IS data and statistics that show the majority of customers of hookers are married men, hence the main part of their "occupation" involves helping married men to cheat on their wives.

 

There is only a flimsy correlation. If you go to Iceland, you might well find that blondes eat most of the chocolate cake consumed there, but it would be a mistake to conclude that chocolate cake causes blondeness, or that non-blondes don't eat chocolate cake, or any number of other extrapolations.

 

In this specific case, a person who is going to purchase the services of a hooker would have to be of the appropriate age, income, and would in all other ways have to believe that the hooker was the best option at the moment. That demographic and the demographic of married men is going to have a significant common subset.

 

Further, you are talking about force of law. I would consider it logical to "view hookers poorly" for the reason that they don't mind having sex with married men or women. I view people poorly who do that for free too, it's a personality flaw.

 

But I wouldn't advocate making accessory-to-adultery illegal, and you are taking it even one step past that.

 

You are saying that it's legally OK to be an accessory-to-adultery as long as one does it for free, or as long as the remuneration is vague enough. If however the price and exchange is clear, it should be illegal. That argument is devoid of logic until such time as you can show a difference between the two cases.

 

Further, you haven't promoted the idea of making adultery illegal, which would be the logical 1st step in a legal campaign to stamp it out.

 

Moreover, there is no evidence that the use of prostitutes is even a majority or significant contributor to marital infidelity.

[kaylan]

Luckily Im not so ugly that I need to spend money just for women to have sex with me that they wont enjoy.

 

If other blokes wanna pay for sex....let em. It leaves the quality women for me. xD

 

Id rather see dudes actually try and better themselves in the dating department though.

[123321]

Luckily Im not so ugly that I need to spend money just for women to have sex with me that they wont enjoy.

 

If other blokes wanna pay for sex....let em. It leaves the quality women for me. xD

 

Id rather see dudes actually try and better themselves in the dating department though.

 

For me it's not about that, it's about peoples rights to control their own bodies and so on. Every unwarranted incursion into our human rights takes a little from all of us. Or maybe the men who came out in favor of womens right to vote, or the whites who were in favor of abolishing slavery, had something to gain personally from those acts as well.

 

A lot of guys would like to be as ugly as Hugh Grant or Charlie Sheen ....

Edited July 11, 2012 by 123321

[Robert Z]

Luckily Im not so ugly that I need to spend money just for women to have sex with me that they wont enjoy.

 

I'm so sorry! Why don't women enjoy having sex with you?

 

If other blokes wanna pay for sex....let em. It leaves the quality women for me. xD

 

Don't be so sure! You should see the women I see regularly. They are BEAUTIFUL!!! Not to mention 30 years younger than me. And it's better than one-night-stands because we get to know each otherand what we each like.

[Robert Z]

For me it's not about that....

 

Me either! Well, okay, yes it is. But you're right in that there is no logic to the laws.

 

After spending most of another week in the land of beautiful women, the question posed by this thread seems even more silly than last week. I don't think lowly of hookers. I adore them. They make me very, very happy. It is hard to even think of them as prostitutes after all of the crap I've seen on TV. These girls are nothing like that. They are beautiful, classy, sweet, giving, caring, fun, and great company. It is like having a girlfriend with all of the hassles removed. We have a great time and I get great sex whenever I want it. What more can one ask?

 

Sure I pay for it. But my wife was far most costly in more ways than I can count.

[123321]

.... my wife was far most costly in more ways than I can count.

 

Oh sure, my wife was the most expensive tail I seldom got too. Well over $3000 a month for what can only be generously described as infrequent bad sex while enduring huge unwanted changes in lifestyle.

 

I learn slowly, but I learn well.

[Mme. Chaucer]

 

After spending most of another week in the land of beautiful women, the question posed by this thread seems even more silly than last week.

 

At the Bunny Ranch?

[Robert Z]

At the Bunny Ranch?

 

No, this is a member's-only club.