vimothy
yurp
Nothing is black and white
Really, nothing?
Nothing is black and white
Really, nothing?
Not unreasonable.
Now Tea - what about you?
Socks with sandals?
I know at least a couple of friends of mine have paid for sex, and I don't think any the less of them for it.
Really, even in an legislative environment where there is a strong likelihood that the person they paid was exploited in some way?
Well, I wasn't there on either occasion - but knowing the guys concerned I'm fairly sure neither of them would have been raring to go with a terrified and visibly bruised teenager. Of course, a prostitute might not be that obviously exploited and yet still be in that situation for reasons beyond her control, I accept that.
Now you're avoiding the question.
So, a question for those advocating decriminalisation.
Whatever about the morals of selling sex - do you think its moral for a man to buy sex?
Right, so its bad if the women involved are 'visibly bruised teenagers', whereas a seemingly cheerful & healthy migrant in her 20's whose family has been threatened and is forced to give up 90% of her income if she ever wants to see her passport again is OK? Isnt a main pillar of the argument for decriminalisation that exploitation and abuse is much more likely under the current conditions?
Benny B said:Many of the men had an awareness of the economic coercion and the lack of alternatives in women's entry into prostitution.
Benny B said:Sex buyers in this study seemed to justify their involvement in the sex industry by stating their belief that women in prostitution are essentially different from non-prostituting women.
"Almost nothing" - which still leaves room for the example you give above, and more besides.
Ben, we all have to pay the rent and buy food. We do not all fall into prostitution as a result of financial hardship: vulnerable women and girls do. The idea that regularization would somehow protect women, that prostiution is just a job like any other, is a lie sold by the men who want to maintain this status quo.
The elephant in the room, the thing that nobody here seems to really want to talk about, is that our society is defined by its patriarchal and capitalist (obv the two go hand in hand) structure
They are conditioned, usually from a young age (the younger the better), and attracted or kept there by financial desperation, coercion and manipulation. As a matter of pure survival, the abused are bonded to their abusers and come to rely on them (this is also one of the reasons why women who are beaten, abused and raped by their partners often do not leave them).
Meanwhile men are conditioned into the idea that it is normal to buy sex from somebody whenever they want it – there’s no need to go through the hassle of building a relationship in which their desire is reciprocated.
And that’s why droid’s question about buying sex is not just relevant, but absolutely key to the debate.
Just a couple of rhetorical questions for Benny.
Is there any scenario where you would say that prostitution is not morally wrong? Say a woman of independent means who freely chooses to sell sex with no third parties involved?
Is it only in the context of societies treatment of women that you view prostitution as unacceptable - what about male prostitution?
Not to propagate the happy hooker myth - but can you conceive of a prostitute who actually enjoys her work?
Really, though, it quickly comes down to a definition of 'exploitation'. In the Marxist view, anyone is who is paid a wage by anyone else is exploited, aren't they? Taking that stance, you'd find yourself very limited for choice of where to spend your money if boycotted every shop, pub, restaurant etc. that was 'exploiting' its workers.