Decriminalize Sex

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Legalize and regulate. It makes work safer for sex workers.

Much safer, because it makes trafficking and sexual abuse of minors much more difficult, and it also brings in the medical community by regulating health checks for sex workers.
Legalizing and regulating the sex worker industry also puts pimps out to pasture.

It is never going to be a perfect solution with 100 percent compliance but it swings everything much further in a better direction than it is now.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Until we can fully get our hands around that, I don’t think decriminalizing the sex industry is a wise move.

Part of decriminalizing the sex worker industry involves criminalizing exploit of underage trafficked persons and taking the stigma off the trafficked person.
Decriminalization changes the definition of a minor from "prostitute" to "sex abuse victim" and pushes the criminal aspect onto the customer instead.
In other words, there is NO SUCH THING as a "fifteen year old prostitute" because a fifteen year old prostitute is seen as a victim of human trafficking and the "John" is seen as
the criminal who commits an illegal rape violation instead.

In a regulated system this would be seen as common sense.

 

[Lutherf]

Apparently you do not understand prostitution.

Maybe not, but I do understand human nature and if prostitution is fully legalized and some woman accuses a guy of rape then all he's got to do is say, "She's trying to extort me. She held herself out as a prostitute and I paid her".

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Maybe not, but I do understand human nature and if prostitution is fully legalized and some woman accuses a guy of rape then all he's got to do is say, "She's trying to extort me. She held herself out as a prostitute and I paid her".

Now you're proving that you do not understand how a regulated sex industry really operates.
You're talking about a sex worker who is outside of the regulated system and part OF the regulations includes the fact that if someone is engaged in sex work, it is only legal
if the operator is working IN the system. Now, see if you can think of reasons WHY someone would refuse to work INSIDE the regulated system.
We cannot pretend that we can come up with a utopia so when you complain that a proposed regulated system is NOT a perfect utopia, you are
demonstrating intellectual immaturity.

A regulated sex industry is never going to be perfect, but it WOULD be much better than what we have now, by several orders of magnitude.
Every country that has taken this step reports improvement.

What we are discussing here is harm reduction.

 

[Gatsby]

Now you're proving that you do not understand how a regulated sex industry really operates.

Well in this thread, some of the legalization advocates cite places like Nevada, Netherlands, and Germany as success stories (they are all sex trafficking dystopias).

And the rest of the legalization advocates are opposed to any regulations at all, and attribute those aforementioned failures to not being libertarian *enough*.

So forgive my skepticism that a legalized prostitution regime will get the regulations right, when very few of its advocates seem to even care about getting the regulations right.

 

[Lutherf]

Now you're proving that you do not understand how a regulated sex industry really operates.
You're talking about a sex worker who is outside of the regulated system and part OF the regulations includes the fact that if someone is engaged in sex work, it is only legal
if the operator is working IN the system. Now, see if you can think of reasons WHY someone would refuse to work INSIDE the regulated system.
We cannot pretend that we can come up with a utopia so when you complain that a proposed regulated system is NOT a perfect utopia, you are
demonstrating intellectual immaturity.

A regulated sex industry is never going to be perfect, but it WOULD be much better than what we have now, by several orders of magnitude.
Every country that has taken this step reports improvement.

What we are discussing here is harm reduction.

See, all the regulation stuff was either left out of the OP or I just don't read between the lines as well as you liberals do.

So, out of curiosity, how do you plan on regulating prostitution without putting up barriers to the profession that a certain number of wannabe prostitutes can't manage to overcome?

 

[Bush Lawyer]

Let me be clear...if there is a pimp involved he/she needs to be arrested and charged. Independent operators? Where's the crime?

C all
O ff
Y our
O ld
T ired
E thics

I'm just being Devil's Advocate here.....but...why, if she has consented to the pimping arrangement? Where is the victim?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Ah, you make it all about me because you cannot debate in a civil and rational manner, which would require actually thinking thru what I've posted before returning to your repetition. The bold , repeated, shows that you didnt comprehend a very specific counter statement I made in the post you responded to. I didnt read any further...you are not demonstrating the capability for debating in good faith.

My posts remain for any others to consider.

I have debated you in a civil and rational manner. I provided studies that showed the trauma caused by prostitution to those who engage in it. I provided studies that showed the extremely high incidence of addiction disorder and severe mental illness in sex workers. I have provided evidence and studies that showed that nations that fully legalized sex work rather than just decriminalizing it, increased the rates of sexual exploitation and sex trafficking. I provided evidence that happened in Nevada as well.

At this point, if this were before a judge, your case would be dismissed with prejudice because you have provide no evidence for your claims and completely disregarded all the evidence showing your view on full legalization is wrong. In the real world, every time its been tried, it resulted in more exploitation of sex workers, not less.

I have been on here for 20 years. I change my mind on things all the time when someone else makes a convincing case for their argument or point of view. For example, I used to be completely in favor of full legalization of prostitution, then I read the real world results, and read how much better decriminalization has worked for sex workers, and I changed my mind. I do not understand why so many people on forums like this are just so hell bent against ever changing their mind on anything. What they believe at a the start of a thread is what they believe at the end of a thread no matter what they are presented with between them.

Finally, as to your "HR departments for sex workers claim", HR departments do not protect employees, that is not their purpose at all. Their job is to protect the company. As to your transparency claim. If its illegal to be a pimp, you can both face criminal and civil charges for being a pimp. If you are a venture capital backed legal pimp, then it is much harder for you to face criminal charges and likely, at most, you face civil charges, and if you lobby your state legislature enough, you can ensure that you don't even face them. Industries get civil immunity passed all the time when they have enough money to lobby congress with. This is why we see increased sexual exploitation of sex workers every time and every place sex work is fully legalized instead of just decriminalized. So you can continue with pulling "what ifs" out all you want, but we have real world evidence, and plenty of it. You are wrong. Accept it or not, change your mind or not, but you are wrong. Everything that is currently wrong with making sex work illegal can be addressed by decriminalizing it without making it fully legal, and that has been shown in every country that has decriminalized sex work without legalizing pimping.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

See, all the regulation stuff was either left out of the OP or I just don't read between the lines as well as you liberals do.

So, out of curiosity, how do you plan on regulating prostitution without putting up barriers to the profession that a certain number of wannabe prostitutes can't manage to overcome?

So you still believe in utopias, or you think that I do?

 

[mrjurrs]

I'm just being Devil's Advocate here.....but...why, if she has consented to the pimping arrangement? Where is the victim?

For the same reason that I want drug suppliers arrested instead of drug dealers. The bottom rung on the crime ladder is rarely the person that does any real damage.

I would question the 'consideration' the prostitute received for the agreement.

 

[Bush Lawyer]

For the same reason that I want drug suppliers arrested instead of drug dealers. The bottom rung on the crime ladder is rarely the person that does any real damage.

I would question the 'consideration' the prostitute received for the agreement.

Isn't that for them, in their freedom, to decide?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

For the same reason that I want drug suppliers arrested instead of drug dealers. The bottom rung on the crime ladder is rarely the person that does any real damage.

I would question the 'consideration' the prostitute received for the agreement.

The bottom rungs on the crime ladder are typically the source of the vast majority of violent crime. I am all for going after the supplier, but the supplier isn't out engaging in violence, the dealer is. Now, you might argue that others will take their place if you arrest them, that is true to a degree, but in a city of a few hundred thousand (which is most cities), there are less than a thousand people on average committing 80% of the violent crime in that city. Getting even a third of them off the streets reduces the violent crime rate dramatically. This is why cities are always better off over policed than under policed. In either case, I suppose its a topic for another thread though.

 

[mrjurrs]

Isn't that for them, in their freedom, to decide?

In a free market yes.
In the real world, likely not

 

[mrjurrs]

The bottom rungs on the crime ladder are typically the source of the vast majority of violent crime. I am all for going after the supplier, but the supplier isn't out engaging in violence, the dealer is. Now, you might argue that others will take their place if you arrest them, that is true to a degree, but in a city of a few hundred thousand (which is most cities), there are less than a thousand people on average committing 80% of the violent crime in that city. Getting even a third of them off the streets reduces the violent crime rate dramatically. This is why cities are always better off over policed than under policed. In either case, I suppose its a topic for another thread though.

It is not "...true to a degree...", it is true. And the violent crime created by the conflict surrounding the replacement warfare will repeat again and again.

 

[roguenuke]

Maybe not, but I do understand human nature and if prostitution is fully legalized and some woman accuses a guy of rape then all he's got to do is say, "She's trying to extort me. She held herself out as a prostitute and I paid her".

He can claim that now. It being legal or not doesn't have any affect on that hypothetical scenario, not really.