You answered your own question, in the bolded part.
Anyone who is a sex trafficker, male or female, absolutely should be convicted.
Yes, if governments make it legal to take advantage of vulnerable people, then it will mechanically lower the crime rate. That doesn't make it good.
It is clear women will benefit when laws used against them are relaxed based on social change.
Anyone? Jeffrey Epstein, President Donald Trump's best friend was trafficking girls out of Trump's Club. Trump continues paving the way to a pardon for Ghislaine the co-conspirator in the most famous Sex Trafficking Case in the USA. We will not stop even if it means going all the way the the White-house to expose the Truth.
Women have been the most venerable victims of religion for thousand of years and have suffered both physically and mentally due to being subjugated by men in power passing un-just legislation to control human behavior. The only thing illegal is the use of money that changes hands between two consenting adults. It looks like you are not interested in freedom of choice of a woman to be compensated for a professional service that gives men pleasure. The men actually see the value of having a date without all the pretenses of dinner and a movie before sex. Prostitution cuts through the BS. IN and Out. Wam-Bam Thank you Ma'am !
Because it’s consensual sex between adults. The government can’t regulate it what so ever.
The government banned solicitation of sex for hire. Therefore it is being regulated. And this is illegal with statutory crime. Which punishes anyone who violates the law. And why is the question does the need to ban and criminalize the use of money or gifts for sexual intercourse, has long been debated. The big question is when will the government wake up and stop the insanity of expecting people to be subjugated.
You are arguing things I never claimed and don’t believe.Didnt say that. Dont make stuff up, then you wont have to misdiagnose "strawmen."
I addressed this already. No point in repeating it. You certainly are not refuting it.
--and--
If there is a legal "pimping"system that comes of it...women arent forced into joining it and are much more protected if they do. They'd be reduced to managerial and administrative roles. So your repeated statement still makes no sense. No one denies sex workers can be harmed or exploited. So can people in other industries. But since we ...you are a good example...seem to see sex as some moral or special 'bugaboo'...it's less visible and acceptable to expose and fight. What do you think OSHA is for? Why it was created? Remember the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire? Why wouldnt OSHA apply as appropriate to escort services that can legally provide sex? You see "exceptions" due to it being sex everywhere. That's part of the problem. Are there abuses and would there be abuses? Sure...just like in any industry. See: Harvey Weinstein. But with it being legal...it would reduce risks depending on the choices the women made.
Re: your studies. What about the studies on the psychological toll taken on first responders, cops, EMTs, ER docs, firefighters? Terrible trauma and PTSD, high suicide rates, high divorce rates, high injury rates, crazy high cancer rates for firefighters. But it's their choice. But hey, society finds that a lot more noble than $$ for sex, right? It's still hypocritical.
endsexualexploitation.org
We tried it in Nevada, it has resulted in even more exploitation of sex workers.
endsexualexploitation.org
You are arguing things I never claimed and don’t believe.
Sex workers are often extremely vulnerable and very easily exploited. You seem to think that creating a billion dollar industry employing them will result in less exploitation for them. In what other industry where the employees are predominantly vulnerable and easily exploited, did making it a big legal business result in less exploitation? Did legalization of share cropping result in less exploitation? What about for stripping? Does fining them for calling in sick result in less exploitation?
Moreover, we tried this social experiment in Nevada, it resulted in the worst exploitation and sex trafficking in the country. https://www.awakenjustice.org/heres...ampaignheres-why-nevada-is-not-safe-for-women
State-Enabled Sex Slavery Exposed by Nevada Brothel Lawsuit
Sex Trafficking Survivor Sues Nevada, Government Officials, Brothels, and Brothel Owner/County Commissioner for Violating 13th Amendment WASHINGTON, DC (February 8, 2024) – The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) and Jason Guinasso, a Nevada Attorney representing victims of sex...
You see what I am saying, we need to only look at states and countries that have legalized rather than just decriminalized prostitution to see real world results that match up with exactly what I have been arguing.
This is also something that can be remedied by better oversight and access...by legitimizing instead of selectively and puritanically moralizing over sex for sale and thus reducing prostitutes shame and reticence at demanding better treatment and knowing they'll be supported if they do...just like other workers. People's feelings and judgements shouldnt affect other people's choices that arent harming others.
Some because they have been trafficked and are basically sex slaves.
Are You Married ?
Can a boss legally add the job duty of "you must bow before me and kiss my feet at work every day and every hour come into my office and show me your underwear or you're fired" without facing a lawsuit?
From the link: In 2005, another study on 11 European Union countries, requested by the European Parliament’s Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, found that stricter prostitution laws seem to produce fewer human trafficking victim. In order to abolish sex trafficking, we must eliminate the demand for prostitution. The demand elimination strategy is the only way to put pimps and traffickers out of business and protect the rights of women and children to attain a life free from exploitation. Quoted from AwakenWe tried it in Nevada, it has resulted in even more exploitation of sex workers.
State-Enabled Sex Slavery Exposed by Nevada Brothel Lawsuit
Sex Trafficking Survivor Sues Nevada, Government Officials, Brothels, and Brothel Owner/County Commissioner for Violating 13th Amendment WASHINGTON, DC (February 8, 2024) – The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) and Jason Guinasso, a Nevada Attorney representing victims of sex...
No.
Correct. And for good reason. Telling a secretary "The new policy is for you to show me your underwear or you're fired" is fundamentally different from telling a secretary "The new policy is to put a cover sheet on your TPS reports or you're fired." Because we all recognize that degrading or sexual conduct is NOT just like any other job function, and needs to be heavily regulated.
The job function usually is defined in a contract by the employer. An employee has to agree with the job requirements to be gainfully employed. So in certain cases ie: an acting career may require a female to submit to performing a sex act for money where is it questionable to have her physically and mentally abused. I call it consensual rape. the victim knowingly allows herself to used and tortured. Porn and Prostitution seem to go hand in hand. And yes it a crime to victimize an employee using duress and coerced into the act by the promise of a reward.
This is why your continued attempt to compare legalization of sex work to a boss trying to make sex work a part of the job description is wrong.
Women have been forced to submit to things involving sex just to earn a paycheck.
Yes. But not all are forced.
The bowing thing is fine, a little weird, but whatever.
Generally it would be legal to add cleaning a toilet and cleaning up puke to someone's job description, assuming they're an at-will employee and you actually needed the toilets cleaned. The exception would be if you're deliberately doing it as retaliation or to try to get them to quit, or otherwise trying to sneakily avoid civil rights laws.
I don't think being a Victoria Secret model should be illegal. Although one can certainly question the ethics of how models are treated, I don't think it rises to the level of needing to be illegal. And the key distinction here is that it's a job that at least serves a legitimate purpose (i.e. to sell more underwear through the ads).
No.
Yep, requiring employees to do degrading and/or sexual things should be banned, I agree.
Unlikely. Again, unless it was done as retaliation or to try to get them to quit or to sneakily avoid civil rights laws.
The key part is in bold.
The use of force