Thread: Prostitution: The Debate

Prositution should be legal as long as pimps don´t control the women that are prositutes.

Here in Germany its legalized

Lets pretend that men only want "normal" sex. If there between relationships, or don´t have the time to find a women, why not? What about ment who are ugly or sick? Don´t they have a right to sex?

I think prositution is bad, when they are forced to do things that they don´t want to do.

I'm sure you won't consider my argument 'sound' although it may be the most unique, but I've had prostitutes as health care clients so I have seen first hand the devastating side of the world's oldest profession.

Legal? Is that really the word, probably not. Regulated is the word I would use, but that would imply legal.

Prostitution is just another way that men can and do exploit women who are powerless and often desperate. The regulation would require safety measures, a fair price (whatever that would be), mandatory health care paid for by the clients themselves, other benefits that employees in traditional jobs get, and regular screening for STDs.

Prostittution is NOT a victimless crime, and the most victimized is the woman herself. They are often brutalized or even murdered, and this doesn't even address the toll taken on a woman's mental well being.

Of course, it isn't just women who get exploited, there are the young desperate men who are in the same situation, poor, and often mentally impaired. And they too are exploited usually by men. But regardless of the gender or situation, those who avail themselves of these 'services' should have some responsibility as an 'employer' ...just like other employers have as to health, injuries, pay, etc. The ones who can should also have some benefit that offers them a way out should they want it, like scholarships, training for other jobs, etc.

As you see, my view is a combination of legal issues, individual rights and a public health concerns. Probably unusual for a woman of my gneration. But then I see polygamy as favoring the woman because it makes men responsible for every woman he sleeps with. And until women truly do have equal rights in this country, (which we don't and probably never will) then fuck the men who would exploit women. Make the bastards pay.

What a women does with her body is not my business. Nor is what a man pays a women to do with her body. I dont see why sex has to be treated differently than any other service anyone provides to anyone else. As to the side effects of such commerce, that is again not my problem other than to ensure consumer safety, such as protecting prostitutes and customers from disease, pregnancy, or a woman from being physically hurt during the exchange, which is already illegal. Beyond that, it is the womans job to run her life how she sees fit.

Interestingly it seems like a very valuable commodity to have, and could sure help the world out a lot, as men could more easily have sex, and rely less on going out and agressively getting it, or wasting time or money on aquiring it.

If 2 people consent to having sex they should be able to do so. End of story.

The government should create legislation for a safe work environment just like with any other job.

Originally Posted by jviehe

What a women does with her body is not my business. Nor is what a man pays a women to do with her body. I dont see why sex has to be treated differently than any other service anyone provides to anyone else. As to the side effects of such commerce, that is again not my problem other than to ensure consumer safety, such as protecting prostitutes and customers from disease, pregnancy, or a woman from being physically hurt during the exchange, which is already illegal. Beyond that, it is the womans job to run her life how she sees fit.

Interestingly it seems like a very valuable commodity to have, and could sure help the world out a lot, as men could more easily have sex, and rely less on going out and agressively getting it, or wasting time or money on aquiring it.

Whose business are those things then?

Originally Posted by Vincent.

If 2 people consent to having sex they should be able to do so. End of story.

The government should create legislation for a safe work environment just like with any other job.

You need to either strictly state what you mean by "2 people" or strictly state what you mean by consent. And you need to establish why "they should be able to do so."


As you have stated this, pedophilia would qualify.

So far, no sound arguments.

Dear Sunshine,

Thank-you for your thoughtful and well thoughout Statement. I could agree with most of what you said.

Not being a woman its difficult for me to understand why college girls or socalled models go into this bussness? I tip off fast money.

In Sweden the man goes to jail, not the prositute, Do you like that?

I agree that prositution is terrible if women are forced into "slavery" or for economic reasons. How can the society and government help women so that is not an option? Don´t think the american people want to help them out.

Back to europe. We have slavery here too, but like you said its regulated. They have to go regualry for a health check. And they dont have to hide from the law.

If I was a woman, then I would plead for Swedish laws. They go after the man. Isnt that fair? Please feel free to disagree

This should be in the formal debate section...

Hey Steve,



Why did you make a comment, without saying anything?

Prostitution should be legal because it's not the job of the government - any government - to tell consenting adults who they can and cannot have sex with. If consenting adults have sex, and money happens to pass hands either before or after, then the authorities do not have the right to decide that that reason to have sex is wrong. I'm not entirely sure why the people who are direct about sex being a transaction get into trouble while those who are more sneaky and dishonest about it don't.

People who are against legalising it generally point to things like child prostitution and violence against women as arguments. Things like child abuse, rape and battery are already illegal. "Trafficking" is, at most, grossly exaggerated and again is already illegal.

Whose business are those things then?

Um, the business of what consenting adults do with each other sexually is the business of the people involved. You're not exactly showing why prostitution is wrong. Make some positive arguments for your point of view rather than pissing on everyone else's arguments.

For those who don't understand debates, the resolution stands until it is "knocked down."

Those who truly don't understand what concepts and discussions are about need to be remined to make some arguments of their own. Again, you can't give a position, refuse to make positive arguments and then act like it's the job of everyone else to prove you wrong. You made the OP. You offer something constructive. You keep saying that you believe x, y and z, but you're not actually providing arguments.

Originally Posted by bennyhill

Hey Steve,

Why do you hate people? Were you forced into gay prositution?

Why did you make a comment, without saying anything?

This thread was presented in a format of a formal debate. There's a section for that.

Originally Posted by Sunshine

Prostittution is NOT a victimless crime, and the most victimized is the woman herself. They are often brutalized or even murdered, and this doesn't even address the toll taken on a woman's mental well being.

In some cases, possibly the majority, this is true. However, would this victimization of women be more severe or less severe if prostitution was legalized?

I'd argue that legalizing prostitution would reduce the victimization of the women participating in it. Because once it is legal, there are then laws to regulate the profession, and generally laws are implemented to protect people. No longer would women be subjected to a drug-dealing pimp with a rap sheet a mile long. Instead they'd be working for a company whose CEO gets indicted for embezzlement. But in such a case, the woman would still be better treated under the CEO who wouldn't beat her, wouldn't skim insane amounts from her earnings, and who wouldn't trade drugs for sex with her (well maybe a CEO would actually do that). Furthermore, she could be working under much safer conditions, on the main (safe) drag rather than some seedy back alley where only drug dealers hang out.

Originally Posted by Hafke

Prostitution should be legal because it's not the job of the government - any government - to tell consenting adults who they can and cannot have sex with. If consenting adults have sex, and money happens to pass hands either before or after, then the authorities do not have the right to decide that that reason to have sex is wrong. I'm not entirely sure why the people who are direct about sex being a transaction get into trouble while those who are more sneaky and dishonest about it don't.

People who are against legalising it generally point to things like child prostitution and violence against women as arguments. Things like child abuse, rape and battery are already illegal. "Trafficking" is, at most, grossly exaggerated and again is already illegal.



Um, the business of what consenting adults do with each other sexually is the business of the people involved. You're not exactly showing why prostitution is wrong. Make some positive arguments for your point of view rather than pissing on everyone else's arguments.

Showing why prostitution is wrong is for those who support the debate resolution.

Originally Posted by Hafke

Those who truly don't understand what concepts and discussions are about need to be remined to make some arguments of their own. Again, you can't give a position, refuse to make positive arguments and then act like it's the job of everyone else to prove you wrong. You made the OP. You offer something constructive. You keep saying that you believe x, y and z, but you're not actually providing arguments.

You may be confusing the debate resolution for a position, but it is a debate resolution.

Originally Posted by Steerpike

Showing why prostitution is wrong is for those who support the debate resolution.

Fine, but part of making a debate is putting forward a position yourself. You can't just tell people to prove something to you. For what you want to do, the only way you could justify it is putting it in the formal debate section. Otherwise you are completely disregarding the conventions of the informal debate sections.

You may be confusing the debate resolution for a position, but it is a debate resolution.

This is the informal section. You do have to take a position. Otherwise you are simply baiting people.