Should prostitution be legalized?

[B_johnschlong]

It ought to be regulated and taxed, along with pot and all the other things that all good and righteous people rail against for no good reason, and secretly indulge in at home with the curtains drawn.

But don't you think prostitution is an act of social violence?

Do you honestly believe women consciously "choose" to become sex workers?

I tend to think there are socio-economic factors at play that force them into this kind of work. And that we must address these injustices first. But that of course requires much more effort than just regulating things, which is the easiest, least courageous way.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

But don't you think prostitution is an act of social violence?

Do you honestly believe women consciously "choose" to become sex workers?

I tend to think there are socio-economic factors at play that force them into this kind of work. And that we must address these injustices first. But that of course requires much more effort than just regulating things, which is the easiest, least courageous way.

Some of the sex workers I know enjoy their work. Others enjoy the fact that they can buy designer jeans and Prada cell phones and expensive condos by only working a couple hours a day, often earning $300-$500 for a half hour of lying on their back.

Offering up these facts just for public discourse, since the poster I'm responding to is a [FONT=verdana, helvetica]<A HREF="[/FONT]http://www.lpsg.org/67689-why-americans-so-focused-blowjobs-3.html#post1100474[FONT=verdana, helvetica]">troll</A>[/FONT] troll.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

would anyone like to explain how you can turn part of the text in your post into a hypertext link here? Obviously I don't get it.

 

[rob_just_rob]

But don't you think prostitution is an act of social violence?

Do you honestly believe women consciously "choose" to become sex workers?

I tend to think there are socio-economic factors at play that force them into this kind of work. And that we must address these injustices first. But that of course requires much more effort than just regulating things, which is the easiest, least courageous way.

Au contraire, the "easiest, least courageous way" is what we have now, actually.

And speaking of "socio-economic factors", do you honestly believe that women or men consciously "choose" to work for minimum wage? People do what they feel they have to do.

If you feel that women are being coerced into prostitution, all the more reason to regulate it.

Be practical for a minute, instead of pretending to be a sociology major.

 

[HazelGod]

Some of the sex workers I know enjoy their work. Others enjoy the fact that they can buy designer jeans and Prada cell phones and expensive condos by only working a couple hours a day, often earning $300-$500 for a half hour of lying on their back.

Offering up these facts just for public discourse, since the poster I'm responding to is a troll.http://www.lpsg.org/67689-why-americans-so-focused-blowjobs-3.html#post1100474

Precisely. Prositution is nothing more than an inevitable offering in any market economy...and a relatively inconsequential one at that, given the lack of scarcity.

So why has the OP chosen such a limited incarnation to decry, when his philosophical problems clearly lie with the broader framework of capitalism itself?

would anyone like to explain how you can turn part of the text in your post into a hypertext link here? Obviously I don't get it.

Highlight the text you want linked, then click the icon of the globe with the flat oval (chain link) superimposed over its lower right edge. In the box that pops up, type or paste the URL you want it to link to.

 

[B_Think_Kink]

Yes, legalize it and make it safer. Regular checkups and testing.

 

[frizzle]

Yes, legalize it and make it safer. Regular checkups and testing.

Indeed, tax it heavily aswell.


I mean...why not make money for the government out of it? :biggrin1:

 

[B_johnschlong]

Au contraire, the "easiest, least courageous way" is what we have now, actually.

And speaking of "socio-economic factors", do you honestly believe that women or men consciously "choose" to work for minimum wage? People do what they feel they have to do.

Exactly, which is why I feel we should address the reasons as to why so many people are forced to work in inhuman conditions, like slaves.

You say minimum wage slavery is just a fact of life, so let's regulate it and leave it at that. Others want to change society in such a way that the injustices leading to such a dirty situation can be removed.

I admit that in some circles, especially in the U.S. (and even amongst "liberals" there, who are clearly reactionary right wingers, compared to Eurosocialists) a more socialist approach to development and justice is not appreciated.

It's not a coincidence that most people in here prefer the regulation approach, whereas in Europe, a majority is in favor of the abolitionist approach.

 

[rob_just_rob]

Exactly, which is why I feel we should address the reasons as to why so many people are forced to work in inhuman conditions, like slaves.

Nice try. You're drawing conclusions based on what you would like me to have said, not on what I actually said.

That's dangerously close to trolling.

You say minimum wage slavery is just a fact of life,

Where did I say that?

so let's regulate it and leave it at that. Others want to change society in such a way that the injustices leading to such a dirty situation can be removed.

Are you hijacking your own thread? I have debated that point elsewhere and at length. Isn't this thread about prostitution?

This sounds like this is about your personal morality and what you perceive to be injustices. No doubt injustices do exist in the sex trade, but you're generalizing.

It's not a coincidence that most people in here prefer the regulation approach, whereas in Europe, a majority is in favor of the abolitionist approach.

You wouldn't happen to have references for these otherwise unsupported contentions, would you?

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

It's not a coincidence that most people in here prefer the regulation approach, whereas in Europe, a majority is in favor of the abolitionist approach.

So, troll, why is it so much more prevalent, more readily available, cheaper, and legal in more places all around Europe than it is in the US? I already know the answer (you're a troll and everything you say is bullshit) but I'm interested in your answer.

 

[DC_DEEP]

It's no ones' business. The government has no vested interest (and therefore, really, no authority) in making prostitution "illegal."

 

[B_johnschlong]

It's no ones' business. The government has no vested interest (and therefore, really, no authority) in making prostitution "illegal."

Don't you think societies have the duty to enlighten themselves and to ban ridiculous systems and ideologies like individualism, capitalism and neoliberalism which condone prostitution? I think society, the State and government does have the duty to strive towards promoting Enlightenment, Sociality, Reason and Citoyenneté. Yes, it's a very conservative point of view, but at least it's more modern than the current capitalist, reglementarist status quo.

Creating a just, rational and civil society is definitely worth pursueing, and the government has an obvious interest in this. Of course, you must have the right government in place. And it's the duty of society to put such a government in place.

The right wing, reactionary regularists are the enemy of reason.

 

[whatireallywant]

Right-wingers support legalization of prostitution???

Tell that to my right-wing Baptist relatives! :biggrin1:

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

The right wing, reactionary regularists are the enemy of reason.

too funny. :biggrin1:

 

[B_johnschlong]

Right-wingers support legalization of prostitution???

Tell that to my right-wing Baptist relatives! :biggrin1:

Well, abolitionism is found mostly amongst the left-wing (e.g. the French marxists, the German neo-feminists and the Italian communists are all abolitionists).

So yes, reglementarism, because of its replication of the ideology of capitalism, with its individualism, its hate of sociality and reason, its consumerism and its general abandonment of notions of citoyennet&#233; - is the real enemy of the left-wing.

Your average Baptist would be a coward, that is, a prohibitionist. Using repression to get rid of the problem, instead of asking the key questions about the roots of prostitution.


You see, American "liberals" and the "Democratic Party" are seen in Europe as right wing losers. American "conservatives" are seen as ordinary fascists and nazis.

There is no real left wing in America (except for some marginal groups).

So you should know that the political spectrum is broader than what's available in the US.

In Italy there are real communists in the government; in Greece, the marxists-leninists won the recent elections; in the Netherlands the real socialists crushed the social-democrats; likewise in Germany, Oscar Lafontain's Die Linke is decimating the social-democrats (which Americans would call liberals or "left wing").

Social democrats and liberals have nothing to do with left thinking. They are ordinary capitalist cowards, right wing reactionaries.

 

[Knight Attrition]

I find your poll to be slanted towards a predetermined answer of abolitionism. The wording in the description clearly tries to sway voters toward that view point.

Regarding your poll, a person should be free to exchange sex for money. In a free nation what you put into your body: drugs, alcohol, tobacco, penis, etc and the reasons for doing so are no one's business but your own.

 

[B_Lightkeeper]

If I had a son, I'd much rather have him experience his first sexual experience with a disease-free prostitute than accidentally knock-up some young girl or catch something from a sleezy streetwalker.

 

[Knight Attrition]

Don't you think societies have the duty to enlighten themselves and to ban ridiculous systems and ideologies like individualism, capitalism and neoliberalism which condone prostitution? I think society, the State and government does have the duty to strive towards promoting Enlightenment, Sociality, Reason and Citoyennet&#233;. Yes, it's a very conservative point of view, but at least it's more modern than the current capitalist, reglementarist status quo.

Creating a just, rational and civil society is definitely worth pursueing, and the government has an obvious interest in this. Of course, you must have the right government in place. And it's the duty of society to put such a government in place.

The right wing, reactionary regularists are the enemy of reason.

Oh no a communist. Communism/socialism/fascism DO NOT WORK. People must have the right to self determination and the government needs to keep its proper place, out of our lives.

 

[B_johnschlong]

I find your poll to be slanted towards a predetermined answer of abolitionism. The wording in the description clearly tries to sway voters toward that view point.

Regarding your poll, a person should be free to exchange sex for money. In a free nation what you put into your body: drugs, alcohol, tobacco, penis, etc and the reasons for doing so are no one's business but your own.

Well, to me a person does not have the right to inflict violence onto himself (e.g. by taking drugs, or by committing suicide) nor on other persons (e.g. beating a woman). Prostitution is an act of violence on both accounts.

Abolitionists would tackle the root causes of these problems: tackling the psychological misery resulting from capitalism, which is responsible for such high suicide rates in the West (no suicide in non-capitalist societies); tackling the root causes of drug addiction (social misery, ghettoification, individualism, lack of social cohesion, etc...); tackling the root causes of prostitution (i.e. a social system that forces women into inhuman work, social misery, lack of assertiveness of sociall weak women, etc...).

We should help people so that they can lead dignified lives.

People do not have the individual right to inflict violence on themselves, even if they think they "choose" this consciously. They do not choose this.

Some ideologies want people to believe that there is such a thing as self-determination and individual freedom. These anti-social ideologies are really evil, because they destroy the essence of humanity, namely the dense sociality inherent in man. Individual freedom is a psychotic myth. Man is social, not individualist. Subjectivity is deeply social (the word itself indicates this - being subject to the social; your own "self" is fully social, never individual).

In short, reglementarists are denying this deeply social nature of man. They do this because they sneakily support the evil, destructive ideology of capitalism, with its ridiculous notions of individualism and self-determination.

 

[B_johnschlong]

By the way, I'm all in favor of drugs that enhance sociality and collective happiness. But heroin, marihuana, cocaine, and other forms of individualist, consumerist dope are anti-social. They must be banned.

Good forms of drugs would be Stalinist mass spectacles and rallies, Buddhist mass meditation sessions, Maoist communal mass games and soup kitchens, the North Korean mass games, etc... these have a clear delirious effect on the masses, who become drugged in such a way that they embrace sociality. There are so many possibilities for collectivist drugs, but capitalism can't stand these.

The pathetic individualist drugs that destroy the social, these must be fought and banned forever.

This crack prostitute does not have the right to destroy herself:

Capitalism and Angloprotestantism says: go ahead, you are "free" to destroy yourself; you "choose" this yourself, in all freedom.


These addicts on the contrary are happy and live life to the fullest, in its sociality and decently: