• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why is it shameful for men to advocate legalization of sex work?

Nap said:
There is also the dilemma of the pro-choice argument. It is hard to argue that because it is the woman's body she should be able to kill her child but then turn around and say she has no right to make money off of using her own body should she choose to do so.
Click to expand...

Not really much of a dilemma. Most of those who would be pro-choice would likely be for legalizing prostitution. Mind you, they also most likely hold a difference between human trafficking and legalized prostitution, something those against would say are one in the same. But conservatives are usually against both pro-choice and legalized prostitution, and liberals for both.
 
maquiscat said:
Not really much of a dilemma. Most of those who would be pro-choice would likely be for legalizing prostitution. Mind you, they also most likely hold a difference between human trafficking and legalized prostitution, something those against would say are one in the same. But conservatives are usually against both pro-choice and legalized prostitution, and liberals for both.
Click to expand...

Most conservatives and liberals are typically against it. The majority of people for it seem to be libertarian.
 
Captain Adverse said:
I'm curious.

Are you implying that American porn stars are being forced to work in that field? That somehow they have no choice?

In my time I have encountered various people, both male and female, who work in that industry. To them it's just a job, they are simply acting. There are all sorts of reasons they start, and they stop when they wish (or can't get hired whichever comes first).

I can't argue that the majority of U. S. prostitutes (male or female) are doing it because they want to...being how it is illegal and dangerous work everywhere in America but for one or two counties in Nevada.

But from the various documentaries on legal prostitution here and abroad...it seems to work out for everyone involved because they have the protection of the law.

So I am not sure what you are saying in your comment.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. it works for those legally in the field, but it helps shield the human traffickers and provide people who purchase illegal sex plausible deniability.
 
Captain Adverse said:
EXACTLY!



Not if the law is enforced properly. That is a different issue entirely.
Click to expand...

properly enforcing a law is far easier when the law is broad.

if selling sex is 100% illegal you can simply jail whomever does it. if it's sometimes legal you then have to prove the trafficking, the illegality, you have to find it first because it's harder to develop reasonable suspicion that x pimp or y prostitute is operating illegally, not only that but "legitimate" businesses can operate as fronts, making it generally harder for cops and prosecutors to develop suspicion, investigate, and make the case.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
properly enforcing a law is far easier when the law is broad.

if selling sex is 100% illegal you can simply jail whomever does it. if it's sometimes legal you then have to prove the trafficking, the illegality, you have to find it first because it's harder to develop reasonable suspicion that x pimp or y prostitute is operating illegally, not only that but "legitimate" businesses can operate as fronts, making it generally harder for cops and prosecutors to develop suspicion, investigate, and make the case.
Click to expand...

But there is no reason for "sex" to be illegal unless it is coerced. For purposes of this discussion, coerced includes rape, human trafficking, and child sexual abuse.

What two consenting adults, or as a separate issue...two consenting juveniles of appropriate close-in-age status do sexually is their business.

Making something illegal just because you don't approve of it is what has created this mess in the first place. It only leads to more crime and commensurate greater harms for all involved.

On the other hand making something that is neither inherently harmful, nor socially disruptive legal reduces the burden on the criminal justice system, allowing those limited resources to be used to deal with actual sex crimes.

The same holds true for the use of drugs or just about anything else that might or might not cause harm to the user; make it legal and then punish them if their actions while under the influence cause harm. Just like we do with alcohol.

In each type of illicit act legalization and regulation would make it safer for the participants while preserving individual liberty interests.

The law should be about punishing actual harms, not exacerbating the situation by a blanket ban which will be broken anyway; multiplying the issues that have to be dealt with and straining our criminal justice resources for no good reason.
 
Captain Adverse said:
But there is no reason for "sex" to be illegal unless it is coerced. For purposes of this discussion, coerced includes rape, human trafficking, and child sexual abuse.

What two consenting adults, or as a separate issue...two consenting juveniles of appropriate close-in-age status do sexually is their business.

Making something illegal just because you don't approve of it is what has created this mess in the first place. It only leads to more crime and commensurate greater harms for all involved.

On the other hand making something that is neither inherently harmful, nor socially disruptive legal reduces the burden on the criminal justice system, allowing those limited resources to be used to deal with actual sex crimes.

The same holds true for the use of drugs or just about anything else that might or might not cause harm to the user; make it legal and then punish them if their actions while under the influence cause harm. Just like we do with alcohol.

In each type of illicit act legalization and regulation would make it safer for the participants while preserving individual liberty interests.

The law should be about punishing actual harms, not exacerbating the situation by a blanket ban which will be broken anyway; multiplying the issues that have to be dealt with and straining our criminal justice resources for no good reason.
Click to expand...

Theoretically, I agree with you. Practically, when it comes to the potential of abuse of innocents, I have an uneasy feeling. It is the process of trying to get from where we are now, to a close approximation of the idealization that , to me, is an issue. There right now is too much explanation of innocents, and I have a concern what will happen if things are made legal to that exploitation.
 
maquiscat said:
And how is one supposed to know if the person they are purchasing sex from is a trafficking victim or not? Or is it knowingly doing so, and if it would not have been obvious to one, they are not liable?
Click to expand...

Who invented Uber? We need to get that person working on a prostitution app.

What do you think...background (and in this case medical) check for both sides. Worker profiles. Client profiles. Services and fees worked out through the app. Etc.

The problem with legalized prostitution is human trafficking, so if a 3rd party app (Madam?) can verify the worker's legal status...
 
Captain Adverse said:
But there is no reason for "sex" to be illegal unless it is coerced. For purposes of this discussion, coerced includes rape, human trafficking, and child sexual abuse.

What two consenting adults, or as a separate issue...two consenting juveniles of appropriate close-in-age status do sexually is their business.

Making something illegal just because you don't approve of it is what has created this mess in the first place. It only leads to more crime and commensurate greater harms for all involved.

On the other hand making something that is neither inherently harmful, nor socially disruptive legal reduces the burden on the criminal justice system, allowing those limited resources to be used to deal with actual sex crimes.

The same holds true for the use of drugs or just about anything else that might or might not cause harm to the user; make it legal and then punish them if their actions while under the influence cause harm. Just like we do with alcohol.

In each type of illicit act legalization and regulation would make it safer for the participants while preserving individual liberty interests.

The law should be about punishing actual harms, not exacerbating the situation by a blanket ban which will be broken anyway; multiplying the issues that have to be dealt with and straining our criminal justice resources for no good reason.
Click to expand...

Gotta keep liability in minde, too. You talk of 2 consenting adults but if one of them is married then the worker/brothel is open to civil liability; maybe not for Alienation Of Affection but certianly for an STD.
 
BlackBook said:
Gotta keep liability in minde, too. You talk of 2 consenting adults but if one of them is married then the worker/brothel is open to civil liability; maybe not for Alienation Of Affection but certianly for an STD.
Click to expand...

Alienation of affection is a tort that exists in six states.

As of 2016, six US states (Hawaii, North Carolina, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Utah) recognize this tort. It is not necessary to show that the defendant set out to destroy the marital relationship, but only that he or she intentionally engaged in acts which would foreseeably impact the marriage. Thus, the defendant has a defense against an alienation claim where it can be shown that he or she did not know that the object of his or her affections was in fact married.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alienation_of_affections

In those states where this alienation tort still exists all the defense has to do is show the business was never made aware the plaintiff's spouse was married. Conversely, to prevent this issue entirely, they could require a signed marital disclaimer from the customer attesting he or she is not married. Tort dismissed.

As for STD's? That's part of the regulatory aspect. Medical cards showing monthly exams, and regulations requiring condoms. Periodic facility inspections for health and safety. Access to counseling and anonymous reporting to deal with human trafficking. Etc.

All businesses have liability issues. Adjust regulations just like any other business. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
Alienation of affection is a tort that exists in six states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alienation_of_affections

In those states where this alienation tort still exists all the defense has to do is show the business was never made aware the plaintiff's spouse was married. Conversely, to prevent this issue entirely, they could require a signed marital disclaimer from the customer attesting he or she is not married. Tort dismissed.

As for STD's? That's part of the regulatory aspect. Medical cards showing monthly exams, and regulations requiring condoms. Periodic facility inspections for health and safety. Access to counseling and anonymous reporting to deal with human trafficking. Etc.

All businesses have liability issues. Adjust regulations just like any other business. :shrug:
Click to expand...
Absolutely.

I also like the potential a system like Uber could have in addressing the human trafficking issue, which IMO is the only real reason to keep sex work illegal. An Uber-like system could have the worker submit photo documentation of their legal presence in the US, which a background check could verify.
 
countryboy said:
The negative effects of pornography are well documented. Can you point to any serious studies which have found positive results?
Click to expand...

http://www.otago.ac.nz/christchurch/otago018607.pdf
I cannot copy and paste this but if you cannot be bothered to read it then just skip down to the conclusion which basically states that there have been many positive outcomes for the decriminalisation of it and there have been few if any negative consequences in terms of health and safety or the numbers attracted to the industry since decriminalisation.
 
soylentgreen said:
http://www.otago.ac.nz/christchurch/otago018607.pdf
I cannot copy and paste this but if you cannot be bothered to read it then just skip down to the conclusion which basically states that there have been many positive outcomes for the decriminalisation of it and there have been few if any negative consequences in terms of health and safety or the numbers attracted to the industry since decriminalisation.
Click to expand...

Gee, thanks for having me click on a download link on my phone. I glanced at it before quickly deleting, and it was about prostitution, not pornography.
 
countryboy said:
Gee, thanks for having me click on a download link on my phone. I glanced at it before quickly deleting, and it was about prostitution, not pornography.
Click to expand...

Given that the thread is about prostitution and not pornography, it was most likely assumed that you used the wrong word accidentally and he addressed the topic at hand.
 
countryboy said:
Gee, thanks for having me click on a download link on my phone. I glanced at it before quickly deleting, and it was about prostitution, not pornography.
Click to expand...

Now i need ask the question, why bring porn to the table What does that have to do with prostitution?
 
soylentgreen said:
Now i need ask the question, why bring porn to the table What does that have to do with prostitution?
Click to expand...

You must be new to online political forums. Sometimes these conversations go off on tangents and drift into related subjects. I didn't bring anything to the table, I was merely responding to another poster who had mentioned pornography. Hope that clears things up for you.
 
SCitizen said:
In USA and other places where paying for sex is illegal, tens of millions of men live lives of loneliness and misery. In most Europe, where both buying and selling sex is legal, that is not the issue. Definitely decriminalizing sex work between consenting adults would greatly improve the lives of people who can not find a partner. In UK, purchasing sex from a trafficking victim is a strict liability offense and yet consensual sex work is legal.

They could have formed strong advocacy groups for decriminalization, and yet most would be ashamed to even speak on the issue. For some reason being accused of being a bitter virgin is one of the worst insults.
Click to expand...

You haven't explained why it is shameful for men to advocate the decriminalization.
 
joG said:
Is it really? I would think that it is probably like many things. If the young girl is revered and thought a representative of the Goddess and practicing the good rites in the temple as in some cases in ancient history, there is probably no consequential trauma from the pedophile activities and the girl is protected into the position as priestess.
Click to expand...

o.m.g
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom