Support NeoGAF

[Kano on the Phone]

If you don't have any other real options, then it's hardly a real choice, is it?

Some people go into the military because they have no other options too, so what? It isn't even like that's true for the majority of people who choose sex work.

 

[highoffcoffee496]

I feel that the legalization and normalization of prostitution might worsen the issue of human trafficking. If prostitution is legal, pimps will be able to import women (many who may be underage, victims of abuse, or addicted to narcotics) much more easily.

Because prostitution is all about entitlement to sex, I'm a bit fearful that a government endorsement of prostitution (primarily a service for straight men) will harm women ultimately. It's completely legal for a woman's body to be treated as a commodity that's rented like a pick-up truck. I worry that this could impede women's rights and encourage the objectification of women.

Cracking down on pimps and clients, creating programs to protect and help former prostitutes, and ensuring that less women have to turn to prostitution, would do much more good.

This.

 

[PrivateWHudson]

My question is basically whether or not it'd be okay for an unemployment office to suggest prostitution to someone without a job as an option.

Unemployment offices around here just want to see that you are looking for a job, they don't care what kind of job it is. They wouldn't say "here's an opening at a strip club, get a job there or no check for you". So why would they do that with prostitution?

If you are just asking, would it be okay for them to suggest it as an option... sure, why not? I'm sure if in an unemployment counseling session they find that you really like sex with strangers then they may recommend a local brothel that has an opening.

 

[Devolution]

I feel like Theroux's doc would be pertinent to watch. Basically the Brothel provides security, health inspections, blacklists and a central safe place women and their johns can interact.

I see it as a marked improvement over how it is most everywhere else.

 

[itsinmyveins]

Some people go into the military because they have no other options too, so what? It isn't even like that's true for the majority of people who choose sex work.

I don't see how any of that is strengthening your argument, only bringing up other issues?

 

[John Kowalski]

This might have been posted already, but Reihan Salam has a more than excellent interview with Melissa Gira Grant about reframing the social and legal perspective on sex work, which does a great job at describing how and why the discussion around prostitution is so muddled by ethical and moral paradigms that do no good job at actually addressing the problems that sex workers face as professionals and as individuals capable of agency.

I'm of the opinion that we should first and foremost support sex workers in a manner that empowers them as singular agents of their own desires, enabling them access to tools that they might use to improve their working conditions and to exercise economical autonomy in safe and legal ways. I often refuse to look at it form a feminist/humanitarian perspective, because i don't think that will ever bring about pragmatic solutions to the situation, though admittedly the best course of actions would be to have those who do act upon this subject with feminist/humanitarian interests work in conjunction with those who want to solve the problem from a purely pragmatic perspective.

 

[dinazimmerman]

The negatives ARE a different issue. You're trying to say porn must involve abuse to be made and that's ridiculous. A women or man might decide to enter the porn industry because they like making porn, that doesn't mean they like the negatives that might come with who they work with which is why we target that instead of trying to take away the empowerment of them wanting to join.

Objectification is always going to exist. Retail workers are viewed as sub human but that doesn't mean if someone enjoys the job that they're not empowered. We should be encouraging better treatment for these workers, not taking away the empowerment they feel for wanting to do the jobs just because the bad treatment exists.

They're not separate issues. Suppose legalization leads to more empowerment and more exploitation. Even if further measures are taken to prevent exploitation (that weren't possible without legalization), if the net effect is more exploitation, then supporting legalization implies that you believe that the increase in exploitation is worth the increase in empowerment. Also, the empowered and the exploited would probably come from different segments of the population, so you're making a value judgment about which group of people is more important.

 

[OrlanisWorks]

Couldn't regulations of business revolving around prostitution prevent exploitation?

 

[Sketchbag]

The negatives ARE a different issue. You're trying to say porn must involve abuse to be made and that's ridiculous. A women or man might decide to enter the porn industry because they like making porn, that doesn't mean they like the negatives that might come with who they work with which is why we target that instead of trying to take away the empowerment of them wanting to join.

Objectification is always going to exist. Retail workers are viewed as sub human but that doesn't mean if someone enjoys the job that they're not empowered. We should be encouraging better treatment for these workers, not taking away the empowerment they feel for wanting to do the jobs just because the bad treatment exists.

If you think you're empowered then good for you that doesn't mean you're actually empowered. There's the illusion element you are seemingly ignoring.

The negatives are not a different issue. If you truly believe empowerment in the work place only comes from whether or not you choose to work there is all that matters then we are going to have to disagree on this point.

 

[Kano on the Phone]

I don't see how any of that is strengthening your argument, only bringing up other issues?

I don't know how better to explain that there are plenty of things we don't forbid just because people do them for reasons we don't personally like.

 

[Devolution]

Couldn't regulations of business revolving around prostitution prevent exploitation?

Some of it yes.

It seems to me the best compromise is sex workers having to go through some sort of brothel system because of the ability to confirm age and regulate health.

 

[DoktorEvil]

This might have been posted already, but Reihan Salam has a more than excellent interview with Melissa Gira Grant about reframing the social and legal perspective on sex work, which does a great job at describing how and why the discussion around prostitution is so muddled by ethical and moral paradigms that do no good job at actually addressing the problems that sex workers face as professionals and as individuals capable of agency.

I'm of the opinion that we should first and foremost support sex workers in a manner that empowers them as singular agents of their own desires, enabling them access to tools that they might use to improve their working conditions and to exercise economical autonomy in safe and legal ways. I often refuse to look at it form a feminist/humanitarian perspective, because i don't think that will ever bring about pragmatic solutions to the situation, though admittedly the best course of actions would be to have those who do act upon this subject with feminist/humanitarian interests work in conjunction with those who want to solve the problem from a purely pragmatic perspective.

Funny, that sounds like how Real Estate agents and brokers normally operate: As independent contractors. They are responsible for their own taxes, their own legal frameworks, and their own right to earn commissions.

Anything that creates a new tax item for the government to have money to fund safe sex initiatives I'm all for.

 

[itsinmyveins]

I don't know how better to explain that there are plenty of things we don't forbid just because people do them for reasons we don't personally like.

We're talking empowerment, though. If you can't get any opportunities at all without joining the army, I don't know if I'd consider that an empowering choice. It's more a choice made out of necessity. All it does is show that there's a huge lack of social mobility.

 

[Devolution]

Some sex workers are quite empowered. It'd be nice not to assume they're all victims with daddy issues or no education or no social mobility.

 

[TheSadRanger]

decriminalizing prostitution will hurt the demand of sex purchased through sex traffickers. I think this would be a great thing.

I disagree with this statement. Even if prostitution were legal in the entire United States I doubt there would be a influx of American women willing to do it. Some women think it's okay to prostitute themselves but at the same time there's way more women who are okay with stripping, yet won't sell their body for sex. There's women who are okay with working at Hooters, yet they don't ever want to be a stripper etc. If anything I bet there would be an influx of illegal immigrants willing to do it to make money in the U.S. (Which I'm not trying to be racist, you can't deny there's many jobs in the U.S that are filled by immigrants for various reasons)

If someone wants to prostitute themselves in the U.S than they can probably find a way to do it these days without getting caught even though its illegal, rich people get by with purchasing it all the time. Also the really good looking, high priced girls are probably going to stay high priced regardless of legality.

The rationale that it should be legal to "operate safely" is a farce as well. Many escort companies operate efficiently and discreetly despite it being illegal. Who knows how many used forced labor though. Most escort companies don't screw around though and women have a choice in their clients.

I dunno, I think leaving it the way it is in the U.S might be better off than letting it run wild.

 

[Sketchbag]

Some sex workers are quite empowered. It'd be nice not to assume they're all victims with daddy issues or no education or no social mobility.

Good for them. What about the others? I'd rather assist those that aren't and have policies changed to help them the most.

 

[dinazimmerman]

Couldn't regulations of business revolving around prostitution prevent exploitation?

It could, but there's a counter-effect. Legalizing prohibition increases the size of the prostitution market. And the extent of human trafficking is roughly proportional to the size of the market. This article shows the positive association between legalization of prostitution and human trafficking across countries:

http://www.lse.ac.uk/geographyAndEn...elopment-_prostitution_-anonymous-REVISED.pdf

The case of Germany illustrates this statistical trend:

Contrary to Sweden, Germany introduced a more liberal prostitution law in 2002. Today, prostitution in Germany is regulated by law and regarded as a “regular job” subject to tax payment and retirement schemes (Di Nicola et al., 2005). Prior to 2002, Germany only allowed individual, self-employed prostitution without third-party involvement. Having a liberal prostitution regime, Germany is known to have one of the largest prostitution markets in Europe, with about 150,000 people working as prostitutes (Global report data used in Danailova-Trainor and Belser (2006)). This means that the number of prostitutes in Germany is more than 60 times that of Sweden, while having a population (82 million inhabitants) less than 10 times larger. In terms of human trafficking victims, the ILO estimated the stock of victims in Germany in 2004 to be approximately 32,800—about 62 times more than in Sweden (Danailova-Trainor & Belser, 2006). Again, the share of trafficked individuals among all prostitutes appears to be quite similar in both countries, corroborating the view that any compositional differences across prohibitionist and legalized prostitution regimes are likely to be small. Additionally, Di Nicola et al. (2005) provide annual estimates of trafficking victims used for sexual exploitation in Germany over the 1996–2003 period, which can shed some light on the changing number of trafficked prostitutes. The estimates show that the number of victims gradually declined during 1996–97, the first years of data collection, and 2001, when the minimum estimate was 9,870 and the maximum 19,740. However, this number increased upon fully legalizing prostitution in 2002, as well as in 2003, rising to 11,080–22,160 and 12,350–24,700, respectively. This is consistent with our result from the quantitative analysis indicating a positive correlation between the legal status of prostitution and inward trafficking.

Prostitution is regulated in Germany, but there's still a lot of human trafficking.

 

[itsinmyveins]

Some sex workers are quite empowered. It'd be nice not to assume they're all victims with daddy issues or no education or no social mobility.

I don't doubt that, but I'll refer to the issues Goya brings up in previous posts.

 

[Kano on the Phone]

We're talking empowerment, though. If you can't get any opportunities at all without joining the army, I don't know if I'd consider that an empowering choice. It's more a choice made out of necessity. All it does is show that there's a huge lack of social mobility.

You keep hammering on this small percentage of people who do things for "bad" reasons like it should speak to the majority. Not everyone, or even most people, get into sex work because they're damaged or they have no other choice. I feel like you're intentionally missing the point.

Yet again, we don't ban things just because people might choose them for reasons we don't agree with.

 

[DoktorEvil]

Some sex workers are quite empowered. It'd be nice not to assume they're all victims with daddy issues or no education or no social mobility.

What about male sex workers? They make pennies compared to their female stars.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/rachel-hodin/2013/06/17-little-known-facts-about-the-porn-industry/

They're also unable to unionize and are at the mercy of the volatility of the industry itself.

 

[studyguy]

Just as an aside I recall there being some Scandinavian country that issues people on their form of unemployment a waiver to visit some sex workers on the government dime. Not sure if it was true or not, but always found it interesting all the same if it is.

 

[Rentahamster]

It's past time, really.

The benefits outweigh most plausible negatives, IMO.

 

[kirblar]

What about male sex workers? They make pennies compared to their female stars.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/rachel-hodin/2013/06/17-little-known-facts-about-the-porn-industry/

They're also unable to unionize and are at the mercy of the volatility of the industry itself.

Because the demand for male sex workers comes primarily from the gay community. And it isn't the same size as the straight market.

Things aren't wrong just because they're not equivalent.

 

[Wazzy]

They're not separate issues. Suppose legalization leads to more empowerment and more exploitation. Even if further measures are taken to prevent exploitation (that weren't possible without legalization), if the net effect is more exploitation, then supporting legalization implies that you believe that the increase in exploitation is worth the increase in empowerment. Also, the empowered and the exploited would probably come from different segments of the population, so you're making a value judgment about which group of people is more important.

They're seperate when we're discussing someone feeling empowered going into the job. You cannot assume every person that goes into the industry faces the exact problems others do. This is why it's silly to tell someone they're not empowered for something they absolutely can be.

 

[PrivateWHudson]

I disagree with this statement. Even if prostitution were legal in the entire United States I doubt there would be a influx of American women willing to do it. Some women think it's okay to prostitute themselves but at the same time there's way more women who are okay with stripping, yet won't sell their body for sex. There's women who are okay with working at Hooters, yet they don't ever want to be a stripper etc. If anything I bet there would be an influx of illegal immigrants willing to do it to make money in the U.S. (Which I'm not trying to be racist, you can't deny there's many jobs in the U.S that are filled by immigrants for various reasons)

If someone wants to prostitute themselves in the U.S than they can probably find a way to do it these days without getting caught even though its illegal, rich people get by with purchasing it all the time. Also the really good looking, high priced girls are probably going to stay high priced regardless of legality.

The rationale that it should be legal to "operate safely" is a farce as well. Many escort companies operate efficiently and discreetly despite it being illegal. Who knows how many used forced labor though. Most escort companies don't screw around though and women have a choice in their clients.

I dunno, I think leaving it the way it is in the U.S might be better off than letting it run wild.

So you feel that it only being a safe industry for the rich and beautiful is the best option?

 

[dinazimmerman]

They're seperate when we're discussing someone feeling empowered going into the job. You cannot assume every person that goes into the industry faces the exact problems others do. This is why it's silly to tell someone they're not empowered for something they absolutely can be.

I agree. Whether or not someone is empowered is something only they can decide. I think I didn't read your previous post carefully. I was arguing against a point you weren't making. Sorry!

 

[Sketchbag]

I agree. Whether or not someone is empowered is something only they can decide. I think I didn't read your previous post carefully. I was arguing against a point you weren't making. Sorry!

You can say you feel empowered and good for you. Whether you're actually empowered or not is different. The illusion of choice exists still.

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

But who will fill the empty jail cells?

still plenty of black n latin people

 

[GungHo]

So you feel that it only being a safe industry for the rich and beautiful is the best option?

Glad I'm not the only one who read that. It's nice that the escort agencies are able to protect their girls, but not every pimp is enlightened nor do they all have wealthy clientele who don't get rough.

 

[itsinmyveins]

You keep hammering on this small percentage of people who do things for "bad" reasons like it should speak to the majority. Not everyone, or even most people, get into sex work because they're damaged or they have no other choice. I feel like you're intentionally missing the point.

Yet again, we don't ban things just because people might choose them for reasons we don't agree with.

No, I'm saying that you're making it easy for yourself when you simply say that a choice is empowering by virtue of being a choice. I'm saying that it's not as easy as that and that doing something out of necessity and because you want to is different. Looking at the numbers Goya posted above, it's clear that trafficking alone is a fairly large issue.

 

[DoktorEvil]

Because the demand for male sex workers comes primarily from the gay community. And it isn't the same size as the straight market.

Things aren't wrong just because they're not equivalent.

I wasn't just explicitly talking about the gay community.

Last time I checked, you need a man and a woman for a boy-girl scene.

In those scenes, men are paid much less then their female counterpart. One part of it is because boy-girl scenes are marketed mainly to straight men, but another part is the inability to organize and control their own labor. Not to mention the damage these guys will do to themselves with injecting shit into their bodies and abusing erection pills.

Male actors will often move into gay porn mainly because it's better paying.

 

[kirblar]

I wasn't just explicitly talking about the gay community.

Last time I checked, you need a man and a woman for a boy-girl scene.

In those scenes, men are paid much less then their female counterpart. One part of it is because boy-girl scenes are marketed mainly to straight men, but another part is the inability to organize and control their own labor. Not to mention the damage these guys will do to themselves with injecting shit into their bodies and abusing erection pills.

Male actors will often move into gay porn mainly because it's better paying.

Yes, and the audience is not nearly as interested in the male performer as they are the female one, thus the pay disparity. There is nothing wrong with said disparity, just as there's nothing wrong with RDJ getting whatever ridiculous amount he got for Iron Man 3.

 

[dinazimmerman]

You can say you feel empowered and good for you. Whether you're actually empowered or not is different. The illusion of choice exists still.

Either way, I just use "empowerment" to mean "satisfaction with personal decisions." So what I said is almost tautological. And people feeling satisfied with their life choices is an important part of human flourishing. Even if these choices are "illusory," the perception of choice is what matters for personal satisfaction.

 

[perfectchaos007]

What about male sex workers? They make pennies compared to their female stars.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/rachel-hodin/2013/06/17-little-known-facts-about-the-porn-industry/

They're also unable to unionize and are at the mercy of the volatility of the industry itself.

The male sex workers that signed a contract with Shotime are doing pretty well. Seemed like they were pretty well off before "Gigolos" started writing them checks too. Maybe its not as glamorous outside of Vegas....and btw prostitution is illegal in vegas

 

[Rentahamster]

Because the demand for male sex workers comes primarily from the gay community. And it isn't the same size as the straight market.

Things aren't wrong just because they're not equivalent.

The straight porn market isn't completely made up of lesbians or female masturbation, though. Got dudes there too.

 

[MUnited83]

I could support prostitution being legalized in very limited, regulated forms, but the lives of most prostitutes (even if they aren't trafficked) seem so awful that I could never vote to legalize with a good conscience. I don't want my government to endorse an industry that toxic.

Unless pimps, street prostitution, trafficking, and sex worker abuse are illegal and prevented, I can't support the normalization of sex work.

You know that main reason for those lifes being so awful it's because prostitution is illegal, right? I think it's pretty obvious by making it legal there would be regulation, and pimps, street prostitution, trafficking, etc would be obviously illegal.

 

[DoktorEvil]

Yes, and the audience is not nearly as interested in the male performer as they are the female one, thus the pay disparity. There is nothing wrong with said disparity, just as there's nothing wrong with RDJ getting whatever ridiculous amount he got for Iron Man 3.

The argument here is decriminalization of sex work, right?
If we're to decriminalize the work itself, shouldn't we aim for as close to parity in terms of pay and of agency as possible?
Lot of arguments are made for empowering women in sex work, but rarely any for men.
Ideally, it should be an equal exchange.

The male sex workers that signed a contract with Shotime are doing pretty well. Seemed like they were pretty well off before "Gigolos" started writing them checks too. Maybe its not as glamorous outside of Vegas....and btw prostitution is illegal in vegas

I was focusing on adult film specifically. I didn't consider male dances/Chippendale's/gigolos.

 

[Kano on the Phone]

No, I'm saying that you're making it easy for yourself when you simply say that a choice is empowering by virtue of being a choice. I'm saying that it's not as easy as that and that doing something out of necessity and because you want to is different. Looking at the numbers Goya posted above, it's clear that trafficking alone is a fairly large issue.

So what? Choice is empowerment. Dictating what choices someone should have because you think you know better is the opposite.

 

[Shaanyboi]

There's more compelling reasons to legalize it and better control it than there are to maintain the status quo.

 

[kirblar]

The argument here is decriminalization of sex work, right?
If we're to decriminalize the work itself, shouldn't we aim for as close to parity in terms of pay and of agency as possible?
Lot of arguments are made for empowering women in sex work, but rarely any for men.
Ideally, it should be an equal exchange.

I was focusing on adult film specifically. I didn't consider male dances/Chippendale's/gigolos.

No, not at all. There is no reason for parity in pay here- there is not equivalent demand. Women do not purchase porn at the same rate men do, just as men don't purchase romance novels at the rate women do.

 

[Protag]

You hang out with prostitutes, Vince McMahon?

Bro, are you throwing shade at Vince?

 

[daffy]

You're not realizing that a large part of these problems are a result of prostitution being prohibited. Legalization means brothels with regular health inspections. It means mandatory contraception. It means STD tests. It means minimum wage. It means prostitutes are able to go to authorities in the case of abuse without fear of being arrested. All of these things improve the lives of all involved.

No it doesn't. A very idealistic assumption but we've seen that America doesn't really know a great deal about supportive authority when it comes to historically marginalized groups. While I do agree that it should not be prohibited, I think Americans would be brought kicking and screaming before they gave sex workers any significant amount of government aid.

 

[itsinmyveins]

So what? Choice is empowerment. Dictating what choices someone should have because you think you know better is the opposite.

If I get to choose between being stabbed or shot in the leg, I don't think either choice is going to empower me as a person. I'm not comparing it to prostitution, it's just an example to illustrate how choices doesn't necessarily equal empowerment -- not in any meaningful way, anyhow.

 

[Wazzy]

I agree. Whether or not someone is empowered is something only they can decide. I think I didn't read your previous post carefully. I was arguing against a point you weren't making. Sorry!

It's cool.

If I get to choose between being stabbed or shot in the leg, I don't think either choice is going to empower me as a person. I'm not comparing it to prostitution, it's just an example to illustrate how choices doesn't necessarily equal empowerment -- not in any meaningful way, anyhow.

How is that a choice if you're forced into a situation where you'll be harmed either way?

 

[itsinmyveins]

How is that a choice if you're forced into a situation where you'll be harmed either way?

Well, that's my point. It's not.

 

[Devolution]

Good for them. What about the others? I'd rather assist those that aren't and have policies changed to help them the most.

There is a false dichotomy here in that we can't legalize prostitution (which means setting up brothels, going after predatory people) and assist people so they're not being exploited. We can do all those things.

 

[Wazzy]

Well, that's my point. It's not.

But when we're discussing empowerment, we're talking about people who have made the choice to enter the industry, not people who are forced and don't want to be in it.

 

[hodayathink]

The male sex workers that signed a contract with Shotime are doing pretty well. Seemed like they were pretty well off before "Gigolos" started writing them checks too. Maybe its not as glamorous outside of Vegas....and btw prostitution is illegal in vegas

Those guys aren't sex workers. They're actors. That show routinely has legitimate porn performers as the female clients.

I almost can't believe there are people that think that show is real.

 

[Kano on the Phone]

If I get to choose between being stabbed or shot in the leg, I don't think either choice is going to empower me as a person. I'm not comparing it to prostitution, it's just an example to illustrate how choices doesn't necessarily equal empowerment -- not in any meaningful way, anyhow.

I guess the fact that you chose two ways of being helplessly victimized as a way to illustrate your point about says it all. This isn't that, but I don't think you're capable of seeing that.

 

[itsinmyveins]

But when we're discussing empowerment, we're talking about people who have made the choice to enter the industry, not people who are forced and don't want to be in it.

But there are people who are selling their bodies, not because it's a job they want to or because they like it, but because that's essentially their only viable option. And if that's the reason someone enters that industry, I wouldn't say that it's due to an empowering choice.