Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Should prostitution be legalised? Or what...
Options
Comments
-
Actually, she made a very good analogy. Drunk driving is an abuse of legal driving. Trafficking would similarly be an abuse of legal prosecution - presuming your predictions are correct which is dubious.christmas2012 wrote: »not the same thing,thats a bad analogy if i ever saw one,as trafficking and prostitution are interlinked,they go hand in hand,drink driving does not..
Driving and drunk driving are just as interlinked as any abuses to anything else which is otherwise considered acceptable. Another example is the prohibition of alcohol to stop alcoholism and alcohol related violence, which is precisely why it got banned in the US - and did you see how well that worked?
Has it? I would be genuinely very interested in seeing some reliable figures on that. And that's the problem, those figures are pretty thin on the ground from what I can see, with many of the reports published (such as the one earlier in this thread) being blatant pieces of propaganda, with little or no evidence to back any of their claims up.christmas2012 wrote: »'In holland prostitution trafficking has increased since legislation of prostitution,the same result could easily happen in ireland.
And, of course, even if trafficking does increase in countries where prostitution is legal, one has to compare it against countries where prostitution is not legal, so see if it is more of a global trend rather than a result of legalization - correlation does not imply causation, after all.
If you think that such a scenario would affect me in the slightest, you're sadly mistaken, so it's hardly any dream come true - or was that simply an attempt at an ad hominem attack?Lets just say legilslation of prostitution occured(all your dreams come true)..
Why would sex tourists come to Ireland? Holland or Germany easier, and cheaper, to get to and stay in.Think of the market,there are plenty of sex tourists in ireland landing,as a result there is a huge market,so you will find this will in turn attract sex traffickers who want to follow the money and who want to remain unlicensed..
Also you are making gigantic presumptions about how the market would react to such a scenario - given the increased costs associated with illicit business, such venues would be out-priced by the legal ones.
Even if demand outstripped supply (which is unlikely given that sex tourists are hardly going to come to a country just to avail of illegal brothels when the attraction - according to you - is the legal ones.
Your scenario makes no logical sense.
Didn't I already respond to this - twice? Is there any reason you're ignoring this?The problem with fully legalising it means the gards wont have any power to do searches on premises,and it will go down on the priority to do list of the gardai..
Also as you didn't respond to my other rebuttals, in my last post, I'll take it you've accepted them.0 -
no i dont accept what youre saying - you should look up the statistics for yourself crime in holland is a huge huge problem and the very well staffed police force as it is,have a lot of trouble dealing with it..paddy vans out every night,its like a busy saturday night in glasgow every night over in amsterdam..0
-
''Think of the market,there are plenty of sex tourists in ireland landing,as a result there is a huge market,so you will find this will in turn attract sex traffickers who want to follow the money and who want to remain unlicensed..''
''Why would sex tourists come to Ireland? Holland or Germany easier, and cheaper, to get to and stay in.
Also you are making gigantic presumptions about how the market would react to such a scenario - given the increased costs associated with illicit business, such venues would be out-priced by the legal ones.''
Legal ones would be more costly as they would be liable for taxing by the government and would have to pay inner city rents..
The attraction of the unlicensed illegal trades would be great,and with an existing prostitution market with heaps of tourists the temptation would be there for a lot of people who want to make big money all untaxed..
You ask why would sex tourists come to ireland..isnt it obvious why they would to avail of sex with a prostitute in a legal setting..
If prostitution did become fully legal ,it would in no way go to protect those who abuse the system and traffick prostitutes into the country who want to remain off the radar,because there would be a prostitution market,they would follow the money to ireland,and in turn attracting sex tourists also,which would boost revenue,but would not protect those trafficked into prostitution as the gards would not look it up due to 'legal' status..
I do think it should be decriminialised but not legalisted to the full degree..0 -
The Corinthian wrote: »
Actually that report gives absolutely no evidence to this effect. At best it gives, largely anecdotal, evidence of the existence of trafficking (including quoting their own organization as a source), but no where do they show any actual figures examining increases in alleged, let alone confirmed, cases of trafficking.Originally Posted by jonniebgood1 View Post
In addition to the above quoted text and not wanting to quote the full report it has also been the experience in Victoria that trafficking has increased as has underage
It does. See page 10- reference to Fred Lelah.
Also reference to ECPAT report.
What a ridiculous comment- It is an opinion based discussion and should stay that way rather than snide insinuations.christmas2012 wrote: »Lets just say legilslation of prostitution occured(all your dreams come true)......
Could'nt unwarned searches/ inspections form part of any legislation?christmas2012 wrote: »
The problem with fully legalising it means the gards wont have any power to do searches on premises,and it will go down on the priority to do list of the gardai..0 -
@Corinthian (I must say your responses make me smile)Should we make casual sex illegal then? Custodial sentences for swingers? Perhaps fines for one-night-stands?
Prostitution involves the transfer of money for sex. One night stands and swinging is just pure sex. This type of arguing where one throws in the red herring detracts from the core issue.I think you are overestimating the psychological aspect to sex and have not really given any evidence that it is simply a personal opinion or feeling. Not everyone sees sex in the same way as you do, so it would be wrong to legislate for them.
Yes I am giving an opinion, who isn't? This is a very subjective matter and to assert otherwise is deeply naive. Even when people produce evidence or data they approach that data in a subjective manner. For instance if I want to prove a point I could gather up loads of stats etc as to why prostitution should remain illegal and I will find it and you or others will find suitable evidence to back up why it should be legalised. It then becomes an arguement about who has the best evidence and why my evidence is wrong, yaddy yaddy ya ad finenutum. I have decided to come at this topic in a purely subjective manner and lay my thoughts out there. To further my point lets say it comes to a referendum and we are asked to vote on whether prostitution should be legalised. I would vote no based on my opinions. Judging by your comments you would vote yes. As we live in a democracy if the yes side win then prostitution is legalised and I will have to suck it up and visa versa.Secondly, the cynic in my has long thought that sex is already pretty much commodized even without prostitution. Many relationships (especially marriages) end up as little more than exchanges of sex for security eventually
Certainly historically the above is true, women were bargaining chips and it was a trade off. Anyone who marries for money today (be they male or female) is setting themselves up for a life time of misery and I really would not want to be in their shoes.Who in their right mind is going to choose sanitation as a career? Or coal mining? Or flipping burgers? Not everyone grows up to be an astronaut.
I find nothing morally or spiritually wrong with the above jobs. I've cleaned toilets in my time but ask me to put a price tag on my vagina and farm it out to any man willing to pay the price and the answer is no fricking way.
The thought of selling my body makes me feel ill and I suspect just about every prostitute who rents out his or her bits feels the same. It is my belief that in order to do that you have to shut off huge parts of yourself to do it. I suspect that is why many prostitutes have a drink / drug problem.
A number of months back Channel 4 did a documentary on phone sex workers and one girl in particular started doing it for the money but as time wore on she found she could no longer relate to men and it was seriously affecting how she viewed them. That was just phone sex. For balance I should say that another woman loved doing it and even found a partner through it but if it was difficult for one woman to do that via the phone, I suspect full on contact is 100% worse.0 -
Advertisement
-
I find nothing morally or spiritually wrong with the above jobs. I've cleaned toilets in my time but ask me to put a price tag on my vagina and farm it out to any man willing to pay the price and the answer is no fricking way.
The thought of selling my body makes me feel ill and I suspect just about every prostitute who rents out his or her bits feels the same. It is my belief that in order to do that you have to shut off huge parts of yourself to do it.
Very insightful IMO. The problem of course being that people will have different moral values and morals on different levels. Some people may have morals that make them see cleaning toilets as beyond them (think of victorian posh). The laws of the land do not though. With prostitution they do.
Which comes first?I suspect that is why many prostitutes have a drink / drug problem.
I think that is a strong argument against legalising. Being forced into prostitution as a way to getting money for satisfying a drug problem is a real danger as things are in some areas. This would be a more widespread problem if prostitution were legalised as many people retain some of their morals based on what the law tells them is correct (forgive my slight paradox!).0 -
The Fred Lelah case is anecdotal - individual cases do not denote rampant problems.jonniebgood1 wrote: »It does. See page 10- reference to Fred Lelah.
Also reference to ECPAT report.
As to the brief reference to ECPAT, it gives one one rough statistic from an NGO - and the objectivity of such organizations has already been called into question in this discussion.
Interestingly, it then goes on after mentioning ECPAT, to cite "feminist campaigners who who worked through the League of Nations against the traffic in women between the World Wars I and II" - hardly compelling evidence 80 years later.
I do think that reliable, objective data is both difficult to come by on this topic. In part because it is difficult to collect, but also because from what I can see, the only one's collecting, or presenting, data of any kind appear to be pushing ulterior agendas. And the above report is an example of this IMHO.
Apologies, I see that you specifically cited the transaction in paid sex, however you did also talk about "having sex can alter a person physically and spiritually" and suggested that if so, sexual practices that reject the spiritual aspect would be equally damaging to the individual.Prostitution involves the transfer of money for sex. One night stands and swinging is just pure sex. This type of arguing where one throws in the red herring detracts from the core issue.
I disagree. One can be objective, even utilitarian on this topic, but to suggest that subjective data is all that one can hope to find is to ignore the tools available in statistical analysis to eliminate such subjectivity and almost acts as a justification for NGO agendas that seek to manipulate result.Yes I am giving an opinion, who isn't? This is a very subjective matter and to assert otherwise is deeply naive. Even when people produce evidence or data they approach that data in a subjective manner.
We all know that surveys may be manipulated, but that does not mean that they will be. What is needed is for data to be collected by someone who has no vested interest other than to find the truth, or the best solution for a problem. As long as those doing so are in reality simply using such 'data' to prove that prostitution is right or wrong for ideological or religious reasons, that won't happen, but it does not mean it cannot.
Why not? You can get divorced and if you're a woman the odds are on your side.Certainly historically the above is true, women were bargaining chips and it was a trade off. Anyone who marries for money today (be they male or female) is setting themselves up for a life time of misery and I really would not want to be in their shoes.
While less common than in the past the sex-for-security transaction till happens today, although it has been cleverly camouflaged using tradition, social acceptance and diamond rings. Doesn't make it any less of a transaction in the end just because there's a wedding.
While I accept that this discussion is largely based upon opinions, I do think we're getting to a point where we've got a Schrödinger's cat scenario building up here, with two alternative realities based upon people's opinions and dubious reports (on all sides). And until we actually have real data to back things up, we won't know if this cat is dead or not.The thought of selling my body makes me feel ill and I suspect just about every prostitute who rents out his or her bits feels the same. It is my belief that in order to do that you have to shut off huge parts of yourself to do it. I suspect that is why many prostitutes have a drink / drug problem.0 -
And until we actually have real data to back things up, we won't know if this cat is dead or not.
Well I guess there isn't much more that I can add to this debate, I can't get my head around the need for data on a subject such as this.0 -
Objective data is necessary so that we can understand the true nature of the issue and decide if it is, on balance, good or bad for both those involved and society in general.I can't get my head around the need for data on a subject such as this.
Choosing policy based on clearly dubious data or simply on 'gut feeling' is the way of the mob.0 -
Choosing policy based on clearly dubious data or simply on 'gut feeling' is the way of the mob.
Just because I do not provide stats / data, does not negate the fact that I provide thoughtful commentary on this subject. There is such a thing as qualitative analysis.0 -
Advertisement
-
I'm not denying you're providing thoughtful commentary (opinion) on this subject at all, but simply because it is thoughtful does not make it valid.Just because I do not provide stats / data, does not negate the fact that I provide thoughtful commentary on this subject.
We all have a right to an opinion, but we do not have a right to have it taken seriously.
Qualitative analysis employs the collection of data to arrive at conclusions.There is such a thing as qualitative analysis.0 -
Qualitative analysis employs the collection of data to arrive at conclusions.
Now I conduct and collate data for work related purposes and qualitative analysis is in a nutshell commentaries from X persons. Data can be broken down into figures eg: X no of people are unemployed, or eat X product and qualitative analysis is those who said why they like x product or why they find themselves unemployed but it is an opinion all the same.
Anyhow for some strange reason I actually came across some data in relation to the issue of prostitution, which interestingly you haven't.
Accounts from former prostitutes which taps into the psychological effects of selling ones body:
http://theprostitutionexperience.com/
http://secretdiaryofadublincallgirl.wordpress.com/
Now I've not sold my body but the above blogs do examine its effects. I'm not sure if I would compare prostitution with sexual abuse as one of the above bloggers claim to make that link but I think there is an interlinking. I read through some of the postings and there are instances where men who pay women for sex think it is okay to abuse that prostitute.
I could also add links to Rhuhama but the problem I have with them is that they do not cover men who sell their bodies for sex. My ex brother in law was a rent boy and I think he sold his body because a) he needed the money and did not know of another way to make money and b) he had major problems psychologically (his whole family did) but knowing him and his circumstances has made me aware of male prostitution.0 -
With respects, the above two link not to data, but to anecdotal accounts of prostitution. In fact the latter is named after the now famous blog 'Diary of a London Call Girl' by Brooke Magnanti (a.k.a. Belle de Jour) who worked as a prostitute and wrote on her own experiences. Anecdotally, her take on working in the sex industry contradicts those given in your anecdotes and later went on to write a rather scathing criticism of both the conservative and liberal moralists who seek to attack that industry. Indeed, for every negative account of prostitution, you'll probably find more positive ones out there, with many sex workers campaigning for the legalization and regulation of prostitution.Anyhow for some strange reason I actually came across some data in relation to the issue of prostitution, which interestingly you haven't.
Accounts from former prostitutes which taps into the psychological effects of selling ones body:
http://theprostitutionexperience.com/
http://secretdiaryofadublincallgirl.wordpress.com/
Nonetheless, it's still anecdotal evidence, and little more. It does not really answer questions of such as whether legalized prostitution improves life, on balance, for those working in that industry, or it's effect on alleged trafficking and other illegal activities.
I will fully admit that my anecdotal knowledge of prostitution is tiny. It's limited to being asked if I was "looking for business" by the rather pitiful, drug addicted, prostitutes you find in Dublin (and there I believe the problem is drugs rather than prostitution) and one curious occasion where I and my girlfriend ended up being brought to a legal brothel in Germany by a Canadian friend for a last drink after a night on the town. Comparing the two, my personal opinion became that prostitutes are better off in a legal and regulated industry.
However, if you're looking to impose policy for society, anecdotes and personal opinion don't cut it - including my own. You need to make an objective assessment of whether a policy will be good for both those involved and society as a whole. And from what I can see there's little objectivity in the debate at present, leaving us in a situation whereby we cannot really say.
This is the problem with objectivity on this subject; everyone appears to be pushing an agenda beneath the surface, be it christian or feminist. As such, I genuinely have little faith in much of the 'data' and 'reports' published out there on the subject.I could also add links to Rhuhama but the problem I have with them is that they do not cover men who sell their bodies for sex.0 -
christmas2012 wrote: »If you legalise prostitution,crime will go through the roof
Which crimes, what roof, and why do you think so? I am not seeing much support at all for this statement/assumption at all and would be keen to read some.So should I say nothing? I thought this was a forum for debate on the subject.
It is. Which is why you should not say "nothing" but if you insist on saying something you should very much be prepared for people to debate your view or ask you to substantiate it, without having a tantrum. People disagreeing with you and explaining why IS what debate is. What did you think it meant? Something more like speakers corner in London where you stand up, express your view, and leave before anyone retorts?First of I come from a belief that we have a mind, body and soul which interacts with each other and optimum health is when each of these interact as a whole.
I am with you as far as mind and body. But not sure what you mean by "soul". Is this not just another word for "mind" or are you trying to introduce some magic or metaphysics here?Who in their right mind is going to choose prostitution as a career?
That is for them to decide I guess, not you or me. Perspectives are massively different on this one. I for one find myself often wondering who in their "Right mind" would choose a career in television. I also, in my line of work, wonder who in their right mind ever takes "Software Testing" as a career as I personally find it the most mundane, repetitive and soul destroying career I ever had the danger to almost fall into.
The point is that it is not for any of us to question the careers, or career choices, or motivations of others. Perhaps the career path is not for YOU but be careful before extrapolating "I do not want/like it" into "Therefore no one else should either".
Also just because a career exists does not mean it is "chosen". How many people working in McDonalds, Tesco, Sewage cleaning, Dog food taste testing and more actually chose to enter that career? I am not saying none of them do, but I do not think the %s are going to come anywhere even close to supporting your point here.christmas2012 wrote: »what about sex workers that are trafficked or under duress? have you asked those victims?
I think it is risky to mix up prostitution with sex trafficking. I doubt there are many people on threads like this who are defending the idea of fully legalizing and regulating prostitution who do not also share your concerns about human trafficking.
Mixing the two is unhelpful and irrelevant unless you could show with actual argument, rather than assumption, that full legalizing of prostitution would increase human trafficking rather than decrease it. Such an argument requires back up and so far the only back up you appear to offer is "Go find the figures yourself" which tells me nothing except you do not HAVE the figures/arguments to present. Alarm bells should always go off if someone says "The figures are there... go find them".
It is also risky and dangerous to conflate the bad actions of some in any industry with the industry as a whole. In recent years for example there was a lot in the press made of certain clothing manufacturers that were using child labor to produce their clothing products.
The result was those firms were targeted for prosecution, product boycotts and more. At no point did anyone stand up and say "Because child slave labor is used to produce some clothes, clothes are evil and immoral and should be banned".
It is similarly ridiculous to say "Because some people capture and traffic women into sex slavery, therefore all kinds of prostitution is wrong".0 -
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »I think it is risky to mix up prostitution with sex trafficking. I doubt there are many people on threads like this who are defending the idea of fully legalizing and regulating prostitution who do not also share your concerns about human trafficking.
Mixing the two is unhelpful and irrelevant unless you could show with actual argument, rather than assumption, that full legalizing of prostitution would increase human trafficking rather than decrease it. Such an argument requires back up and so far the only back up you appear to offer is "Go find the figures yourself" which tells me nothing except you do not HAVE the figures/arguments to present. Alarm bells should always go off if someone says "The figures are there... go find them".
...
It is similarly ridiculous to say "Because some people capture and traffic women into sex slavery, therefore all kinds of prostitution is wrong".
I would have shared that view when starting this thread.
However the evidence seems to show that despite the intentions of laws legalising prostitution the result in a number of cases has always been an increase in trafficking of people. There is no reason I can see to see why an Irish law would not follow this if it is accepted as a norm in the process. The evidence seems to show this-A top German law enforcement official has warned of a climbing number of human trafficking cases in the country with an 11-percent rise in the figure.
"Over the course of the last five years, the number of investigations has risen continuously from 317 to 534. This means an increase of 70 percent over five years and 11 percent last year alone. We attach great importance to this form of criminal activity because the human dignity of the victims is violated," said Jorg Ziercke, the Chief Commissioner of the Federal Criminal Police Office of Germany, Press TV reported Monday. http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/127565.html
Also this report concludes the same http://www2.vwl.wiso.uni-goettingen.de/courant-papers/CRC-PEG_DP_96.pdf after goin into detail on the consideration of this with the 'scale effect' of legalisation, i.e. more people will use prostitutes if it is legal thus trafficking will rise proportionally:
also from same reportThe likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution, thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn 2005).Additionally, Di Nicola et al. (2004) provide annual estimates of trafficking
victims used for sexual exploitation in Germany over the 1996 to 2003 period, which can shed
some light on the changing number of trafficked prostitutes. The estimates show that the
number of victims gradually declined between 1996/97, the first years of data collection, and
2001, when the minimum estimate was 9,870 and the maximum 19,740.31 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.32 This is consistent with our result from the
quantitative analysis indicating that the legalization of prostitution leads to an increase in
inward trafficking.0 -
Just legalise it, it's the oldest profession and not everyone is trafficked, as one of the above stated where is the data concerning the guys selling their wears ? The tax would come in handy and it can be properly policed0
-
Good and interesting report. Nonetheless it is very balanced in that it fully admits that this correlation is by no means proven with certainty:
"Naturally, this qualitative evidence is also somewhat tentative as there is no “smoking gun” proving that the scale effect dominates the substitution effect and that the legalization of prostitution definitely increases inward trafficking flows."
More importantly it concludes:
"The likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution, thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn 2005). However, such line of argumentation overlooks potential benefits that the legalization of prostitution might have on those employed in the industry. Working conditions could be substantially improved for prostitutes – at least those legally employed – if prostitution is legalized. Prohibiting prostitution also raises tricky “freedom of choice” issues concerning both the potential suppliers and clients of prostitution services. A full evaluation of the costs and benefits, as well as of the broader merits of prohibiting prostitution, is beyond the scope of the present article."
And this is ultimately the core of the argument. Trafficking is only one facet of it, there is also the question of those who choose to work in the industry and the conditions under which they work, monitoring of health issues, taxation, insurance and so on.
In short, as with most 'solutions' the question of whether prostitution should be legalized or not will never be without negative consequences, only the solution that has the least negative consequences. It's like prohibiting alcohol because legalizing it will see a marked increase in road accidents (it will, but as 1920's America discovered, it was better than the alternative).
I do believe that studies such as these are important to the debate however and am not overly surprised that it did not originate from an Anglophone university.0 -
jonniebgood1 wrote: »I would have shared that view when starting this thread.
The issue is that there are no useful figures or arguments to support the idea regulation is the cause of such increases. Correlation does not imply causation and your quote from a German Cop is not a "report" or "study" of any kind. It is merely an observation that a certain type of case has increased. The causes for that increase are not even speculated upon in the quote. Also note that the officer in question said the number of INVESTIGATIONS has increased. Not the number of convictions or cases solved. This does not, therefore, directly mean an increase in cases..... but can mean many other things such as an increase in people reporting the cases.... or an increase in resources to divert to making such investigations.
Corinthian raises the same objections essentially, as well as others, about the report you do link to however so I will not go over the same ground but as pointed out in the post above mine there are many parts of your report that support my position, not the counter one. It is a speculative report and little more though.
I think if the average punter has a choice between a slightly more expensive but credited, licensed, medically checked and professional option.... or a cheaper unlicensed illegal product in a back room through a scary pimp.... one can expect the majority to go with the former. There will always be some who will go with the latter but we need to deal with that separately. The same as we do for any product that has an illegal black market alternative.
But indicting an industry because a black market version of the industry exists is not a rational option in my opinion. We do not ban cigarettes and alcohol because louts down the end of Henry Street sell illegal black market cheaper alternatives of the same product. Why should we therefore do the same with prostitution?0 -
@nozzferrahhtoo
I was responding to this:If you feel sex is a spiritual experience good for you but not everyone does so why should your morality be forced on other people when it doesnt concern anyone but the people involved.
I fail to see how my below comment is having a tantrum.Quote:
Originally Posted by miec
So should I say nothing? I thought this was a forum for debate on the subject.It is. Which is why you should not say "nothing" but if you insist on saying something you should very much be prepared for people to debate your view or ask you to substantiate it, without having a tantrum.Quote:
Originally Posted by miec
First of I come from a belief that we have a mind, body and soul which interacts with each other and optimum health is when each of these interact as a whole.I am with you as far as mind and body. But not sure what you mean by "soul". Is this not just another word for "mind" or are you trying to introduce some magic or metaphysics here?
Considering I see a distinction between mind and soul then the answer to your question is yes I am introducing magic / metaphysics if that is what you would like to call it.0 -
Tantrum, stamping your feet, throwing toys out of the pram, whatever you want to call it is irrelevant to me. The main point is that no one said you should "say nothing". They simply disagreed with you, which is what happens on a debate forum. If you think debate means something else, or if you can not handle when people disagree with you, then I simply question the wisdom of posting here at all. But certainly saying "I thought this was a debate forum" at someone who was debating you is not making much sense.
Being a debate forum it is expected that you might try and back up your claims and such too. So if you want to introduce some concept of souls then perhaps you would be so good as to evidence their existence before using them as a basis for argument.0 -
Advertisement
-
Oh dear... This is where rational debate breaks down; when dogma is introduced. And it is dogma, because it is ultimately unprovable; and article of faith and no level of reason can change it.Considering I see a distinction between mind and soul then the answer to your question is yes I am introducing magic / metaphysics if that is what you would like to call it.
Unfortunately though, if we accept dogma as a valid argument, then anyone's dogma should be equally acceptable, no matter how contradictory, irrational or even offensive it may be.0 -
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »The issue is that there are no useful figures or arguments to support the idea regulation is the cause of such increases. Correlation does not imply causation and your quote from a German Cop is not a "report" or "study" of any kind. It is merely an observation that a certain type of case has increased. The causes for that increase are not even speculated upon in the quote.
The report I linked does give reason to this, i.e. scale effect.0 -
jonniebgood1 wrote: »The report I linked does give reason to this, i.e. scale effect.
I am not talking about the report, I am talking about the German Cop you quoted. All he said was that the number of cases being investigated has increased. I am pointing out how much of a leap that is to suggest this means that the number of cases is actually increasing.
The number of actual cases can remain constant but many other factors can lead to an increased number being investigated. More resources to do so would be one. Raising the public's consciousness so that more cases get reported is another. Just two examples, there are more.
If you want to directly link the full legalization and regulation of prostitution with increased human trafficking then you have to do a LOT more work than this. First you need to find a country where this has actually occurred. Secondly you would have to establish that an increase in trafficking actually has occurred. Finally you would have to show that the latter is actually as a direct result of the former.
Thus far I have not seen any of these three steps being rigorously performed here, and in some cases not performed at all.0 -
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
If you want to directly link the full legalization and regulation of prostitution with increased human trafficking then you have to do a LOT more work than this. First you need to find a country where this has actually occurred. Secondly you would have to establish that an increase in trafficking actually has occurred. Finally you would have to show that the latter is actually as a direct result of the former.
Thus far I have not seen any of these three steps being rigorously performed here, and in some cases not performed at all.
As I said already the report details the rising numbers from the German example. I don't intend to read it out to you but in summary rising numbers are largely attributed to the scale effect. I don't mean to be obstreperous about this but you seem to want a report drawn up to your specific requirement and that is unlikely to happen, particularly when the quoted report deals in some measure with your query.0 -
jonniebgood1 wrote: »As I said already the report details the rising numbers from the German example.
And the problems with that report have been outlined to you in response, including the problems the report itself admits to and laid out in detail. You seem to want to ignore all those issues and just assume the report supports your case, when it does not.
The report itself says it has no hard evidence, such evidence is near impossible to get, it has no "smoking gun" and that basically everything it has argued is just hypothesis and theory. Basically the report is interesting and it very strongly suggests that this is a line of inquiry that is deserving of more research funding but that is about as far as you can stretch it. It simply does not go where you want it to go.
Worse than that however is that even if the report DID go where you want it to go it is still entirely irrelevant. I say this because of something I said already. You can not indict a legitimate industry with the crimes of it's black market equivalents. Even if we imagine for a moment, and I stress the word imagine, that your report proves beyond a doubt that legalizing and regulating prostitution really does cause an increase in trafficking.... so what? That just means we have to find ways to deal with and counter trafficking. It is not an argument for not legalizing and regulating prostitution.
The analogy I gave earlier was to the clothing industry. As the industry expanded some companies were found to be using child slave labor to produce their products. Was that a reason to call clothing immoral or make it illegal? No. More rational people realized that the crimes of some are not an indictment of the industry as a whole and that the solution was to regulate the industry better and work against those producing clothing immorally.
The same is true here. If we imagine your report was true then this does not speak against legalizing or regulating prostitution, but FOR doing it better and more effectively. So not only do I find your argument unsubstantiated here, even if it was unsubstantiated its still irrelevant to the specific debate.jonniebgood1 wrote: »you seem to want a report drawn up to your specific requirement and that is unlikely to happen, particularly when the quoted report deals in some measure with your query.
Not at all. I want a report that first the required detail, not just my own. If you want to link an increase in X to a legalization and regulation of Y then it is not just me that realizes that to do so you need to, as I said:
1) Find a country where full legalization and regulation of Y has occurred.
2) Show that an actual increase in X actually has been observed, not just an increase in cases of it being investigated or reported. The latter being something we should strongly expect as a result of regulation.
3) Show that 2) actually is a direct result of 1). Correlation is not causation remember.
As I said, that is not being done here. Least of all by you and certainly not by your linked report. And again as I said even if it was being done, the results are still irrelevant to the debate at hand. It is more something we should be aware of having regulated it.0 -
I agree with you, but I would not completely dismiss the report either.nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »The report itself says it has no hard evidence, such evidence is near impossible to get, it has no "smoking gun" and that basically everything it has argued is just hypothesis and theory. Basically the report is interesting and it very strongly suggests that this is a line of inquiry that is deserving of more research funding but that is about as far as you can stretch it. It simply does not go where you want it to go.
You are quite correct that it is a single report, focusing on a single aspect of legalized prostitution from a single country that has its own model of legalization and regulation. It furthermore concludes itself that it is very limited and does not definitively prove anything.
I do also feel that the focus on trafficking in this debate is grossly over-weighted. Trafficking is a problem related to prostitution but to focus simply on this would ignore not only the other problems associated with the profession, but also the benefits that would come with legalization and regulation. It's like a discussion on the legalization of homosexuality that becomes obsessed with HIV and ignores all else.
Nonetheless, it is an objective and well researched report. It appears not to be pushing any ulterior agenda and is even self-critical in the scope of its conclusions. On this basis, unlike the blatantly partisan report that was presented earlier in this thread, I would not dismiss it and, instead, would seriously take on board what it says.
As such, while I still would conclude that the legalization and regulation is on balance better for both those working in that industry and society in general, than its criminalization, I would not be as certain as I was prior to reading that report.0 -
^ I do not completely dismiss it though. As I said in my post I think it is a very useful report in that it highlights that if we are going to regulate and legalize prostitution in a country that there are very strong and important arguments for funding some more research into the effects of doing so.
I think the arguments for such legalization and regulation FAR outweigh the arguments for not doing so. By a long long way. However every political and legal decision has bad side effects and reports like this help us find out what they will be and how we can go about dealing with them and minimizing their effects. This is important and I feel we could do a lot more of it. We need more reports and studies like this one and reports that are just good theory are often great precursors to reports that go out and find the hard evidence, facts and numbers that the original report lacked.
However as I laid out, even if this report was proved 100% correct in that such regulation does actually lead to increased trafficking, I still do not see that as an argument against the regulation itself. At all.0 -
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »And the problems with that report have been outlined to you in response, including the problems the report itself admits to and laid out in detail. You seem to want to ignore all those issues and just assume the report supports your case, when it does not.
Out of interest could you let me know what my case is?nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »1) Find a country where full legalization and regulation of Y has occurred.
2) Show that an actual increase in X actually has been observed, not just an increase in cases of it being investigated or reported. The latter being something we should strongly expect as a result of regulation.
3) Show that 2) actually is a direct result of 1). Correlation is not causation remember.
As I said, that is not being done here. Least of all by you and certainly not by your linked report. And again as I said even if it was being done, the results are still irrelevant to the debate at hand. It is more something we should be aware of having regulated it.
The current situation is that prostitution is not legalised. If we are to move to a situation where that changes then we need first to be able to deal with the arguments that are raised against legalisation. So its a simple point but also important- the onus is on the pro legalisation side to prove that this will not happen as opposed to the other way around. That is how the world works if you want change. Saying of trafficking that "It is more something we should be aware of having regulated it" is ridiculous as it is clearly something that needs to be considered beforehand and dealt with before any legislation. Any other suggestion simply ignores the overwhelmingly conservative nature of our legislators.0 -
The Corinthian wrote: »I agree with you, but I would not completely dismiss the report either.
You are quite correct that it is a single report, focusing on a single aspect of legalized prostitution from a single country that has its own model of legalization and regulation. It furthermore concludes itself that it is very limited and does not definitively prove anything.
I do also feel that the focus on trafficking in this debate is grossly over-weighted. Trafficking is a problem related to prostitution but to focus simply on this would ignore not only the other problems associated with the profession, but also the benefits that would come with legalization and regulation. It's like a discussion on the legalization of homosexuality that becomes obsessed with HIV and ignores all else.
Nonetheless, it is an objective and well researched report. It appears not to be pushing any ulterior agenda and is even self-critical in the scope of its conclusions. On this basis, unlike the blatantly partisan report that was presented earlier in this thread, I would not dismiss it and, instead, would seriously take on board what it says.
As such, while I still would conclude that the legalization and regulation is on balance better for both those working in that industry and society in general, than its criminalization, I would not be as certain as I was prior to reading that report.
You are correct- it is only one aspect but it needs to be dealt with by those who are pro- legalising. It is normal that if we want to change a law such as this that we need to show how trafficking in this example would not increase. In Germany trafficking rose due to the scale effect which is understandable even if the percentage of prostitutes that come from trafficking stayed the same. The underlying fact is that trafficking rose after legalisation in Germany so a proposal to prevent that needs to be availiable before it becomes a considerable option.0 -
Advertisement
-
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »However as I laid out, even if this report was proved 100% correct in that such regulation does actually lead to increased trafficking, I still do not see that as an argument against the regulation itself. At all.
Seriously?
If legalising prostitution causes "increased trafficking", it is clearly an argument against legalising prostitution. If you cannot recognise that then we don't have a clear starting point for this discussion.
We have to deal in reality.0
Advertisement