Should prostitution be legalised? Or what...

iptba wrote: »

The minutes of hearings of this committee can be read in considerable detail here:

Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality - 16/Jan/2013 Table of Contents (http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/JUJ2013011600001?opendocument)

and here:

Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality - 23/Jan/2013 Table of Contents (http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/JUJ2013012300001?opendocument

Very interesting stuff there iptba, thanks for that. Just finished reading the first debate there. What I've read is somewhat disturbing however- while it is obviously difficult to interpret everything just from reading transcripts (and thus lacking an insight into important aspects such as tone of voice and body language etc), it seems the committee had already arrived at a preconceived verdict and were simply going through the motions to make it seems like there was a semblance of public consultation. Look at the grilling and hostility Dr. Whitaker faced compared to the pro-prohibition speakers. Dr Whitaker to her credit responded calmly and coherently and plainly laid out the facts and figures (i.e increase in trafficking in Sweden, success of policies in NZ, failure of policies in Norway) on prostitution for all to see- and correctly came to the conclusion that legal and regulated is the best solution.

The first speaker provided a practically stat-free facile analysis where she attempted to draw a tenuous link between violence against women and prostitution she got off very lightly in terms of questioning.

One thing I found very disturbing was the proposal by Emma Regan to have an "education" (see- propaganda) campaign in schools relating to prostitution. I am firmly opposed to this kind of indoctrination and social conditioning and any other liberal should be too.

One other incident which was both enjoyable and illuminating was the exchange on page 13:

Senator Katherine Zappone: In terms of the submissions received by the committee there has been criticism of the evaluation conducted by the Swedes into their own legislation, particularly that it lacked scientific rigour. Does Ms O'Connor wish to comment?

Ms Monica O'Connor: I have met Anna Skarhed who is a Supreme Court judge.

Senator Katherine Zappone: She was the author of the evaluation.

Perfectly and succinctly sums up the inaccuracy and intellectual dishonesty of the prohibitionist position.

Cathyht wrote: »

Objectifying someone to the sum of their body parts, using them in exchange for money, I find this disgusting.

Even outside the sex industry there are many jobs and roles... in the manual industry, army and more... where essentially all we are doing is using people (and paying them) for the use of their bodies for our own ends in one way or another.

It is only your own hang ups / opinions related to the subject of sex that elevates this one job over the others as one to be worried or concerned about. Or disgusted by.

Many people like yourself have an idea of what sex "should be" or for those of a more theistical bent "is meant to be" for.

There is no objective reason outside those subjective impressions of what this "sexual ideal" is meant to be however to single out sex and not army work, packing boxes on a production line, cleaning their toilets or any other role. In all of them the employer or contractor is paying people to use their bodies in ways that benefits or pleases them or furthers their aims and agendas.

Cathyht wrote: »

I am astonished there could possibly be demand for paid sex.

So what? This is a thread about whether it should be legal or not. Your astonishment is entirely irrelevant to that discussion.

I, for example, am astonished that in a time of easily achieved medical knowledge and readily available facts and figures on the internet that there could possible be demand for cigarettes.

Has my personal astonishment got anything to do with the ethics, morality or legality of the tobacco industry?

Not in the slightest. No.

Just because YOU can not get your head around why people would purchase a product in no way validates the extrapolation that therefore that product must be "abuse, control, sadism or depravity". And how you imagine you would treat a prostitute in no way licenses you to extrapolate that is how all customers do.

This attitude of "If people do not want what I want, the way I want, then they must be sick on some level" is the problem here. Not prostitutes or their customers. Work on it for us please. Society would benefit from a reduction of it.