Prostitution

AARRRGH

Jakkass wrote: »

Human trafficking is a huge problem in the Netherlands even where it is legal. You'd have to show me with examples that it isn't a problem in other countries or regions (Nevada in the USA) where it doesn't involve human trafficking or that there is no role from gangs in the process. I'm highly doubtful that you can though.

Human trafficking is NOT a huge problem in the Netherlands.

There was an excellent article in the Guardian a few weeks ago (if I can find it I will link to it) which proved the "human trafficking" figures for Europe are actually "foreign women working as prostitutes" and don't at all mean kidnapped/forced to have sex.

Even Ruhama admit on their website that they consider all foreign prostitutes in Ireland "trafficked".

I accept there is the odd psycho who might force a girl to work as a prostitute, but it is very much in the minority, and sadly, abuse happens in every industry.

Jakkass wrote: »

You assume that women freely choose to be prostitutes in most cases. Both I and the UN would disagree with you suggesting that financial coercion doesn't allow for free choice. Infact sex by coercion is rape and they are quite correct to call it such if that is indeed the case.

Every job is financial coercion! Do you really think I would be doing my job if I didn't need the money?

Do you have any idea how much prostitutes charge per hour, and how much money they make per day? Every prostitute I know, and there are quite a few of them, are completely loaded. They have chosen to continue working as prostitutes because it gives them such a high standard of living.

irish_bob

Jakkass wrote: »

I personally don't consider my views to be "extreme" at all. They are merely the values I decide to live my life with. Note how I don't consider legislating against one night stands to be important as opposed to legislating against prostitution.



People should have autonomy as long as it doesn't harm others. This is the best way to deal with it in a secular sense. I don't hold that people should stop doing things because I don't like it. I hold that prostitution can cause considerable harm to a prostitute, it facilitates human trafficking, and it is harmful in the respect of how we view human dignity. That isn't the same as "not liking it". That's a structured reason why we should ethically oppose prostitution in our society. That's rather different to what you claim of me. If it causes harm to another or has the potential to harm another seriously it should be outright forbidden.



I've explained my position clearly. I consider it wrong that you would support such a widescale violation of the understanding of human dignity. To view people as sexual objects instead of human beings with feelings, emotions, desires, needs and wants.



I never said that prostitutes weren't intelligent, infact it's the opposite of what I said. I oppose the understanding that prostitutes are sexual objects, but that they are fully fledged human beings in many respects including in intelligence.

As for seeing movies I couldn't care about that. I care about the reports that come in about human trafficking and how foreigners are sexually exploited. If we had enough funding in this country a huge Garda operation on it and drugs would be a major success like they have done in Stockholm.

They have chosen to do it under coercion in most cases. You say it is a free choice, yet but I and the UN apparently understand that financial coercion isn't a choice. You cannot seem to comprehend this in any meaningful sense.

i dont consider your views extreme , to me they are simply traditional and thier is nothing wrong with that

regarding prostitution in general , i doubt being a prostitute is as good for building self esteem as being an nurse or a teacher even you are on 5 times the pay but i dont believe that all of them are junkies who were forced to make thier living on thier back either , most of them i suspect probably see themselves as involved in a shamefull exercise which involves charging pathetic losers money in exchange for sex

AARRRGH

irish_bob wrote: »

most of them i suspect probably see themselves as involved in a shamefull exercise which involves charging pathetic losers money in exchange for sex

It's only shameful because society has issues with sex...

Regarding your comment about punters being pathetic losers; from what my friends have told me they tend to be men in their 40's and 50's who are divorced and lonely.

philologos

AARRRGH wrote: »

Human trafficking is NOT a huge problem in the Netherlands.

You're denying facts then I am afraid. There is a huge problem with it. The Dutch authorities even recognise this but you blatently deny it.

AARRRGH wrote: »

There was an excellent article in the Guardian a few weeks ago (if I can find it I will link to it) which proved the "human trafficking" figures for Europe are actually "foreign women working as prostitutes" and don't at all mean kidnapped/forced to have sex.

They are coerced because they cannot find another job. What don't you understand from this.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Even Ruhama admit on their website that they consider all foreign prostitutes in Ireland "trafficked".

Right, I haven't referred to this group once in my argument.

AARRRGH wrote: »

I accept there is the odd psycho who might force a girl to work as a prostitute, but it is very much in the minority, and sadly, abuse happens in every industry.

You're kidding me you're not understanding what financial coercion means. It means that they do it out of desperation. Not that they genuinely want to be prostitutes, but that they are doing it because they cannot find other work.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Every job is financial coercion! Do you really think I would be doing my job if I didn't need the money?

Yes, but you don't get raped at work or at least I hope you don't. Prostitutes work as prostitutes because they have to do it. If they had other options they most likely wouldn't be doing it at all. You're arguing that prostitutes should basically just shut up and take whatever job that takes, even if that means having unwanted sex with people. I can't help but find that disgusting.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Do you have any idea how much prostitutes charge per hour, and how much money they make per day? Every prostitute I know, and there are quite a few of them, are completely loaded. They have chosen to continue working as prostitutes because it gives them such a high standard of living.

I couldn't care how much they make a day.

AARRRGH wrote: »

It's only shameful because society has issues with sex...

I don't think we do. I think society has a huge issue with prostitution though, and rightly so.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Regarding your comment about punters being pathetic losers; from what my friends have told me they tend to be men in their 40's and 50's who are divorced and lonely.

That justifies it?

AARRRGH

Listen, I'm telling you the trafficking figures are greatly exaggerated.

Here's the article I referred to earlier: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/03/prostitution-humantrafficking

Have a read of it - it's very interesting. As I stated earlier, the figures in Ireland are also based on the women being foreign rather than any actual evidence of trafficking.

...

Regarding prostitutes being forced to work as prostitutes because they cannot get any other job. That isn't true I'm afraid. I know a few prostitutes who left the industry (they wanted a more normal life) and worked as cleaners. They all went back to prostitution though because minimum wage doesn't give you a good lifestyle.

Your argument about financial coercion is bogus because every prostitute I know has enough money to give it up, but they all continue to do it. Is this greed? Or is this because they don't actually hate the job? I don't know. The point is they are choosing to continue to do it for non-financial reasons, or at least, not because they are financially desperate.

You say you have no interest in how much money they make - don't you think that's a bit odd considering you are so sure they all are in financial dire straits? If you just looked at the numbers you would be forced to see your argument doesn't make sense.

I posted this earlier in this thread, but a prostitute I know has a massive stash (over 100k) in her apartment.

aare

Joycey wrote: »

So, all the people saying prostitution should be legalised, that it will benefit all involved etc etc. Why would this be the case? How would this benefit the prostitute? They are still engaged in prostitution, something which by and large, youd assume they wouldnt want to be. What we should be doing is taking away the poverty and lack of choice which forces the women into the situation of having to sell themselves in the first place.

That is the perfect answer, but frankly, now is not a good time to expect it to happen.

Joycey wrote: »

What could be done in order to grant the women who are still in a position where they have to do this the same benefits that complete legalisation would bring, is to completely decriminalise the selling of yourself, so no prostitute gets punished, but crack down hard on the customers and especially the pimps/escort agencies. Enforce regular testing and treatment for STDs for the prostitutes, and create an environment where they dont feel victimised/isolated because of the current laws in place which label them as criminals. This means that anyone who beats or rapes a prostitute is far more likely to be reported then they currently are. It doesnt, however solve the problem of women who are trafficed illegaly because they are still going to be as isolated as they always were.

I cant see any additional benefit to the prostitute under full legalisation then having the position of the seller be entirely decriminalised. It gives the prostitute much more power and it means that we dont live in a society where the oppression of people who are forced into the position of having to sell themselves is legitimised by legalisation.

I think you are missing something...women are in prostitution because they need the money, what you suggest will make it harder, and sometimes impossible for them to get that...

aare

AARRRGH wrote: »

The reports about human trafficking are by Ruhama. They are a religious organisation who are considered a joke by the various organisations who help prostitutes.

Now I know for sure that you are genuinely clueless...Ruhama, in affiliation with the, equally appalling, Europap (the Strasbourg based origin of the organistion that compiles their statistics), are the origin of any initiative to *help* women in prostitution in Ireland...and have an effective monopoly over the issue...nobody is laughing...not with their salaries dependent of Ruhama's approval.

aare

irish_bob wrote: »

most of them i suspect probably see themselves as involved in a shamefull exercise which involves charging pathetic losers money in exchange for sex

Actually you are quite right there...most prostitutes DO depersonalise their clients, and look down on them as pathetic losers...

...it's an essential defence mechanism...a way of keeping it objective and putting a wall between themselves and their clients...

AARRRGH

aare wrote: »

Now I know for sure that you are genuinely clueless...Ruhama, in affiliation with the, equally appalling, Europap (the Strasbourg based origin of the organistion that compiles their statistics), are the origin of any initiative to *help* women in prostitution in Ireland...and have an effective monopoly over the issue...nobody is laughing...not with their salaries dependent of Ruhama's approval.

Ruhama want to help women based on lies.

For example, according to them, "human trafficking" is a foreign woman working as a prostitute.

They think prostitutes are being sexually assaulted every time they have sex.

They think women are incapable of choosing to work as a prostitute.

Etc.

If they really cared about prostitutes, they would just help women instead of making stuff up (even the Gardai say they are full of crap). There are many other decent prostitution organisations who are non-religious, non-extremist, and exist simply to help prostitutes and fight for better rights.

Sure you admit yourself Ruhama and Europap are appalling, but you are wrong that salaries are dependent on Ruhama's approval - the HSE funds many prostitution organisations. Ruhama are not a parent body - they are just another prostitution organisation.

getz

Jakkass wrote: »

gaygaf: Seems to be all about the guy doesn't it? How selfish can one get?

it is well known that if sex is left to woman there wouldent be a human race--in the 60s,70s,and 80s i was in the merchant navy [sailing out of manchester]most of the crew would be young males under 30,most of them because of the work they did ,dident have a wife or girlfriend often we would be at sea for many weeks at a time, when your ship reached port all you would want to do is go out and party [drink and a woman] morals in that time was different ,plenty of girls about but very little chance of getting a one night stand[you wouldent be in port long enough to build up any steady relationship with a girl] but in any dockside pub , like dublin there would be young girls available [for a price] so sex wasent a problem,the goverment /police /and local people knew and excepted this as part of life,for the girls side of this was to have a good time and end up with cash in their handbags,it also kept young irish and foreign seamen down in the dock pubs--remember at this time the only way to ship goods in or out was by merchant shipping -in a way catholic ireland excepted this as part of life-i can still name all the pubs in dublin/belfast i used to party in

aare

AARRRGH wrote: »

Ruhama want to help women based on lies.

Ruhama don't, to thew best of my knowledge, want to help ANYONE but themselves...to retain their power base.

AARRRGH wrote: »

They think prostitutes are being sexually assaulted every time they have sex.

Emotionally, they usually are...and it took YEARS of pressure to get Ruhama to even pay lip service to that instead of dismissing them as voluntarily fallen women in need of "saving".

AARRRGH wrote: »

They think women are incapable of choosing to work as a prostitute.

How ridiculous...the whole world knows that at least 5% of women are sufficiently dysfunctional to be capable of choosing, freely, to work as prostitutes...unfortunately, the women actually working as prostitutes only very rarely fall into that 5%.

AARRRGH wrote: »

If they really cared about prostitutes, they would just help women instead of making stuff up.

The same could be said of a lot of people really and some of them even project...

AARRRGH wrote: »

There are many other decent prostitution organisations who are non-religious, non-extremist, and exist simply to help prostitutes and fight for better rights.

Yes, I know...but not in Ireland...Ruhama and associate arganisations have the monoploy here...

AARRRGH wrote: »

Sure you admit yourself Ruhama and Europap are appalling, but you are wrong that salaries are dependent on Ruhama's approval - the HSE funds many prostitution organisations.

It funds the Women's Health Project which is a co-operation between Europap/Tampep and Ruhama...

...and that's all...

AARRRGH

Aare we both agree that Ruhama are a selfish, dishonest organisation, so you don't have to keep disagreeing with me about Ruhama just for the sake of it. Saying I am clueless about Ruhama and then explaining why Ruhama are bad (i.e. saying the exact same things I am saying) makes it seem like you aren't reading my posts and simply want to disagree with me. So let's just agree that we both know Ruhama are dodgy and leave it at that.

Regarding why people become a prostitute - it is still a choice though. You may feel they have no options, but they still choose to repeatedly have sex for money. You might like to think they have no choice, but seriously, they make a conscious decision to work as a prostitute. Maybe it is a BAD choice, but it is a choice nonetheless. And if they are honest they will know they have other options (no one is totally optionless - they could go to a womans shelter, or work as a cleaner, or go on welfare, or even beg on the street - they don't have to have sex for money).

I accept there is the odd extreme situation where the woman genuinely has no choice, but that is very rare and should not be considered the norm.

If someone who can't count gets a job as an accountant, he really shouldn't blame accountancy when he gets in trouble... Know what I mean? Just like a woman who thinks prostitution is sexual assault probably shouldn't regularly work as a prostitute. So don't blame the industry - blame the bad decision.

philologos

AARRRGH: There was still pressure that motivated a botched choice. I don't regard such decisions entirely free if they were done out of pressure and coercion of any form. You seem to consider physical coercion to be the only form of coercion. That's a very simplistic understanding of what coercion is. It's not a valid understanding given the human condition of coercion. Coercion can also be very much a mental activity.

As I say though. I have to only wonder why you underplay Dutch statistics which are raising concerns about a) human trafficking, and b) gang activity in prostitution. If prostitution is funding illegal activity even when it is legalised, I don't think we can justify it as a part of society at large.

Why are the Dutch insisting on closing so many windows in Amsterdam?

aare

AARRRGH wrote: »

Aare we both agree that Ruhama are a selfish, dishonest organisation, so you don't have to keep disagreeing with me about Ruhama just for the sake of it. Saying I am clueless about Ruhama and then explaining why Ruhama are bad (i.e. saying the exact same things I am saying) makes it seem like you aren't reading my posts and simply want to disagree with me. So let's just agree that we both know Ruhama are dodgy and leave it at that.

From all your posts here, as far as I can see the only thing you know about Ruhama is that they do not support your need to believe that women are content in prostitution. I get the impression that, if they did (as the once did in the early 90s) you would not give a fig how "dishonest" or "selfish" they are.

AARRRGH

Jakkass wrote: »

AARRRGH: There was still pressure that motivated a botched choice. I don't regard such decisions entirely free if they were done out of pressure and coercion of any form. You seem to consider physical coercion to be the only form of coercion. That's a very simplistic understanding of what coercion is. It's not a valid understanding given the human condition of coercion. Coercion can also be very much a mental activity.

The only way to tackle this is by giving prostitutes more rights so women who enter the industry are treated well, and women who want to leave the industry have options, for example, can go on a FAS course or something like that.

We'll never be able to remove financial pressure from our society.

Also - and this is one of my main point which I keep repeating - we need to focus on ALL prostitutes, not just the unbelievably desperate ones.

Jakkass wrote: »

As I say though. I have to only wonder why you underplay Dutch statistics which are raising concerns about a) human trafficking, and b) gang activity in prostitution. If prostitution is funding illegal activity even when it is legalised, I don't think we can justify it as a part of society at large.

Why are the Dutch insisting on closing so many windows in Amsterdam?

The problem I have with "human trafficking" statistics is they are so often false, or at least, grossly inflated.

Did you read the article I linked to? Here it is again: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/03/prostitution-humantrafficking

AARRRGH

Aare, please, I am sick of fighting with you. We agree on the basic concepts - prostitution needs to be talked about honestly and prostitutes need more rights. Please stop insulting me and disagreeing for the sake of it.

PS I can see from your previous post that you have misread many things I said. Please, be careful when you read my posts. For example, I said "a woman who thinks prostitution is sexual assault" which you read as "a woman who thinks sex is sexual assault". This is happening a lot and means I keep having to defend things I have not said.

philologos

AARRRGH wrote: »

I agree that she felt she had no choice, but I am a believer in personal responsibility, so if you choose to do something, you need to stand by your decision. Yes, you can claim you were under pressure and you made a bad choice, but you still made a choice.

I'm a believer in modern psychology. People can be manipulated very easily.

AARRRGH wrote: »

The only way to tackle this is by giving prostitutes more rights so women who enter the industry are treated well, and women who want to leave the industry have options, for example, can go on a FAS course or something like that.

Or with a more substantial police effort it can be minimised. I prefer this as it lessens the probability of such incidents happening at all.

AARRRGH wrote: »

We'll never be able to remove financial pressure from our society.

It is possible to assist new migrants to Ireland to seek legitimate work instead of selling their bodies however.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Also - and this is one of my main point which I keep repeating - we need to focus on ALL prostitutes, not just the unbelievably desperate ones.

I think if there is such a degree of danger involved in the practice it shouldn't be considered for legalisation at all, but rather a more comprehensive clamp down should start and help for former prostitutes to seek other work should be key.

AARRRGH wrote: »

The problem I have with "human trafficking" statistics is they are so often false, or at least, grossly inflated.

We don't know this in the Dutch circumstance. I personally think since the authorities are dealing with it there must be a genuine reason for doing so.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Did you read the article I linked to?

It primarily considers British statistics not Dutch statistics. As such I don't feel it was an adequate answer to what I asked you.

AARRRGH

@Jakkass: Do you know though that lots of foreign women fly into Ireland to work as prostitutes for a week, and then fly out again? These sorts of women would be a substantial percentage of prostitutes in Ireland.

What would you like to do to these women? I think we should respect their choice as women to live their lives however they want. I do not think these women need to be told they are damaged and mistaken and need our help to find another job.

Are you only talking about prostitutes who are heroin addicts or similarly desperate, or are you talking about all women who have sex for money?

If you could clear this up that'd be great.

philologos

AARRRGH wrote: »

@Jakkass: Do you know though that lots of foreign women fly into Ireland to work as prostitutes for a week, and then fly out again? These sorts of women would be a substantial percentage of prostitutes in Ireland.

And?

AARRRGH wrote: »

What would you like to do to these women? I think we should respect their choice as women to live their lives however they want. I do not think these women need to be told they are damaged and mistaken and need our help to find another job.

If they are caught in activity deport them and deny them a visa into Ireland for a period of time would probably be the best route.

Unless we can certainly show that there aren't going to be women abused in the prostitution industry there is little incentive at all to legalise a system of sexual exploitation.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Are you only talking about prostitutes who are heroin addicts or similarly desperate, or are you talking about all women who have sex for money?

I'm talking about the vast majority of prostitutes from what aare seems to have suggested.

getz

AARRRGH wrote: »

@Jakkass: Do you know though that lots of foreign women fly into Ireland to work as prostitutes for a week, and then fly out again? These sorts of women would be a substantial percentage of prostitutes in Ireland.

What would you like to do to these women? I think we should respect their choice as women to live their lives however they want. I do not think these women need to be told they are damaged and mistaken and need our help to find another job.

Are you only talking about prostitutes who are heroin addicts or similarly desperate, or are you talking about all women who have sex for money?

If you could clear this up that'd be great.

prostitution-receipt of money for sexual acts that is not illegal in uk law,there are also male prostitutes, but in my mind how different is the lady who has a good time on a date with a man [him paying ]then ends up in bed with him at the end of the night ,than the girl who just takes his money and gives him what he wants-at the end of the day isent the out come is the same ?

aare

Jakkass wrote: »

I think if there is such a degree of danger involved in the practice it shouldn't be considered for legalisation at all, but rather a more comprehensive clamp down should start and help for former prostitutes to seek other work should be key.

Criminalisation simply doesn't work that way...

When prostitution was recriminalised in 1993, the bill was read at this time of year, to become operational in mid September...

In real, human terms that just meant a lot of Mum's were not going to be able to pay for a lot of essential schoolbooks and uniforms.

A prostitute can usually make any amount of money for the first four weeks or so...after which she is "yesterday's news" and in constant competition with the other women in a buyers market.

Her income can be high, but precarious, it cannot be relied upon at all.

Clamping down has an effect like like cutting an entire industry down to a "one day week"...with no court of last resort...

That helps no-one...

The pressing needs do not go away...the women have to go on working...under almost unbearable stress, watching over their shoulder for the Police they should be able to turn to for protection...

The slip up, they get arrested, they get criminal records...which makes it even harder for them to ever find any other work...

Meanwhile, if their names appear in the paper, some kid at school always finds out....and "outs" the kids most prostitutes are only trying to provide their best for...

In my experience the on thing all relevant organisations (including FAS) put up the greatest resistance to, was any scheme to offer the women real, financially viable alternative work...

They were even more resistant to that than to the idea of any scheme to offer the women grants or loans to get them out of the most pressing financial difficulties.

If you want women out of prostitution, all you have to do is provide a viable door marked "exit" that does not put their lives, or their children's down on the line and they will flood through it like a tsunami...

AARRRGH

aare wrote: »

I think you are trying to play a lot of semantic games to score points.

Until you start reading my posts properly, I don't see any point talking to you, as you're just going to repeat the cycle of misreading, disagreeing, and then later saying the exact thing you supposedly disagreed with.

It is very frustrating for me because after all your posts I have to defend things I never said.

I gave you an example of this in my last post.

Jakkass wrote: »

If they are caught in activity deport them and deny them a visa into Ireland for a period of time would probably be the best route.

That's fair enough, but they are normally from the EU!

Jakkass wrote: »

Unless we can certainly show that there aren't going to be women abused in the prostitution industry there is little incentive at all to legalise a system of sexual exploitation.

Many women would disagree with your interpretation that sex for money is sexual exploitation. You don't realise it, but you are being very insulting to women. You are basically saying they are not in control of their sexuality.

As a feminist I believe women are competent and their decisions should be respected.

Jakkass wrote: »

I'm talking about the vast majority of prostitutes from what aare seems to have suggested.

Prostitution has come a long way since the 80's and 90's. Most prostitutes these days advertise online or work in brothels. They all make a lot of money (about €250 per hour for non-brothel work, and about €100 per hour for brothel work.) The traditional image of the "street hooker" is very much the minority.

If you want to specifically talk about prostitutes with heroin problems, then no problem, I agree these are desperate women who need help kicking their addiction. I would have a lot of sympathy for these women.

But the professional prostitutes (the majority) who make a lot of money (thousands per week), and don't have a pimp, these are not helpless women who are trapped and confused and need people to come rescue them. They are competent human beings who happen to have made a choice you do not understand.

philologos

AARRRGH: There are certain circumstances by which governments can deny access to EU citizens. It's happened in cases of political activists in the UK such as Geert Wilders and I think in criminal cases they have every right to deport. Not entirely sure, but I think it is possible.

acorntoast

AARRRGH wrote: »

Many women would disagree with your interpretation that sex for money is sexual exploitation. You don't realise it, but you are being very insulting to women. You are basically saying they are not in control of their sexuality.

As a feminist I believe women are competent and their decisions should be respected.

Well said.

AARRRGH wrote: »

They are competent human beings who happen to have made a choice you do not understand.

People who have strong beliefs want the world to conform to those beliefs. It doesn't matter if their beliefs are misguided, they will always see things from their own perspective no matter what evidence is placed before them.

I agree with you that prostitutes are not two dimensional and should not be viewed with a one size fits all attitude. Some of them are going to be desperate but many of them won't be. People should differentiate between the two.

Joycey

Aarrrgh, your on a complete loser here buddy. The whole thread (or at least the last 5 or 6 pages which ive read) have been you backing up what seem to be completely off the wall claims with professed "insider knowledge", and your purported depth of experience with people who work in the trade. Someone who actually has first hand experience has come on, outed your claims as "wildly inaccurate" and you then start accusing her of point scoring.

Now you say you used to "make porn". That means that you were either a prostitute yourself, or you were one of the people who profitted out of the prostitution of others. Seeing as how you havent actually said you used to be (or still are) a prostitute, Il take it as the latter. That means that the extent to which you have had dealings with prostitutes it was in a proffesional context.

If your working in a factory, do you rant to your boss or your co-workers about how degrading you find your job to be? About how you feel humiliated or dehumanised by your activity? Doubtfull. So any knowledge you may have (and it doesnt seem to be too obvious, if it exists at all) is compromised by the fact that it was in a proffesional context that you worked with prostitutes.

The additional possibility remains that you were actually one of the people who actually employed the prostitutes and made money at their expense, which makes you a glorified pimp

aare

AARRRGH wrote: »

It is very frustrating for me because after all your posts I have to defend things I never said.

...because, heaven knows, most of the things you definately have said are indefensible to anyone who is aware of the reality...

AARRRGH wrote: »

Prostitution has come a long way since the 80's and 90's. Most prostitutes these days advertise online or work in brothels. They all make a lot of money (about €250 per hour for non-brothel work, and about €100 per hour for brothel work.)

Yeah, it's come a long way all right...for pimps...

In the 80s and 90s they were paid around £150 an hour for escorts and
£60 and hour in "massage parlours"...

Of this they handed over approximately 20% as "book money"...

Today they have to hand over 50%...call round and check...I did...

In addition, that is not the hourly rate for a 40 hour week, that is the hourly rate WHEN THERE IS WORK...which, after your first few weeks as a "novelty" is very precarious and unpredictable. There are more hookers than sex work available. In real terms a woman working for an agency is lucky to get one client per day...and often has to cut her own share of the rate to get that.

AARRRGH wrote: »

But the professional prostitutes (the majority) who make a lot of money (thousands per week), and don't have a pimp, these are not helpless women who are trapped and confused and need people to come rescue them. They are competent human beings who happen to have made a choice you do not understand.

You are SO clueless...

I think that this might be a good time to point out that in such an economically precarious industry one of the most effective ways to compete is to play to your clients by pretending to be confident and content (acute distress doesn't sell, however real it is) and most important of all, if she can stomach it to pretend that she LOVE EVERY MINUTE of fulfilling his one sided fantasies.

aare

AARRRGH wrote: »

Many women would disagree with your interpretation that sex for money is sexual exploitation. You don't realise it, but you are being very insulting to women. You are basically saying they are not in control of their sexuality.

What on earth has prostitution got to do with women's "control over their sexuality"? They are two totally seperate and unrelated issues...

AARRRGH wrote: »

As a feminist I believe women are competent and their decisions should be respected.

But, of course, only as long as they "decide" what you want to believe they do...and frankly, they don't...

AARRRGH

Joycey wrote: »

Now you say you used to "make porn". That means that you were either a prostitute yourself, or you were one of the people who profitted out of the prostitution of others.

I don't know what point you are trying to make, but yes I used to run a number of porn sites (some with original content) which were very successful and everyone made a lot of money.

aare wrote: »

Today they have to hand over 50%...call round and check...I did...

I know. If you read my post I showed how much money they make in a brothel. It is much lower than non-brothel work.

I don't at all believe women should have to work in a brothel, just in case that's what you think I said.

And I am fully aware the industry does not guarantee X hours of work per day. But even one client per day (i.e. one hours work) - that can be €300 cash into your hand.

You are still agreeing with me but are still saying I'm clueless. Can you not see that keeps happening?

Aare, can I ask though, why do you think prostitution is sexual assault? Surely it's a bit naive to assume every single prostitute thinks she is being sexually assaulted when she does her job. Maybe some think that, and for whatever reason continue working as a prostitute, but to project your opinion onto every prostitute isn't right.

AARRRGH

aare wrote: »

But, of course, only as long as they "decide" what you want to believe they do...and frankly, they don't...

Aare, I understand you feel no prostitute has a choice, but come on, I am telling you I know girls who definitely are doing it by choice.

Seriously, open your mind to the possibility that not all prostitutes are desperate heroin addicts who have no choice but to sell their bodies.

Everyone and every situation is different...

aare

acorntoast wrote: »

Well said.
People who have strong beliefs want the world to conform to those beliefs. It doesn't matter if their beliefs are misguided, they will always see things from their own perspective no matter what evidence is placed before them.

That is actually what AARRRGH is trying to do...but if you go out there and talk to REAL women in prostitution, not as a client, but as an equal, over a coffee, you will discover that what he is saying is absolutley wrong.

acorntoast wrote: »

I agree with you that prostitutes are not two dimensional and should not be viewed with a one size fits all attitude. Some of them are going to be desperate but many of them won't be. People should differentiate between the two.

I have only known one prostitute in hundreds, who, in private, among friends, would even claim that she did not need to be desperate to go on...

That's not "many".

Women in prostitution are very different from each other...the only thing I have ever seen resembling a "common factor" is that there do seems to be a disproportionate amount of women in prostitution who come from family backgrounds of self employment, compared to the general population.

For the rest, they are of all classes, ages and levels of education. They have widely different tastes and leisure activities, as well as diverse ethical codes and standards and religious beliefs...

In spite of which differences, the vast majority find selling sex repellant and only do it because they have no viable alternative.