Prostitution in Ireland.

Coriolanus

desertcircus wrote: »

3. Seriously now: what makes prostitution different to manual labour? I'm not being flippant; I want to know what makes a brickie different to a brasser. And none of this nonsense about sex being special or anything. What makes one concretely different to the other?

Because sex is something a mommy and a daddy do when they're very much in love so that they can make God-fearing little baby versions of themselves. At least, that's all I really get from the replies so far on this aspect of the issue. Manual labour is normal, sexual labour is somehow wrong.

sam34

eilo1 wrote: »

oh and the funding for that piece was the "Prostitution Licensing Authority" clearly a conflict of interest there

pot, kettle and black come to mind, considering what we know of the author of the opinion piece you quoted :

Dr. Farley is a research and clinical psychologist who has been in practice for 35 years. She edited the book Prostitution, Trafficking, and Traumatic Stress

she's hardly unbiased and objective is she?

eilo1

The article as you said is written by a clinical psychologist and researcher with 35 years experience. All the points raised are backed up by references.

Here is a talk given to the United Nations, Commission of Status of Women. It talks about legalised prostitution in Australia.

The points it raised is that by legalising prostitution you legalise pimps and turn them into "business men".
The women are still damaged psychologically and need to detach from the work they do.
Illegal prostitution has increased since legalising the industry.
The women are not safe, they can only hit the panic button after someone has attacked them.
60% of legal prostitution still occurs without the use of a condom.

panda100

Mrmoe wrote: »

I would say there are many reasons why. They probably overlap with the same reasons why there are so few Irish women involved in the porn/glamor modelling industry. Many do not want to run the risk of being identified by friends/family/neighbors and the negative connotations those people might have of the industry. I also think that more Irish women tend to have a more negative view of sexuality than continental Europe. It isn't all women but there is definitely a more conservative element associated with some Irish women. This is a social construct due primarily I would say due to the power the Catholic church exercised in this country. This influence is gradually being eroded and Irish women are becoming more open about their sexuality.

There is no doubt that the catholic church had a huge influence on sexual oppression in this country.

However, commidifying sex and intimacy, and putting a price on it ,is just as damaging as what the RC church did to sexual views in this country.

It is not sexual liberation to pay a 19 year old women from Rio de Janeiro, €50 to perform oral sex in a ****ty apartment in Phibsborough,Then afterwards the punter can rate her performance and looks for everyone to see on escort Ireland. Thats far from sexual liberation. It not only oppresses women but oppresses the whole concept of sex and sexuality. It cheapens, degrades and commodifies it.

Still laughing at the poster who thinks midwifery is a relatively modern concept.:)

28064212

eilo1 wrote: »

The article as you said is written by a clinical psychologist and researcher with 35 years experience. All the points raised are backed up by references.

Your "non-biased" researcher doesn't provide any links to studies in legalised, regulated areas. In fact, she demonstrates her very obvious bias with this paragraph:

Regardless of prostitution's status (legal, illegal or decriminalized) or its physical location (strip club, massage parlor, street, escort/home/hotel), prostitution is extremely dangerous for women. Homicide is a frequent cause of death (Potterat et al., 2004).

If she's going to make a claim that prostitution is extremely dangerous for woman regardless of legality, she should provide a reference that shows that. Instead, she links to a study that took place in its entirety in one state where prostitution has never been legal. In fact, Colorado's laws are even stricter than here, in that prostitution itself is illegal, rather than just associated activities. Her study has zero relevance to this argument, despite her trying to make it appear so

eilo1 wrote: »

Here is a talk given to the United Nations, Commission of Status of Women. It talks about legalised prostitution in Australia.

The points it raised is that by legalising prostitution you legalise pimps and turn them into "business men".
The women are still damaged psychologically and need to detach from the work they do.
Illegal prostitution has increased since legalising the industry.
The women are not safe, they can only hit the panic button after someone has attacked them.
60% of legal prostitution still occurs without the use of a condom.

Since you ignored the question last time, and the time before that, have you any links to original research in legalised, regulated prostitution areas that back up your claims? Do any of them study non-trafficked, consenting prostitutes? I have provided links which back up my claims, you could at least have the courtesy to provide yours.

eilo1

http://sisyphe.org/spip.php?article697

sorry forgot to supply the link in my above post

28064212

eilo1 wrote: »

http://sisyphe.org/spip.php?article697

sorry forgot to supply the link in my above post

Do you understand what "original research" means? Can you provide links to studies and/or papers which back up your claims? Not opinion pieces, not speeches, not editorials, actual original research containing methodologies and raw data.

eilo1

All the references are there for you to look at yourself.

I am not going to go trawling through each and everyone for you.

That link is from a talk presented to the women's commission within the UN.

I have provided you with multiple links to article and research on the negative affects of prostitution legal or illegal.

All you do is ignore the information from experts in the field.

Why is it again you think Prostitution should be legal?
So you can visit them is that it?

fat__tony

k_mac wrote: »

It's illegal for a punter to solicit a prostitute.

It's illegal to have a third party arrange the deal.

It's illegal to advertise your sexual services for money.

So there is no way you can actually come to an agreement with a punter without breaking the law. So while the act itself is not illegal. The steps you must take before it are.

Which pretty much proves that laws in this country are complete nonsense.

philologos

fat__tony wrote: »

Which pretty much proves that laws in this country are complete nonsense.

If you agree with legalising prostitution I suppose you could see it that way. I think the only major thing that could do with being changed would be to place the burden of criminalisation firmly on the client and not the victim.

fat__tony

curlzy wrote: »

Don't so arrogantly make assumptions about me. You don't know me, I only buy fair trade and as my rice crispies are made in Ireland I really can't see sweat shop coming into it. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

How about you get off your high horse, you daft bint.

philologos

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Theres a fairly high chance that the brekfast you had this morning, the clothes on your back and the keyboard you typed your post on were the product of sweatshop and/or child labour. But seemingly this is not sad and sick as someone getting a few minutes enjoyment in the context of a business relationship with a willing adult ?

Actually, it is equally as tragic, and equally worthy of combatting surely?

sam34

eilo1 wrote: »

The article as you said is written by a clinical psychologist and researcher with 35 years experience. All the points raised are backed up by references.

her qualifications arent the issues i was commenting on.

if you look at the title of the book she edited, it gives away her opinion on prostitution. so she is not writing an unbiased and objective piece.

AntiMatter

Jakkass wrote: »

Actually, it is equally as tragic, and equally worthy of combatting surely?

How does...

a few minutes enjoyment in the context of a business relationship with a willing adult ?

...,equal child labour and people being made to work in terrible conditions, and exploitation of communities?

eilo1

sam34 wrote: »

her qualifications arent the issues i was commenting on.

if you look at the title of the book she edited, it gives away her opinion on prostitution. so she is not writing an unbiased and objective piece.

She is a professional in her field giving her opinion which she backs up with references. This isnt a science argument you can't simply look at a double blind randomised controlled paper and come to a conclusion. There are a multitude of important factors to consider and I think some of the points she highlights wont have been obvious to most people who are only thinking about prostitution for the first time.

Some one had been asking for evidence that health professional accepted the damage prostitution does to the people working in the industry.
Why would a clinical psychologists be carrying out research and writing article that are published in respected pychology literature if there is no harm done.

sam34

eilo1 wrote: »

She is a professional in her field giving her opinion which she backs up with references. This isnt a science argument you can't simply look at a double blind randomised controlled paper and come to a conclusion. There are a multitude of important factors to consider and I think some of the points she highlights wont have been obvious to most people who are only thinking about prostitution for the first time.

Some one had been asking for evidence that health professional accepted the damage prostitution does to the people working in the industry.
Why would a clinical psychologists be carrying out research and writing article that are published in respected pychology literature if there is no harm done.

siiiiiiiiigh, my point is that she is not objectve, as evidenced by the book she edited.

she didnt do original research either, she wrote an opinion piece. big difference.

an opinion piece from someone with that agenda is essentially worthless in this argument, apart from adding some rhetoric.

and it would certainly be possible for some unbiased researchers to carry out valid research into these issues.

Scanlas The 2nd

An interesting observation.

A lot of people seem to want it to be the case that women are forced into prostitution and they want it to be the case that the women who do it are in some way damaged emotionally.

If this is you, why would it upset you for the above not to be true?

eilo1

I never said she was objective she is putting across an argument.

She is a researcher and she put across her arguments based on the references she supplied.

A metanalysis isn't primary research but you wouldn't disregard it on that basis.

And nobody has mentioned anything to argue and of the points raised in the paper or in the UN talk that is presented either.

eilo1

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

An interesting observation.

A lot of people seem to want it to be the case that women are forced into prostitution and they want it to be the case that the women who do it are in some way damaged emotionally.

If this is you, why would it upset you for the above not to be true?

It isnt that people want that to be the case it is the case. Obviously it isnt 100% of women and men in the industry but it is a high proportion.

sam34

eilo1 wrote: »

I never said she was objective

indeed, which brings me back to my original point:

sam34 wrote: »

pot, kettle and black come to mind, considering what we know of the author of the opinion piece you quoted

ie that when you asked for evidence you ridiculed what was supplied with the following:

eilo1 wrote: »

Sorry you expect me to take something from WAS video seriously! oh and the funding for that piece was the "Prostitution Licensing Authority" clearly a conflict of interest there

but yet went on to post biased opinion pieces yourself as evidence.

eilo1

sam34 wrote: »

indeed, which brings me back to my original point:



ie that when you asked for evidence you ridiculed what was supplied with the following:



but yet went on to post biased opinion pieces yourself as evidence.

In that case there is a FINANCIAL conflict of interest, in this case it is a professionals opinion based on a highly regarded and respected career. There is a massive difference.

sam34

eh, no... both are essentially prodeced by people with very fixed agendas, not objective pieces.

no organisation is going to sponsor a piece of writing that opposes their interests

Scanlas The 2nd

eilo1 wrote: »

It isnt that people want that to be the case it is the case. Obviously it isnt 100% of women and men in the industry but it is a high proportion.

There are people who really want that to be the case. They get defensive when any contradictory evidence ( whether valid or not) is given. I think it bothers some people because they have an idea of how the world should work or does work which they attach to emotionally, contradictory evidence hurts.

These people wouldn't get defensive is someone claimed water is as dangerous to drink as battery acid. It wouldn't bother them.

I myself don't know what percentage of women are forced into prostitution, but I'm not sure how people interpret "forced". I'd say it's not uncommon to find women of high self esteem with normal mental health doing it.

philologos

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

An interesting observation.

A lot of people seem to want it to be the case that women are forced into prostitution and they want it to be the case that the women who do it are in some way damaged emotionally.

If this is you, why would it upset you for the above not to be true?

The reality is that in a large proportion of cases it is true. There are severe problems with prostitution even where it is legal. Even if it weren't true, there are still some rather tragic assumptions which would motivate support for it.

Scanlas The 2nd

Jakkass wrote: »

The reality is that in a large proportion of cases it isn't true. There are severe problems with prostitution even where it is legal. Even if it were true, there are still some rather tragic assumptions which would motivate support for it.

What are these tragic assumptions if it were true?

Mrmoe

panda100 wrote: »

However, commidifying sex and intimacy, and putting a price on it ,is just as damaging as what the RC church did to sexual views in this country.

In what way is it damaging? Is it any more damaging than porn? Glamor modeling?

panda100 wrote: »

It is not sexual liberation to pay a 19 year old women from Rio de Janeiro, €50 to perform oral sex in a ****ty apartment in Phibsborough,Then afterwards the punter can rate her performance and looks for everyone to see on escort Ireland. Thats far from sexual liberation. It not only oppresses women but oppresses the whole concept of sex and sexuality. It cheapens, degrades and commodifies it.

This strikes me as a personal view on sex. You are perfectly entitled to have this opinion and you you shouldn't necessarily be criticized for having this view. However, many people think the complete opposite way. Do you think it is fair that your opinion should overrule what they think and want to do?Many people do not see this as oppression any more than any other job. Sex does not have to be between two people who love each other. Why does her country of origin or her age matter? What if it was a 30 year old Irish woman or a 30 year old Irish man for that matter?

The fundamental question still remains, why should sex be placed on a pedestal that raises it above any other human activity?

sam34

panda100 wrote: »

There is no doubt that the catholic church had a huge influence on sexual oppression in this country.

However, commidifying sex and intimacy, and putting a price on it ,is just as damaging as what the RC church did to sexual views in this country.

It is not sexual liberation to pay a 19 year old women from Rio de Janeiro, €50 to perform oral sex in a ****ty apartment in Phibsborough,Then afterwards the punter can rate her performance and looks for everyone to see on escort Ireland. Thats far from sexual liberation. It not only oppresses women but oppresses the whole concept of sex and sexuality. It cheapens, degrades and commodifies it.

why should sex not be commodified?

what's so special about sex?

if someone has an interest in using their body for painting/writing/gardening/singing/dancing/acting etc and they accept money as payment for performing those services, why should someone not accept payment for performing sexual services, if that is what they choose to do?

imo, saying that it is wrong to commodify sex is a great oppression.

Wertz

Jakkass wrote: »

If you agree with legalising prostitution I suppose you could see it that way. I think the only major thing that could do with being changed would be to place the burden of criminalisation firmly on the client and not the victim.

So someone that craves sex and can't get it any place without providing payment for it is somehow a criminal? They should just control those urges and have an oul pray or something until they pass?
It's a two way street...if you're going to start criminalising the client (man) in this scenario, then surely you should target those providing the service equally (I'm aware the sex worker is already targetted).

Personally I think neither should be targetted...as others have mentioned above, prostitution's continued presence in the illegal grey area it occupies is what causes many of the problems that anti-sex industry groups cite.
It's an awful lot like the illegal drugs trade...the common sense approach will never be taken (in this country at least) when moralistic/religious arguments are given so much credence by the willfully ignorant majority

philologos

Wertz wrote: »

So someone that craves sex and can't get it any place without providing payment for it is somehow a criminal? They should just control those urges and have an oul pray or something until they pass?

We all have to control our feelings. If we acted on every single feeling that we had it wouldn't be a good world to live in to begin with. For example, if I am filled with rage at someone is it acceptable for me to lash out with violence and kill them? If I desire someones property (coveting) should I go into their house and steal? Indeed, if I desire someone sexually, should I control this, or should I act and rape? The answers are obvious in those cases and they are obvious in this case.

It is quite reasonable in all these cases to ask people to control themselves. It is no less reasonable in this case.

Wertz wrote: »

It's a two way street...if you're going to start criminalising the client (man) in this scenario, then surely you should target those providing the service equally (I'm aware the sex worker is already targetted).

Criminalising the client is really simple. It encourages prostitutes to feel at ease to inform to the police about their environment so that the police will be able to act clearly to arrest those in charge. It allows for a more transparent means of breaking down the prostitution network.

Wertz wrote: »

Personally I think neither should be targetted...as others have mentioned above, prostitution's continued presence in the illegal grey area it occupies is what causes many of the problems that anti-sex industry groups cite.

I think I should point out, I'm not anti-sex in any shape or form. I'm opposed to exploitation and abuse. In fact I'm very much pro in the correct contexts. It's impossible not to be pro.

Wertz wrote: »

It's an awful lot like the illegal drugs trade...the common sense approach will never be taken (in this country at least) when moralistic/religious arguments are given so much credence by the willfully ignorant majority

The difference at least in the drugs trade is that it only affects one person (at least directly), and thats you. This is a separate argument.

28064212

eilo1 wrote: »

All the references are there for you to look at yourself.

The opinion pieces you've provided have dozens and dozens of papers referenced. I went through a handful of them, and none of the ones I looked at were based on legalised, regulated prostitution. Including the one that Dr Farley implied was evidence that prostitution was dangerous regardless of legality, despite using a study which contained no trace of any study of legalised prostitution

eilo1 wrote: »

I am not going to go trawling through each and everyone for you.

I'm not asking you to do it for me. I have asked you a very simple task. Provide me with sources (containing original research) which back up your claims. I have provided you with mine, which, apart from 1 sentence and a handful of side-conclusions, you ignored

eilo1 wrote: »

That link is from a talk presented to the women's commission within the UN.

Great. Then it should be easy for you to find some original research referenced from it that shows what you claim.

eilo1 wrote: »

I have provided you with multiple links to article and research on the negative affects of prostitution legal or illegal.

You have not provided any research that shows legalised, regulated prostitution is any more dangerous, stressful, harmful etc etc than hundreds of other legal jobs. You've provided articles (which are opinion pieces) which make that claim, but as far as I can see, they provide studies based on illegal, unregulated prostitution

eilo1 wrote: »

All you do is ignore the information from experts in the field.

No, I read opinion pieces, and point out the flawed conclusions and why they're irrelevant to this discussion. All you do is ignore actual original research from experts in the field

eilo1 wrote: »

Why is it again you think Prostitution should be legal?
So you can visit them is that it?

And once again, you return to personal attacks. You know nothing about me, and you seem to be incapable of actually debating the argument at hand. Unless it has some relevance, don't bring up my personal opinion of prostitutes again