Is sex with a 3rd world prostitute a form of rape?

SugarHigh

If someone has no other choice but become a prostitute to survive then are they still able to give consent since they are not in a position to say no. If they don't really have choice to say no surely this would be the same as rape just in the same way we don't believe someone under the age of consent is capable of saying no.

I'm not against prostitution when the women actually has a choice but this does strike me as basically taking advantage of someone. Yet I've heard many men openly talk about having sex with prostitutes in Thailand and no one seems appalled.

seanybiker

Surely most prostitutes become prostitutes because they have no other choices

johnmcdnl

they are in a position to say no - as bad as a situation that they're in they could still "possibly" find work some other way..

prostitution is just the "easiest" way possibility but they are not in a position where they HAVE to consent to becoming a prostitute

looksee

I think it is a little naive to say they could say no, if they are being 'managed' by a gang/pimp, there doesn't seem to be much option of saying no.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

sophia25

In many situations it is the only means they have that would give enough money to pay for sick elderly parents and/or young children. It is an obvious abuse of privilege and exploitation, the only difference with it and rape is the absence of violence (usually) and the added burden of the woman having to pretend she's enjoying it. I suppose also some men may feel more justified in this then rape as they have paid for it, but really....... are they kidding themselves it's a mutually beneficial agreement!

Ickle Magoo

Surely rape is having sex with someone without their consent - regardless of the conditions that led to them offering their bodies for money, there would be few clients who forcefully have sex with prostitutes.

There's a world of difference between preferring another occupation and not giving consent to sexual relations.

SugarHigh

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Surely rape is having sex with someone without their consent - regardless of the conditions that led to them offering their bodies for money, there would be few clients who forcefully have sex with prostitutes.

There's a world of difference between preferring another occupation and not giving consent to sexual relations.

You are missing my point that they may not be in a position to give consent. Rape doesn't have to be forceful to be considered rape. If an underage girl consents to sex it's still considered rape because she isn't believed to be capable of giving consent.

My argument is that if a women is under duress from poverty or a pimp than she isn't in a position to give consent. A legal document is void if it was signed under duress so why doesn't the same line of thinking apply to consent?

SugarHigh

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxrW_wfBRE0

Look at the girls reaction. I don't know what a rape victim looks like but I'd imagine it would be similar.

Ickle Magoo

I suppose the argument is that not all women in poverty are prostitutes so there is still a degree of choice. While it may not be the ideal or first choice occupation, it is still an adult making the decision to sell their body for money - in the case of pimping or trafficking then this is already illegal so I'm not sure why or how you would criminalise the client for the crime of a third party.

sophia25

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I think it definitely depends on your definition of rape.

Rape:- The unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.

Any man who pays to have sex with a woman living in abject poverty and does not appreciate that she is doing this under duress are fooling no-one but themselves. No, violence may not be used but rape is about an abuse of power rather than sex, this is also obvious in the exploitation of a person desperate to feed a family.

SugarHigh

johnmcdnl wrote: »

they are in a position to say no - as bad as a situation that they're in they could still "possibly" find work some other way..

prostitution is just the "easiest" way possibility but they are not in a position where they HAVE to consent to becoming a prostitute

Click on the video I posted and watch all the parts of "The Vice guide to Liberia" and then point out what options the women have?

There is a contradiction where if going into prostitution is there best option if you remove that option they are surely in a worse position so the people who are potentially rapists are in fact helping them. There was program on the other night in Kenya and one of the guys who had sex with an underage prostitute used this reasoning and I couldn't really find fault with it but at the same time I still viewed him as a rapist.

SugarHigh

SugarHigh wrote: »

You are missing my point that they may not be in a position to give consent. Rape doesn't have to be forceful to be considered rape. If an underage girl consents to sex it's still considered rape because she isn't believed to be capable of giving consent.

My argument is that if a women is under duress from poverty or a pimp than she isn't in a position to give consent. A legal document is void if it was signed under duress so why doesn't the same line of thinking apply to consent?

You mean like someone drunk cant give informed consent or something?

SugarHigh

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I suppose the argument is that not all women in poverty are prostitutes so there is still a degree of choice.

That doesn't mean the women have a choice because they are in a different situation. Just because some people manage to find work I don't think it's fair to use them as a stick to beat the ones who can't find work i.e. If they can get work then why can't you? There is of course only a limited amount of work.

While it may not be the ideal or first choice occupation, it is still an adult making the decision to sell their body for money - in the case of pimping or trafficking then this is already illegal so I'm not sure why or how you would criminalise the client for the crime of a third party.

You should criminalise both the pimp and the rapist because they are both taking advantage of someone.

SugarHigh

bluewolf wrote: »

You mean like someone drunk cant give informed consent or something?

Yes, there are many reasons someone can't give consent. It's not an easy thing to define whether someone is capable of giving consent but I would have thought if you can't sign a legal document under duress then how can it be ok to consent to sex under duress.

If a woman is afraid that her pimp will beat or even kill her if she refuses a client than she isn't in a position to consent to sex with that client. She won't say no because that's not really viable option she is being forced to say yes.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Ickle Magoo

SugarHigh wrote: »

That doesn't mean the women have a choice because they are in a different situation. Just because some people manage to find work I don't think it's fair to use them as a stick to beat the ones who can't find work i.e. If they can get work then why can't you? There is of course only a limited amount of work.

Okay, so some are making an informed decision to become prostitutes - and you don't mind using those who are coerced as a stick to beat them with?

SugarHigh wrote: »

You should criminalise both the pimp and the rapist because they are both taking advantage of someone.

When you start using hysterical language to describe all clients of prostitutes then your argument loses credibility. There are undoubtedly plenty of women who choose prostitution for whatever reasons that are well beyond my comprehension and that is their right, their clients are not rapists in any sense of the word. It is known as the oldest profession in the world for a reason.

That said, there are definitely seedy, predatory and distasteful sides to the sex industry - the differing laws and acceptabilities in different countries mean that there will be sex tourists, that's the nature of the beast. Jumping from acknowledging that to assuming all men who pay for sex must there for be rapists and automatically criminalising all aspects helps no-one, it does nothing to differentiate between those who choose prostitution and those who are coerced - nor even attempt to answer why prostitution exists even in affluent societies when there are plenty of career options.

SugarHigh

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Statutory rape is still rape. When you hold someone at knife-point you are refusing them the choice of consent and we also believe that a child isn't capable of giving consent, so I don't see why it's wrong to call it rape.

You seem to follow the Whoopi Goldberg logic of "It wasn't rape rape".

Rape is sex without someones consent. The reasons why they didn't give consent or weren't able to give consent do not change the fact it is rape.

SugarHigh

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Okay, so some are making an informed decision to become prostitutes - and you don't mind using those who are coerced as a stick to beat them with?

I mentioned that I have no problem with prostitution when the person is capable of giving consent. Read my first post again.

When you start using hysterical language to describe all clients of prostitutes then your argument loses credibility. There are undoubtedly plenty of women who choose prostitution for whatever reasons that are well beyond my comprehension and that is their right, their clients are not rapists in any sense of the word. It is known as the oldest profession in the world for a reason.

Again read my first post. I have no problem with prostitution in cases where the women is able to give consent. Calling someone who has sex without the other persons consent a rapist is not hysterical language. This discussion is really about whether these women who have no other choice are capable of giving consent. If you are going to be killed for saying no than how do you have a choice?

That said, there are definitely seedy, predatory and distasteful sides to the sex industry - the differing laws and acceptabilities in different countries mean that there will be sex tourists, that's the nature of the beast. Jumping from acknowledging that to assuming all men who pay for sex must there for be rapists and automatically criminalising all aspects helps no-one, it does nothing to differentiate between those who choose prostitution and those who are coerced - nor even attempt to answer why prostitution exists even in affluent societies when there are plenty of career options.

Where did I say this? You are the one being hysterical and trying to put words in my mouth.

Ickle Magoo

SugarHigh wrote: »

I mentioned that I have no problem with prostitution when the person is capable of giving consent. Read my first post again.

So how do you differentiate? I can't understand why anyone would want to be a prostitute, it seems like an inherently dangerous and unpleasant occupation to me and yet there are plenty of those that choose to do it because presumably it has certain remunerations - so surely all prostitutes are working under duress? In fact, don't most people work under duress?

SugarHigh wrote: »

Again read my first post. I have no problem with prostitution in cases where the women is able to give consent. Calling someone who has sex without the other persons consent a rapist is not hysterical language. This discussion is really about whether these women who have no other choice are capable of giving consent. If you are going to be killed for saying no than how do you have a choice?

Okay, so how do you determine those who are being coerced from those who are not?

SugarHigh wrote: »

Where did I say this? You are the one being hysterical and trying to put words in my mouth.

Well, no. Your OP is suggesting sex with 3rd world prostitutes aught to be classed as A FORM OF rape - which is assuming A) there must be different forms of rape - oddly enough something you were arguing against in a later post and there is no such thing as voluntary prostitution in the 3rd world. I am just pointing out if women in the affluent west choose it as a career path, why wouldn't or shouldn't those in the third world? What purpose do you think arbitrarily labelling clients as rapists actually has?

SugarHigh

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

So how do you differentiate? I can't understand why anyone would want to be a prostitute, it seems like an inherently dangerous and unpleasant occupation to me and yet there are plenty of those that choose to do it because presumably it has certain remunerations - so surely all prostitutes are working under duress? In fact, don't most people work under duress?

This is obviously something that would have to be decided on a case by case basis the same way if someone claimed they only signed a contract because they were under duress it would be judged on it's own merits. My point is that I consider sever poverty to be a form of duress. Yes I'm sure there are prostitutes in the 3rd world who aren't under duress and my thread title doesn't represent them.

Okay, so how do you determine those who are being coerced from those who are not?

It is obviously difficult the same way any rape case is difficult. It's not easy to say if a girl was too drunk to give consent and each case get's judged on it's own.

Well, no. Your OP is suggesting sex with 3rd world prostitutes aught to be classed as A FORM OF rape - which is assuming A) there must be different forms of rape - oddly enough something you were arguing against in a later post

I did not argue against there being different forms of rape in fact I did the opposite. You are once again making up stuff I did not say.

and there is no such thing as voluntary prostitution in the 3rd world.

Again I'm sure there are prostitutes in the 3rd world who aren't under duress and I admit my thread title doesn't represent them. If you actually read my post instead of just the title you would obviously realise I am not against prostitution where the girl isn't forced into it.

I am just pointing out if women in the affluent west choose it as a career path, why wouldn't or shouldn't those in the third world? What purpose do you think arbitrarily labelling clients as rapists actually has?

Prostitution isn't really the same in the west though is it? A girl in Liberia doesn't have the option to decline clients, well it's not certainly not a safe option anyway.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Ickle Magoo

SugarHigh wrote: »

This is obviously something that would have to be decided on a case by case basis the same way if someone claimed they only signed a contract because they were under duress it would be judged on it's own merits. My point is that I consider sever poverty to be a form of duress. Yes I'm sure there are prostitutes in the 3rd world who aren't under duress and my thread title doesn't represent them.

I think in theory its a great idea - but completely unworkable. Hell, they can't police prostitution, trafficking and so on in London or Dublin; how do you propose it works in countries where the police are the pimps?

SugarHigh wrote: »

It is obviously difficult the same way any rape case is difficult. It's not easy to say if a girl was too drunk to give consent and each case get's judged on it's own.

By whom? You seem to be suggesting some form of global legislation?

SugarHigh wrote: »

I did not argue against there being different forms of rape in fact I did the opposite. You are once again making up stuff I did not say.

I thought rape is just rape, contrary to anything Ms Goldberg has had to say on the matter?

SugarHigh wrote: »

Again I'm sure there are prostitutes in the 3rd world who aren't under duress and I admit my thread title doesn't represent them. If you actually read my post instead of just the title you would obviously realise I am not against prostitution where the girl isn't forced into it.

But how can you possibly know the difference? How can you not be against prostitution where someone isn't forced into it when you have no way of knowing if poverty or drugs or some other form of duress has also forced them into the industry?

SugarHigh wrote: »

Prostitution isn't really the same in the west though is it? A girl in Liberia doesn't have the option to decline clients, well it's not certainly not a safe option anyway.

Isn't it? How do you know? Do you think irish pimps are kinder than liberian ones?

If someone is prostituting themselves because they are under duress or fear for their life, what makes you think they are going to press criminal charges? Or even own up to being under duress?

Look, while I think the aim of abolishing all coerced prostitution is a noble one, proposing unpoliceable global legislation which would require a lot of time, money and effort from local legislators and judicial bodies, in an area of the law notoriously difficult to prosecute successfully in a part of the world renowned for corruption is a fairly pointless exercise.

SugarHigh

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yet we all agree that there is a point where someone is not able to give consent because of there age. I am arguing that there is a point where someones situation is so dire that they aren't in a position to say no. Whether for financial reasons or safety reasons because of the consequence of saying no. I never defined that point and it isn't easy to define.

Then, can you explain why an 18-year-old Irish male, who had what he considered to be consensual intercourse with a 16-year-old girl, will not be charged with the crime of rape?

Why are you even asking me this question? It seems like a question you should be asking the people who actually made that judgement. Where did I say they would be charged under the Irish legal system, are we a 3rd world country?

Whether it is legally called rape or not would depend on each legal system. I don't know why you are arguing such a pedantic point. Statutory rape and defilement of a child are two ways of saying the same thing. I genuinely don't care which one you decide to use.

SugarHigh

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I thought rape is just rape, contrary to anything Ms Goldberg has had to say on the matter?

Where are you getting "rape is just rape" from?
You are once again trying to put words in my mouth and I'm just getting bored talking to someone who is more interested in arguing against what they make up.

I was arguing that there are types of rape but they are all still rape.

But how can you possibly know the difference? How can you not be against prostitution where someone isn't forced into it when you have no way of knowing if poverty or drugs or some other form of duress has also forced them into the industry?

*Bangs head on desk*
I have stated numerous times I am against any type of prostitution where the prostitution doesn't have a choice because I believe a lack of choice makes it impossible to give consent. It isn't up to me to know the difference because I simply don't use prostitutes. It would be up to a court to decide if she was in a position to give consent. If a guy has sex with someone who believes is not being forced into it and it turns out she is well then he still deserves to be charged the same way you get charged for unknowingly buying stolen goods. I don't know what this charge would be called and I don't care. By having this charge you are making men more cautious of who they decide to buy sex from and hopefully creates a situation where they will only buy from registered brothels which I believe should be legalised.

Isn't it? How do you know? Do you think irish pimps are kinder than liberian ones?

Yes of course. I don't think an Irish pimp would kill his prostitutes without fear of consequence. Did you watch the Doc on LIberia I posted. You have men feeding children to other children. It not a country where you say no. UN soldiers also go to these prostitutes.

If someone is prostituting themselves because they are under duress or fear for their life, what makes you think they are going to press criminal charges? Or even own up to being under duress?

The same argument can be made against numerous laws. The prostitutes situation may change.

Look, while I think the aim of abolishing all coerced prostitution is a noble one, proposing unpoliceable global legislation which would require a lot of time, money and effort from local legislators and judicial bodies, in an area of the law notoriously difficult to prosecute successfully in a part of the world renowned for corruption is a fairly pointless exercise.

The same argument could be made against countless laws. Why even have murder be illegal in Liberia when the police force is completely incompetent and corrupt? Why have any laws there?

Ickle Magoo

Before you bang your head on your desk and accuse anyone else of anything, perhaps you could stop selectively quoting and answering others, otherwise your protestations are most disingenuous.

Although it obviously appears to be completely logical to you; your entire premise was based originally upon labelling anyone using 3rd world prostitutes, without any form of authority of adjudication and despite later acknowledging there would be voluntary prostitutes, as rapists. That then changed to somehow arbitrarily knowing which prostitutes are working under duress and which aren't and applying the charge only to their clients - irrespective of the presumption of innocence that belays the western judicial system.

Now you seem to be denigrating liberia's legal system - in which I'd be completely supportive - but that has nothing do with your original point of presumption of guilt and charge of rape by some theoretical global police force based entirely on your supposition of a prostitutes monitory or geographical situation.

SugarHigh

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Although it obviously appears to be completely logical to you; your entire premise was based originally upon labelling anyone using 3rd world prostitutes, without any form of authority of adjudication and despite later acknowledging there would be voluntary prostitutes, as rapists.

Repeating the same point that I have already answered.

That then changed to somehow arbitrarily knowing which prostitutes are working under duress and which aren't and applying the charge only to their clients - irrespective of the presumption of innocence that belays the western judicial system.

This just doesn't make any sense. Where did I claim to know who was under duress? That would be a matter for the court to decide. Where did I say only the client would be charged? The pimp would also be charged.

Now you seem to be denigrating liberia's legal system - in which I'd be completely supportive - but that has nothing do with your original point of presumption of guilt and charge of rape by some theoretical global police force based entirely on your supposition of a prostitutes monitory or geographical situation.

It was you who brought the legal system into it.

Ickle Magoo

So sex with 3rd world prostitutes should be a form of rape, it's a matter for the courts but I'm the one who deigned to bring the legal system into it...

And you think I don't make sense?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

CDfm

Lets try to be a little less judgemental here.

I have never gone with a prostitute.

Prostitution is sex in exchange for cash - voluntarily and presumably the client and the prostitute accept this.

I know of one guy -a friend who worked as a male prostutute for older women in Dublin and there are a lot of stories of older women going to poor countries and sleeping with or marrying young guys for visas or money etc. So sex tourism isn't simply a male phenomena.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/11/26/us-sextourism-idUSN2638979720071126

I also know of one physically handicapped guy who goes to Spain for sex a few times a year as prostitutes/sex workers there treat him differently.

The prostitute needs to attract the client.

Moving it to a developing country the client will have not have any knowledge of coercion.So the intention is not there to rape.

I imagine if you broaden the definition of both the gender and circumstances of the client and that of the prostitute from the usual stereotype it becomes a fairer and more interesting debate.

krd

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Ok, I'll give you a slightly different scenario, that has a historical basis.

Between 1942 and 1945, Auschwitz and nine other Nazi concentration camps contained brothels (Freudenabteilung 'Joy Division'), mainly used to reward cooperative non-Jewish inmates - Wikipedia, House of Dolls entry.

Were the men who used the Joy Division rapists? I think they were. Permabear, I wonder about your morality - I think it may have some holes. Just because you have someone else hold the gun to the victims head, doesn't abdicate your moral responsibility.

The coercion exists to facilitate the client. The client effectively outsources the manufacture of consent. The consent is obtained through some form of force - either through 'have sex with the client, or get a savage beating' - or in ultra-free market economies like you have in the third world 'have sex with the client or starve to death'. You're free to do whatever you want, starve to death or do as the market demands.

People think of the sexual revolution as being something of the left. When you look closer at it you see it's driven by the right. Pornography production was once a fringe criminal enterprise - now it's very big and legit business. There are "respectable" publishers who have their fingers right up to their knuckles in it. Sir Tony O'Reilly has made millions from providing pornographic services - but you won't hear about that from any journalists - or in our "free" press (which is a market driven press - ie, journalists only write and publish what suits the rich.)

Neo-liberals want to erode societies sexual mores even further. Job centres in the UK have started advertising jobs in massage parlors and strip clubs.

In the UK, if you refuse to take jobs offered by the job centre you can have your benefit removed. At this point, the job centres are not cutting anyone's benefit who refuses to take jobs in what is euphemistically known as the adult services industry. That could change - the right are agitating for "normalisation" of the sex industry. Already I have heard of jobs facilitators in UK jobcentres advising young women that working in a massage parlor or a strip club could be an option for them.

Neo-liberals would like to see a situation where the poor are forced into prostitution. Neo-liberals very much want a situation where the economically advantaged can very literally put the economically disadvantage over a barrel and screw them.

Rape by "free" market - rape you won't go to jail for - and rape that if you believe the market is the ultimate moral arbitrator than rape without guilt. Let the market decide who you consent to have consensual sex with.

Neo-liberals want to bring the standards of the third world to the first world.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

CDfm

Interesting points KRD

Here is a position paper by Feminists for Free Expression in the USA

http://www.ffeusa.org/

They are part of the Sex Positive Feminist movement and usually have clarity in what they say and a lot of their papers are prepared by academics.

The Free Speech Pamphlet Series: Prostitution
A proposed revision of the laws governing prostitution is a complicated and multi-faceted issue. Feminists for Free Expression advocates the decriminalization of prostitution. This paper sets forth why this position is necessary and why prostitution is a feminist issue. Although decriminalization will not solve all of the problems associated with prostitution, it is a first step in granting women and other members of the sex worker population their basic civil rights.
Definitions
Prostitution: For purposes of this position paper, “prostitution” means any consensual sexual activity among or between adults where money or any other material compensation is involved. Nonconsensual sex acts, whether perpetrated by fraud, threat of force, or force, as well as any sex acts perpetrated against minors are not prostitution, and are referred to instead as criminal sexual acts, collectively.
Prostitute: Anyone who by choice, either because she likes the work, likes the money or chooses it as a way to feed herself and her family, offers consensual sexual activity for money or any other consideration. Women are referred to in this discussion, because prostitutes have most often been identified as women. In reality, the prostitute population also includes men and transgendered persons, and these recommendations hold for those members of the profession as well. The 1996 San Francisco Task Force on prostitution concluded that prostitution is not a monolithic institution. It encompasses people working in the pornographic media industry, live theater, massage parlors, bordellos and through print advertising, as well as the street workers most commonly envisioned when the word “prostitute” is mentioned.
Sex worker is a term of self-definition created by those within the prostitutes’ rights movement in order to find a term that does not carry the pejorative connotations or legal implications of prostitution. The term includes people whose work involves sexual entertainment, art, or education that is not within the ambit of the laws against prostitution, though it might have been in the past. The term “sex worker” also includes all prostitutes.
Decriminalization means the removal of existing laws and is different from legalization which is the establishment of laws within which prostitution can exist (as in the regulated brothels of Nevada).

Why does FFE favor decriminalization?
Decriminalization allows those who are prostitutes to go into business for themselves. Self-determination is a tenet of feminist politics. Decriminalization removes hypocrisy within the criminal justice system and fosters responsibility, empowerment, self-esteem and self-care.

What are the present laws?
Laws that prohibit prostitution concentrate on Soliciting for the purposes of prostitution. A third party living off the earnings of a prostitute.

What issues are the present laws supposed to address?
1) Quality of life. These laws concern complaints about the adverse impact of street prostitution on neighborhoods: litter, traffic, drugs, and crime.
2) Trafficking, slavery, and protection of our youth.
3) Morality and the undermining of marriage and “traditional” family values.

Why don’t these laws work?
Quality of Life
Police crackdowns on street prostitution simply shift street prostitutes to other neighborhoods at tremendous taxpayer expense.
Arresting street prostitutes is selective prosecution. Some segments of the prostitute population, especially poor women and members of minority groups, are prosecuted more than others are. Street solicitation is prohibited but newspaper ads for prostitutes proliferate in most major cities.
In most cases only the seller of the service is arrested, not the buyer.
The quality of life for the woman who chooses sex work is ignored, as is the quality of life for the person who chooses to purchase the service.
Laws against third parties living off the earnings of a prostitute put prostitutes’ homes and families in jeopardy because domestic partners and landlords can be charged.
Arrest records stigmatize sex workers, making it difficult for them to find employment in other fields. Fear of arrest prevents sex workers who are victims of crimes from reporting those crimes.
Predators see sex workers as easy targets who “won’t be missed”. For example, Gary Ridgeway, the Green River strangler who murdered 48 women, admitted that he chose mostly prostitutes because he saw them as easy victims.o intimidate their victims.

Trafficking and Slavery
Unscrupulous people dupe women, especially those in poorer countries, with the promise of a good job in another country, and instead force them to work in brothels. This is non-consensual sex trafficking, not prostitution, and those who perpetrate it are guilty of fraud, kidnapping, and criminal sexual acts. Prostitution law does nothing to inhibit such individuals. In fact, these criminals are helped by the prostitution laws because they use the threat of arrest and deportation, as well as the shame these laws promote, to intimidate their victims.
Protection of Our Youth
Many children leave home, to escape child abuse or discrimination and abuse based on sexual or gender orientation. Some are runaways, and some are thrown away. They arrive in cities and become prostitutes for their survival. Money wasted on prosecution of adult prostitutes could be better used to provide care and services for these needy youths.
Moral Issues
The idea that consensual sex between adults involving financial or other remuneration is symptomatic of moral turpitude is based not on civil code but on religious ethic. Among Americans, there diverse opinions on religion and sexuality. Any law that respects an establishment of religion violates the First Amendment (1) to our Constitution.

Why does FFE take this position now?
Sex Workers’ Rights Movement
There exists today a unified international sex workers’ rights movement, consisting of thousands of members, including those in the United States, who have organized to demand their basic human rights. So far, this activism has resulted in the decriminalization of prostitution in Australia, New Zealand, and the Netherlands, with very strong movements in other countries such as India and Taiwan, where tens of thousands demonstrate for prostitutes’ rights. In the United States, lobbying efforts by sex workers themselves are strongest in San Francisco, California. In 1996, a report by the city of San Francisco’s Task Force on Prostitution recommended decriminalization. The “Angel Initiative” to decriminalize prostitution nearly passed when it was put on the ballot in the city of Berrkely in 2004. We believe this will be the first of many more initiatives in this country, and FFE is in support of such initiatives. Among the many rallying points for this movement, the strongest is the fight to save the lives of prostitutes in jeopardy because of laws that silence them for fear of arrest or lead those who prey on women to believe that this is a “disposable” segment of the population.
Decriminalization models
We can benefit by using other countries that have decriminalized prostitution as research models.
Lawrence vs. Texas
The June 2003 ruling by the Supreme Court in Lawrence vs. Texas upheld the right of individuals to engage in consensual sexual acts in private. Before Lawrence, the courts held that one must prove that liberties not mentioned by the Constitution are valid to be pursued. Thus far, the Court has been silent on whether consensual sexual acts between consenting adults in which the participants also agree on financial remuneration are protected liberties; we question whether these activities are so different.
Model Penal Code
In his majority opinion in Lawrence vs. Texas Justice Kennedy cited the The American Law Institute that in 1955 promulgated a Model Penal Code and made clear that it did not recommend or provide for “criminal penalties for consensual sexual relations conducted in private.” It justified its decision on three grounds: (1) The prohibitions undermined respect for the law by penalizing conduct many people engaged in; (2) the statutes regulated private conduct not harmful to others; and (3) the laws were arbitrarily enforced and thus invited the danger of blackmail.
The New Sex Education Model
Left in the hands of the entrepreneurs and free from prosecution, the concept of the back alley bookstores has evolved into women-owned sexuality boutiques that are also centers of learning. The Adult Industry Medical Clinic (AIM), which offers medical care and education for members of that industry, is another fine example of the good that can come when practitioners are permitted to govern themselves. From these examples, we may assume that providers of sexual service left to govern themselves could also offer a great benefit to society. There are many prostitutes and others who consider sex work a healing art that enhances our quality of life on many levels, physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual. It follows that those who are responsible providers of this service contribute to society’s health, not society’s ills, and should be given support and not condemnation. Prostitution laws have turned a social asset into a liability. It can be argued that this has been done for community hygiene, but we believe anti-prostitution laws, by keeping sex information underground, have only helped maintain a dangerous ignorance that breeds disease. Feminists For Free Expression supports the efforts of the organized sex worker movement. We believe that sex workers allowed to govern themselves have the greatest potential to promote positive change. Decriminalization fosters an environment where education, growth, and good health can flourish.

Whose Body is it anyway?
Some Comparisons
Reproductive rights analogy Some argue the state has an interest in a woman’s use of her own body for reproduction (Roe vs. Wade). Some may also argue that anti-prostitution laws are for the protection of women. In actuality, these laws infantilize women and usurp their power, undermining women’s rights to self-determination and liberty under the Fifth (2) and Fourteenth(3) Amendments. Whether a woman uses her body for reproduction, recreation or remuneration is her business, not the state’s.
Athletes choose to subject their bodies to physical stress that is not only within the law, but widely praised and financially compensated.
Cosmetic surgery that greatly changes the body is not against the law; moreover, it is very popular and doctors are handsomely paid for this service.
Adult Movies: Hardcore adult movies in which people engage in sex acts for fun and profit are widely accepted and enjoyed by a very large segment of the population.
Gender Parity: Women do not have equal rights under the Constitution. The Equal Rights Amendment was never passed. It is, therefore, more difficult for women to fight for and retain their rights to equality and autonomy under the law. Women fight for equal pay in almost every field. Yet, society arrests women for performing the only job in which they can set their own rates and make more than men who provide the same service. Many women who do not identify as prostitutes need and are able to use prostitution for a limited time in their lives to support themselves, be it for one night, one year, one semester, etc. The fact that so many women are prosecuted for exploiting this asset reinforces the position of women as second-class citizens.
It is for the reasons set forth in this paper that Feminists For Free Expression advocates the decriminalization of prostitution.
© FFE developed for FFE by Veronica Vera
1 First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
2 Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
3 Fourteenth Amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The Job Centre scenario above would seem to fall into the coercion and trafficking situation if it is not a free choice.

As would the soldiers using the Joy Division as they knew that they themselves were part of a military force and the women were not their voluntarily.

Someone visiting a country and engaging a prostitute will not know.

I came accross ffe a few years back and I emailed them a question on an article one of the board members had published.

They did email me back and were very helpful.

Some time later when the UCC Bat Sex had not yet become public in Ireland I got an email from one of them suggesting I should start a thread on boards to support the guy.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055914071

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

CDfm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

sorry permabear - i started the post got distracted etc and pressed post not seeing yours.

I goes the same applies though - a woman should be free to make the choice to work in the adult entertainment industry.

While it may not be what I would want , they should still have the freedom and employment and workplace protections etc.

A person should not be compelled to do a job against their moral or ethical considerations - lapdancer or vegetarian butcher.

I am in 2 minds whether or not they should be advertised in job centres

krd

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I never said that. It's not the position as of the moment. I have heard people argue it should be.

There is a discussion in the UK on the legalisation of prostitution and the liberalisation of strip clubs etc.

If you legalise and normalise prostitution, where do you stop?

I know in the US, where there is less social welfare, many women who end up in prostitution or working strip clubs do so because they have no alternative. And before you think any pretty young girl should be able to get a receptionists job so she doesn't go hungry - think of the ugly inner city black girl who has no other alternatives or options.

So the situation of women forced into prostitution for basic existential reasons is already a reality in the developed world.

Remove social welfare in Ireland - people will not be magically energised and incentivised to start world beating enterprises. We'll have prostitutes coming out our ear.

Job Centres were forced to accept sex-industry advertising in 2003 after the High Court ruled in favour of Ann Summers, which had previously been banned from placing adverts in Job Centres.

The legal position has now been clarified by the British government. Any job that involves the direct sexual stimulation of others may not be advertised in a Job Centre. Other jobs, such as retail positions in Ann Summers stores, may be advertised. There's quite a clear line there.

I have been informed by people who have seen the ads that massage parlors and strip clubs in England do recruit through the job centres. Though the ads are not explicit in their description of the advertised work. Cleaners and receptionists for massage parlors are also paid a premium. They're usually coaxed into doing the grubbier work by the threat of the sack, once they've done a little time as receptionist/cleaner.

People are groomed into prostitution.

CDfm

krd wrote: »

There is a discussion in the UK on the legalisation of prostitution and the liberalisation of strip clubs etc.

If you legalise and normalise prostitution, where do you stop?

I know in the US, where there is less social welfare, many women who end up in prostitution or working strip clubs do so because they have no alternative. And before you think any pretty young girl should be able to get a receptionists job so she doesn't go hungry - think of the ugly inner city black girl who has no other alternatives or options.

So the situation of women forced into prostitution for basic existential reasons is already a reality in the developed world.

If a person decides to become a prostitute or sex worker -while I may not agree with it - it is their choice.

If a woman becomes a nun - it is her choice too.

Men also face economic hardship or homelessness too. Think of the ugly man who may go hungry.

Remove social welfare in Ireland - people will not be magically energised and incentivised to start world beating enterprises. We'll have prostitutes coming out our ear.

I cant believe you posted that and think so little of irish women and men and their families that you have posted this..

Why are you depicting poverty in a way that only females are affected.

I have been informed by people who have seen the ads that massage parlors and strip clubs in England do recruit through the job centres. Though the ads are not explicit in their description of the advertised work. Cleaners and receptionists for massage parlors are also paid a premium. They're usually coaxed into doing the grubbier work by the threat of the sack, once they've done a little time as receptionist/cleaner.

People are groomed into prostitution.

People do not have free will then.

It depends what you mean by massage parlours - like do you mean beauticians - I went for a spa treatment and my g/f bought it off boards and it was a foot soak, full swedish body masssage and facial.

Most people who go for massages go for massages nothing else.

seenitall

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Excuse me?? To recap, you claim that a man who "marries" a woman (he doesn't marry her really though, if it is against her will, does he - not in any civilised sense of the word?) and then has sex with her without her consent/against her will, is NOT a rapist? Wonderful. :mad:

I'd love to read some elaboration of this attitude of yours, Permabear. One thing I certainly don't want to read, though, is how "cultural practices" and inhuman laws in certain countries make rape not a rape really, or that the fact that these situations and "marriages" happen to many millions of women throughout their lives, makes them morally A-OK.

krd

CDfm wrote: »

If a person decides to become a prostitute or sex worker -while I may not agree with it - it is their choice.

It could be argued in every economic transaction there is an element of coercion or coercive forces.

Someone holds a gun to your head and offers you a choice. Either do as they say or get shot in the head. You make the choice of your own free will to do as they say.


It's really a question of how far you go with the coercion. Or incentivisation - how much carrot, how much stick. What people should be coerced into doing - what they shouldn't.

The "I pulled myself up by my own breeches" brigade believe everyone should be forced to dance for their dollar.

If a woman becomes a nun - it is her choice too.

Wasn't always the case. Many women were forced into the nunnery - by their family. It used to be a good way of getting rid of the quare wan.

Men also face economic hardship or homelessness too. Think of the ugly man who may go hungry.

They do.

I cant believe you posted that and think so little of irish women and men and their families that you have posted this..

Would these be the same salt of the earth Irish men and women, who gambled the farm on a Ponzi property scheme?

You're aware of that children's story. The one about the greedy couple who had a golden goose that laid golden eggs - and they killed it and cut it open. It's very hard to argue it's not the perfect allegory for Ireland.

Why are you depicting poverty in a way that only females are affected.

Prostitution mostly effects women. This thread is about prostitution. Some men are involved in prostitution. Something tells me, you do not have egalitarian beliefs when it comes to gender politics and you're only throwing in 'what about the menz' for the sake of being awkward.

People do not have free will then.

That's really a philosophical question. What is the will and where does it come from? To a certain extent, I do not believe in free will.

I live near the grand canal. I go by canal lock near Baggot street bridge a bit on the way to the late night spar. At night it's spooky. There are women/prostitutes who hide in the dark around the trees. They pop out of nowhere like ghosts and offer me blowjobs. Their faces are covered in sores - they look terrible. Whatever has them there is not free will. Is whatever drives the men to them free will either?

It depends what you mean by massage parlours - like do you mean beauticians - I went for a spa treatment and my g/f bought it off boards and it was a foot soak, full swedish body masssage and facial.

I'm mean **** off shops - there are a few in Dublin. Full body with a happy ending.

Most people who go for massages go for massages nothing else.

That's what they all say - that's what they all say. CDfm....sporting injury?

krd

seenitall wrote: »

Excuse me?? To recap, you claim that a man who "marries" a woman (he doesn't marry her really though, if it is against her will, does he - not in any civilised sense of the word?) and then has sex with her without her consent/against her will, is NOT a rapist? Wonderful. :mad:

I'd love to read some elaboration of this attitude of yours, Permabear. One thing I certainly don't want to read, though, is how "cultural practices" and inhuman laws in certain countries make rape not a rape really, or that the fact that these situations and "marriages" happen to many millions of women throughout their lives, makes them morally A-OK.

I think what Permabear believes, is that if all other choices are removed - and you acquiesce to the only realistic option, it's not rape.

In Saudi. Women effectively have no legal rights. They have no rights to property and a man can divorce his wife on a whim and kick her onto the street.

They have no effective choice over who becomes their husband. That's decided by male relatives. They may not see or even speak to their prospective husband before their wedding day.

Mr. Loverman

If I went to a city in Africa where absolute poverty is rampant, should I expect to find every poor female working as a prostitute?

If the answer is "no", that means some women are choosing to do something other than work as a prostitute. In other words, there is still a choice, even if it is a difficult one.

Therefore the women are not being raped.

If you were to change the situation and say the woman has been kidnapped and is chained to a wall, well that's obviously a rape situation.

The reality of prostitution (which most people refuse to accept) is that it is overwhelmingly populated by women who have realised they can make a lot more money a lot more quickly if they have sex for money rather than do something crappy like work as a cleaner or sell scrap metal or join the army.

CDfm

krd wrote: »

It could be argued in every economic transaction there is an element of coercion or coercive forces.

i think you are digging yourself in it here

Wasn't always the case. Many women were forced into the nunnery - by their family. It used to be a good way of getting rid of the quare wan.

and here .

Would these be the same salt of the earth Irish men and women, who gambled the farm on a Ponzi property scheme?

You're aware of that children's story. The one about the greedy couple who had a golden goose that laid golden eggs - and they killed it and cut it open. It's very hard to argue it's not the perfect allegory for Ireland.

and here

Prostitution mostly effects women. This thread is about prostitution. Some men are involved in prostitution. Something tells me, you do not have egalitarian beliefs when it comes to gender politics and you're only throwing in 'what about the menz' for the sake of being awkward.

actually i do but this thread was about the ethical responsibility of a prostitutes client and you have turned it into social welfare cuts will cause women to become prostitutes.

That's really a philosophical question. What is the will and where does it come from? To a certain extent, I do not believe in free will.

I go to work cos I cant afford not to

I live near the grand canal. I go by canal lock near Baggot street bridge a bit on the way to the late night spar. At night it's spooky. There are women/prostitutes who hide in the dark around the trees. They pop out of nowhere like ghosts and offer me blowjobs. Their faces are covered in sores - they look terrible. Whatever has them there is not free will. Is whatever drives the men to them free will either?

Have you asked any of these women if they qualify for social welfare

I'm mean **** off shops - there are a few in Dublin. Full body with a happy ending.

I get full body massages and get them bought for me from boards deals.

I have never been offered extra services ever.

Facials usually mean , a wash, scrub, moisturoise and serum etc

That's what they all say - that's what they all say. CDfm....sporting injury?

Actually, around once a month I go to my girlfriends sister for a sports injury treatment and she hasn't offered my extra's either.



Hmmmmmmmmmm krd you have me confused

krd

CDfm, the women at Baggot Street bridge are addicted to drugs. They may also have mental problems.

I've ended up in conversation with them a few times. They've asked me why I've never used their services - and Jesus, I wanted to weep. The conversations I've had with them have been hilarious and heartbreaking at the same time. I've also seen them have altercations with their clients - that is very ugly.

CDfm

krd - you havent answered my question as to why the situation for women is different than that for men.

On prostitution, at a shove (I have to say while it is not my thing ), I have to recognise that it is a lifestyle choice for some and that they should not be criminalised because if it.

You have come back and said drug addicts - so what do you want to do them -take them home or lock them up.


At some level these people have responsibility for themselves.

And why suggest that young men in this situation are in a less vulnerable situation to young women -when it is an area that is not either researched or policed.

seenitall

krd wrote: »

I think what Permabear believes, is that if all other choices are removed - and you acquiesce to the only realistic option, it's not rape.

Oh I see. Well that's alright then. It's not rape as long as "all other choices are removed" - sounds reasonable enough. :rolleyes:

I wonder what Permabear would make of a situation where an Irish woman was stripped of "all other choices" by her father and then her husband, by being sold into marriage like chattel and being kept a prisoner on a farm by virtue of social and religious mores, and repeatedly forced into sexual intercourse until subdued and acquiescent in her own abuse.

(I'm only asking because I have read somewhere, whether true or not, that this is exactly what used to happen in Ireland not too many decades ago.)

I honestly can't believe what I'm reading here.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

CDfm

seenitall wrote: »

I wonder what Permabear would make of a situation where an Irish woman was stripped of "all other choices" by her father and then her husband, by being sold into marriage like chattel and being kept a prisoner on a farm by virtue of social and religious mores, and repeatedly forced into sexual intercourse until subdued and acquiescent in her own abuse.

Ah but that assumes Permabear could conceptualise such a situation -could you imagine yourself in that type of relationship PB.

I can't answer for PB but I would not want a woman like that as a partner and I have a daughter and why would I want that for her.

I have a very close lesbian friend and I would have been lost without her as a friend. I have several female friends who have genuinely enriched my life. Why would I want that for them.

(I'm only asking because I have read somewhere, whether true or not, that this is exactly what used to happen in Ireland not too many decades ago.)

I honestly can't believe what I'm reading here.

When & where.

I am often dismayed when I read about patriarchy etc in Ireland when we really were a peasant society where neither men or women had money or the vote.

The 1940's and 50's had a TB epidemic like a medieval plague.

It is often conveniently forgotten that the Magdelene Laundries were run by women for women and that Irish mammies brought up their sons and the men went to work and did not handle child rearing.

I find it weird when I see people allege that the type of society you describe is a society men want as if we were another race or species.

As I guy I went thru the divorce courts and was treated like some sort of second class citizen.

Maybe we have a sucessive evil matriarchy who have passed on their bile from the Magdelene Laundries thru the Womens Movement and now control the family law system.

It seems very plausable to me.

seenitall

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The quote from your earlier post, Permabear, which lead me to believe (by virtue of reading the bolded bit) that you do not consider someone who has been forced into sex against their will, to have been raped.

A woman may not object to the rape she is being subjected to because she may justifiably feel that it would be pointless or anti-productive. It is still rape. Why? Because she is being made to have sex when she doesn't want to or with the person she doesn't want to have sex with. This applies in Saudi Arabia as well as in Ireland or China or Zanzibar, the only difference is that in some places marital rape is sanctioned, and therefore I would take a very dim view of the attitude that "what happens in bed between husbands and wives" needs to be looked at separately from the "horrific rapes" (what horrific rapes? You mean the non-sanctioned-by-the-cultural mores ones?) that you mention.

EDIT: Oh, and I never assumed anything of the sort that you mention (every Saudi man rapist... eh? ),

krd

CDfm wrote: »

krd - you havent answered my question as to why the situation for women is different than that for men.

Do you want to expand the discussion to cover male and child prostitutes?

On prostitution, at a shove (I have to say while it is not my thing ), I have to recognise that it is a lifestyle choice for some and that they should not be criminalised because if it.

I'm not so sure. For every Belle Du Jour, how many Belle Du Junkies are there?

You have come back and said drug addicts - so what do you want to do them -take them home or lock them up.

If they are on the streets because of drugs - I would rather they had the drugs and were off the streets. They're a health hazard as well as public nuisance. A hazard to themselves and the public. Something tells me, it's not just the drugs.

At some level these people have responsibility for themselves.

I'm not so sure. I've talked to the women at Baggot street a few times - there is something eerily child like about them. I wouldn't be surprised to find out they're not all a little retarded.

And why suggest that young men in this situation are in a less vulnerable situation to young women -when it is an area that is not either researched or policed.

I wouldn't say that. I have never come across male prostitutes - I'm sure they're there - I've never met any. It could be there isn't a market and there are plenty of men willing to have sex with each other for free.

I have witnessed child prostitution taking place in Ireland, but that was a long time ago and since then I believe the Guards take it very seriously. There was a few incidents in the 90s of the Guards being aware of child prostitution in some places and not doing anything.


Maybe with this recession we'll become an international hub for sex tourism - like Jamaica - the young men and middle-aged American and British women.

CDfm

krd wrote: »

Do you want to expand the discussion to cover male and child prostitutes?

if the OP and mods are ok with it.

I'm not so sure. For every Belle Du Jour, how many Belle Du Junkies are there?

Now who is glamourising it.

If a woman or man makes a decision to prostitute themselves to buy drugs well their priority is their addiction and how can that be their clients fault.

If they are on the streets because of drugs - I would rather they had the drugs and were off the streets. They're a health hazard as well as public nuisance. A hazard to themselves and the public. Something tells me, it's not just the drugs.

What is that something. You dont like seeing it.

I'm not so sure. I've talked to the women at Baggot street a few times - there is something eerily child like about them. I wouldn't be surprised to find out they're not all a little retarded.

I think you are being a bit of a snob here.

Have you considered that some people like the lifestyle and like their drugs.

I wouldn't say that. I have never come across male prostitutes - I'm sure they're there - I've never met any. It could be there isn't a market and there are plenty of men willing to have sex with each other for free.

I have witnessed child prostitution taking place in Ireland, but that was a long time ago and since then I believe the Guards take it very seriously. There was a few incidents in the 90s of the Guards being aware of child prostitution in some places and not doing anything.

There is very little research done on it

Maybe some one male prostitutes serving gay clients

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=3387

But why wouldnt a woman pay for sex if she wants it - it is ludicrous to suggest they wont

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7914639.stm

Maybe with this recession we'll become an international hub for sex tourism - like Jamaica - the young men and middle-aged American and British women.

how do you know that irish men and women are not using them already

and we may see it happening

Boskowski

No one has free will really. From an early age we are coerced into the rat race. I really don't want to go to work. At all. But unless I want to turn into some sort of outcast it's what I have to do in our society to be part of it and not be discriminated.

Interesting question sprung into my mind.
On PI every now and then a thread pops up where we have a married couple with non matching libidos. The argument usually goes along the lines of 'he/she never initiates sex and only sleeps with me once a month and I feel he/she isn't very enthusiastic about this either'.

One could argue our culture coerces these women - to remain in the tone if this thread, it's not always women actually - into sex against their will.
Would you consider their husbands rapists?