Purchasing of sex will be criminalised (it appears) in the near future in Ireland

_Beau_

Arfan wrote:

I welcome any counterpoints and hope we can continue this discussion with properly referenced statements of fact.

Prostitution is a form of abuse. The act of prostituting oneself is intrinsically psychologically damaging; being sexually objectified causes emotional and psychological harm. The prostitute is reduced to a body, commodified and dehumanised.

‘When a human being is reduced to a body, objectified to sexually service another, whether or not there is consent, violation of the human being has taken place’.

Source: Barry, K., (1996) ‘The Prostitution of Sexuality: A Cause for New International Human Rights’ in Hayes, A., Lyons, A., Shaughnessy L., (eds) Review, Vol 4. Galway:UCG Women’s Studies Centre, at 95-108.

Prostitution continues the history of sexual abuse endured by the woman. ‘Several studies report a positive correlation between a history of childhood sexual assault and symptoms of PTSD in adult women (Farley and Keaney, 1994, 1997; Rodriguez et al., 1997). Since almost all prostituted women have histories of childhood sexual abuse, this undoubtedly contributes to their current symptoms of post-traumatic stress. Prolonged and repeated trauma usually precedes entry into prostitution. From 55 to 90 percent of those in prostitution report a childhood sexual abuse history.’

Source: Farley, M., et al, (1998) ‘Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder’ in Feminism and Psychology, Vol 8 (4) London: Sage at 405-425.

‘Studies of sufferers of post-traumatic stress disorder in the US rate the condition in those involved in prostitution as ‘enormously high’, higher than Vietnam veterans seeking treatment for the condition. Two thirds of women in prostitution report suffering from post traumatic stress disorder (compared to 5% of the general population).’

Source: Farley, M., et al, (1998) ‘Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder’ in Feminism and Psychology, Vol 8 (4) London: Sage at 405-425.

‘Symptoms include acute anxiety, depression, insomnia, irritability, flashbacks, emotional numbing, poor concentration and being in a state of emotional and physical hyper-vigilance and alertness. Suicide attempts and depression feature strongly’.

Source: O’Neill, M., and O’Connor, A.M. (1999) Drug Using Women in Prostitution, Report of Women’s Health Project, Dublin: Eastern Health Board

‘As well as overt, direct physical violence, trauma in prostitution is caused by engaging in multiple sex acts with strangers . Having to tolerate this much intimate, bodily invasion requires psychological or chemical (with drugs or alcohol) dissociation in order to cope. The very nature of prostitution as an act of violence is compounded by the reality that many men specifically seek out women in prostitution in order to be able to act out humiliating, degrading and violent acts.’

Source: Barry, K., (1996) ‘The Prostitution of Sexuality: A Cause for New International Human Rights’ in Hayes, A., Lyons, A., Shaughnessy L., (eds) Review, Vol 4. Galway:UCG Women’s Studies Centre, at 95-108.

‘Women report resorting to various ‘shutting off’ techniques – distancing, disengagement, dissociation, disembodiment and dissembling, as survival strategies The women try to switch off, to separate from and fragment their real selves, thereby intensifying the harm and damage caused by prostitution.’

Source: Barry, K., (1995) The Prostitution of Sexuality: The Global Exploitation of Women, New York: University Press.

Unlike a “normal” consensual sexual act between two people whereby both people are sexually aroused and both receive pleasure, prostitution serves the desires of one person only and a power imbalance is always present; the man has the economic means to hire the prostitute and the prostitute depends on this transaction to survive.

‘Prostitution excludes any mutuality of privilege or pleasure: its goal is to ensure that one person does not use her personal desire to determine which sexual acts do and do not occur-while the other person acts on the basis of his personal desire’ only.

Source: Davidson, J.O. (1998) ‘Prostitution, Power and Freedom’, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.


“The prostitutes had in common many negative experiences not found or found less often in other populations of young women. These include incestuous and/or coerced sex, lack parental guidance, intercourse at a young age, and few or no meaningful relationships with males.”

Source for above: J James and J Meyerding, Early sexual experience and prostitution, Am J Psychiatry 1977; 134:1381-1385

“Identif(ied) four main challenges which the women have been faced with after leaving the trade: (1) working through and understanding the experiences of a life in prostitution, (2) dealing with shame, (3) living in a marginal situation, and (4) dealing with intimate and close relationships.”

Source for above: S-A. Månsson and U-C. Hedin, Breaking the Matthew Effect – on Women Leaving Prostitution, International Journal of Social Welfare, Vol 8, Issue 1, 67–77, January 1999.

Alopex

_Beau_ wrote: »

Evidence from Sweden and Norway has shown that such a law deters clients from using prostitutes.

I'd say the ones who take the hit are the likes on escort ireland who are self employed prostitutes and make huge money. The businessmen who pay for them will probably just go to hookers on holiday instead of risking prison so a reduction will be seen there.

The seedier ones where girls are enslaved? nah I doubt anything will change with them. So the Sweden and norway stats don't mean much. They make themselves look good by reducing the visible stats.

Though few really care about them. What this is all about is many people don't like that many men go to prostitutes. They'll use any measure available to try and reduce the number of men going to prostitutes.

_Beau_

Alopex wrote: »

What this is all about is many people don't like that many men go to prostitutes. They'll use any measure available to try and reduce the number of men going to prostitutes.

That's probably true, and after researching it, I can understand why - prostitution is a form of abuse and the women who work in that industry suffer severe psychological damage.

Alopex

_Beau_ wrote: »

That's probably true, and after researching it, I can understand why - prostitution is a form of abuse and the women who work in that industry suffer severe psychological damage.

I don't think they're doing it out of compassion for the women. I don't mean that as a backhanded remark about you - just generally speaking. If they did youd hear all the same arguments about people joining the army.

_Beau_

Alopex wrote: »

I don't think they're doing it out of compassion for the women. I don't mean that as a backhanded remark about you - just generally speaking. If they did youd hear all the same arguments about people joining the army.

Our army carries out peace keeping missions.

Prostitutes act as a vessel for men to cum in.

Same argument? I wouldn't say so, no.

Alopex

_Beau_ wrote: »

Our army carries out peace keeping missions.

Prostitutes act as a vessel for men to cum in.

Same argument? I wouldn't say so, no.

WE can all use hyperbolic terms. I could have said the soldiers are vessels to be shot at or blown up or maimed etc to protect the financial and strategic interests of rich men.

When considering the downsides and upsides of each profession I'd personally rather be a prostitute for 6 months than do a tour of afghan for 6 months. Thats no offence to soldiers but I just couldn't do it.

The point is the army could be as easily argued as abuse as prostitution. Whether it is necessary or not is missing that point

_Beau_

Alopex wrote: »

WE can all use hyperbolic terms. I could have said the soldiers are vessels to be shot at or blown up or maimed etc to protect the financial and strategic interests of rich men.

When considering the downsides and upsides of each profession I'd personally rather be a prostitute for 6 months than do a tour of afghan for 6 months. Thats no offence to soldiers but I just couldn't do it.

Hyperbolic? It is a factual statement. If a prostitute is not being used as a sexual object, a vessel, then I don't know how one might describe it.

Prostitutes, according to the studies that I cited, suffer a higher rate of PTSD than Vietnam veterans who sought help.

'The mortality rate of women and girls in prostitution is 40 times higher than the national average'.

You're not offending soldiers - you're offending prostitutes. Clearly, you are not acknowledging the effects of prostitution on women.

Sources:

Farley, M., et al, (1998) ‘Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder’ in Feminism and Psychology, Vol 8 (4) London: Sage at 405-425.

Farley, Melissa, (2004), ‘Bad for the Body, Bad for the Heart: Prostitution Harms Women Even if Legalised or Decriminalised’ in Violence Against Women, Vol.10, (10) at 1087-1125.

Lawless, K., and Wayne, A., (2005) for TSA Consultancy and Ruhama, The Next Step Initiative: Research Report on Barriers Affecting Women in Prostitution.

The point is the army could be as easily argued as abuse as prostitution. Whether it is necessary or not is missing that point

Abuse is an intrinsic aspect of prostitution and that is the point.

Alopex

_Beau_ wrote: »

Hyperbolic? It is a factual statement. If a prostitute is not being used as a sexual object, a vessel, then I don't know how one might describe it.

You said Prostitutes act as a vessel for men to cum in. - Its an inflammatory way of arguing on a mature discussion forum. What I said about the soldier is also factually accurate but it would be a petty argument.

Prostitutes, according to the studies that I cited, suffer a higher rate of PTSD than Vietnam veterans who sought help.

One study. Doesn't make it fact.

'The mortality rate of women and girls in prostitution is 40 times higher than the national average'.

High number but of course correlation does not mean causation.

You're not offending soldiers - you're offending prostitutes. Clearly, you are not acknowledging the effects of prostitution on women.

Sources:

Farley, M., et al, (1998) ‘Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder’ in Feminism and Psychology, Vol 8 (4) London: Sage at 405-425.

I'm not being smart but have you actually read these papers or just copied and pasted the titles? Four of those countries were Thailand/Zambia/Turkey and Thailand. The only western country being the USA. And as it states:

In addition to prostitution, other factors may have contributed to the incidence and
severity of PTSD seen here. The unemployment rate in Zambia was 90 per cent at
the time of this study. Many of the women we interviewed, and their children, were hungry.'
It is likely that the PTSD score elevations from South Africa and the USA are a
result of culture-wide violence, as well as from the harm of prostitution.

Also that paper is ranked 71st out of 120 in psychology multi-diciplinary.

Farley, Melissa, (2004), ‘Bad for the Body, Bad for the Heart: Prostitution Harms Women Even if Legalised or Decriminalised’ in Violence Against Women, Vol.10, (10) at 1087-1125.

This isn't relevant to the discussion. I don't like prostitution. I quite frankly don't care if its criminalised because it won't affect my life because I dont go to prostitutes. The point is I'm not convinced it will even reduce the rates of really nasty prostitution. If anything shutting down the website based escorts (which I believe will be affected the most as they could easily be monitored by the authorities) could push their customers into the underground slave zand streetwalker type prostitutes. Where many of the website girls will end up.

Abuse is an intrinsic aspect of prostitution and that is the point.

It isn't necessarily intrinsic though. Just as being a soldier isn't. End result often the same though.

_Beau_

Alopex wrote: »

You said Prostitutes act as a vessel for men to cum in. - Its an inflammatory way of arguing on a mature discussion forum. What I said about the soldier is also factually accurate but it would be a petty argument.

People seem numb to the word 'prostitute' and describing it accurately, which is what I did, is a mature way of discussing this. If one cannot accept the reality, that a prostitute is nothing more than a vessel that men use to cum in, then they ought not discuss it at all.

One study. Doesn't make it fact.

All of the studies that I cited earlier showed that prostitutes suffered from PTSD.

I'm not being smart but have you actually read these papers or just copied and pasted the titles? Four of those countries were Thailand/Zambia/Turkey and Thailand. The only western country being the USA.

I read through them. Whether a woman acts as a prostitute in this country or another is not relevant. Location is irrelevant. The act itself has the same effects on women.

This isn't relevant to the discussion. I don't like prostitution. I quite frankly don't care if its criminalised because it won't affect my life because I dont go to prostitutes.

Don't you care for other human beings? Wouldn't you want to see the number of prostitutes decreased for compassion for those who endure this industry?

The point is I'm not convinced it will even reduce the rates of really nasty prostitution.

It's all about supply and demand. It's possibly easier to reduce demand by criminalising clients. It's far more challenging for the authorities to reduce the supply end as it's more complex.

Besides, Ireland must keep inline with other EU countries, otherwise it could quite possibly become an attractive location for brothel owners and sex traffickers.

If anything shutting down the website based escorts (which I believe will be affected the most as they could easily be monitored by the authorities) could push their customers into the underground slave zand streetwalker type prostitutes. Where many of the website girls will end up.

Evidence from Norway and Sweden prove promising, even if you disagree.

You seem to be implying that streetwalker type prostitutes are worse off. I'm not going to sift through studies just now (I could cite one tomorrow), but, apparently, the myth that they are worse off is not true.

It isn't necessarily intrinsic though.

It is, and that's what you fail to accept. The act is abusive because it violates the person's body. Prostitutes endure it and that requires them to develop coping mechanisms like "switching off" in order to deal with the act itself.

Put yourself in her shoes - imagine you having to sleep with middle-aged men every day, who can do whatever they want to you. You said you'd choose that over touring in Afghan. I find that difficult to believe.

ihacs

As I got no reply to the example I gave of the young model marrying the millionaire octogenarian, I thought I'd broaden it/put it in another way:

Some women marry it appears mainly due to the money the man has. Could that not be said to be worse than a woman who chooses prostitution but then is free i.e. isn't tied by marriage* to a man she might not have married if he had a smaller bank balance. Amongst other things, it would involve having sex with a man one might not have chosen if he had a smaller bank balance.

* including perhaps have one or more children with him

---

Or to put it briefly, the comparison could be said:
arranging for payment from somebody for having sex with them once vs marrying somebody largely for their money and part of the deal will be having sex with them at least once but most likely more than that and having to spend a lot of time in their company.

ihacs

_Beau_ wrote: »

Prostitutes act as a vessel for men to cum in.

I know men and women who pay people to cook dead animals for them so they can shove them down their throats. Other people are paid to kill the animals so the men and women can shove the dead animals down their throat.

_Beau_

ihacs wrote: »

As I got no reply to the example I gave of the young model marrying the millionaire octogenarian, I thought I'd broaden it/put it in another way:

Some women marry it appears mainly due to the money the man has. Could that not be said to be worse than a woman who chooses prostitution but then is free i.e. isn't tied by marriage* to a man she might not have married if he had a smaller bank balance. Amongst other things, it would involve having sex with a man one might not have chosen if he had a smaller bank balance.

* including perhaps have one or more children with him

---

Or to put it briefly, the comparison could be said:
arranging for payment from somebody for having sex with them once vs marrying somebody largely for their money and part of the deal will be having sex with them at least once but most likely more than that and having to spend a lot of time in their company.

Some wealthy men only marry a woman because she is young and attractive and you consider those women to be prostitutes?

Do you have a negative view of women?

How did you feel about the psychological damage that prostitution causes them as you read my post earlier, detailing their trauma?

_Beau_

ihacs wrote: »

I know men and women who pay people to cook dead animals for them so they can shove them down their throats. Other people are paid to kill the animals so the men and women can shove the dead animals down their throat.

Yep, and that's why I don't eat mammals.

I can't handle the reality of it; it sickens me.

Yahew

_Beau_ wrote: »

Evidence from Sweden and Norway has shown that such a law deters clients from using prostitutes.

Thats what law does. A law preventing people walking the street after dark would deter people from walking the street after dark. The question is whether it is correct for the State to tell people what to do with their bodies. The answer is it's not the State's business to interfere in any consensual transaction between anybody and anybody, of adult age, regarding sex.

Not all prostitutes are women, _Beau_. What is your opinion re: gay prostitutes? i.e. both women and men who serve their own sex.


Were we to poll every prostitute in Ireland, what do you think the result would be? Would they, in your mind, be against or for the criminalization of their work?

T runner

ihacs wrote: »

I had a quick look around and can't see a discussion on this Seanad debate:


It has appeared to me for a while that a lot of the discussion on prostitution is based on dubious premises:

e.g. (i) people don't grow up desiring to be a prostitute therefore it is should be banned - this ignores the fact that a lot of people around the world, in both the developed world and the developing world do jobs that they would prefer not to do or would not have desired to do when growing up.

(ii) the impression that virtually all prostitutes are trafficked: I have come across dubious statistics e.g. I remember a letter in the Irish Times in the last year or two that quoted a very high figure e.g. 96%.
ETA: found the letter:


Just because a person comes here from another country doesn't mean they are trafficked: lots of people work in other countries because the pay is better there - one can't assume that because somebody comes from another country, that they are automatically trafficked.

Unfortunately, this is the sort of issue where most people, probably particularly politicians, won't stand up to those pushing for new laws i.e. argue with those who want the purchasing of sex criminalised (while at the same time, if the Swedish model is followed, the sale of sex won't be criminalised).

Some people may find the following website of interest:
http://www.turnoffthebluelight.ie/

Has worked extremely well in Sweden. Many women are trafficked, many are addicts, many have been abused as children etc. A very few are there solely for the lucrative side.

Men have a choice as to whether they use prostitutes or not. Many prostitutes do not. Therefore it is only just to target the group that can choose not to. Remember, tehse men do not know if a prostitute is trafficked, or is a woman who is only in prostitution because of her vulnerable situation. They dont care.

It makes simple economic sense also. Target the demand: which is flexible. A drop in demand will necessitate a drop in supply.

And demand will drop. Many men for, personal, economic, or job related reasons can not afford a criminal conviction. It also informs them that what they are doing is very wrong.

This is proper order in my opinion.

_Beau_

Yahew wrote: »

Thats what law does. A law preventing people walking the street after dark would deter people from walking the street after dark. The question is whether it is correct for the State to tell people what to do with their bodies. The answer is it's not the State's business to interfere in any consensual transaction between anybody and anybody, of adult age, regarding sex.

The State is obliged to legislate to protect people, that's why we have speed limits, laws regarding assault and bodily harm, children's rights, protection of the elderly and the vulnerable and so on.

Prostitution is a form of abuse and prostitutes require protection.

As for interfering, it is illegal to have sex in public. Is the State interfering there?

_Beau_

_Beau_ wrote: »

Prostitution is a form of abuse and prostitutes require protection.

Says YOU. I wonder what the prostitutes would have to say on the matter?

28064212

_Beau_ wrote: »

As for interfering, it is illegal to have sex in public. Is the State interfering there?

A person who sees it is not consenting. Two adults consenting to have sex in private is incomparable

Alopex

_Beau_ wrote: »

People seem numb to the word 'prostitute' and describing it accurately, which is what I did, is a mature way of discussing this. If one cannot accept the reality, that a prostitute is nothing more than a vessel that men use to cum in, then they ought not discuss it at all.

Will you grow up and stop dodging the point. Clear you know you're wrong because you conveniently left out my quote about the soldier vessel analogy.

All of the studies that I cited earlier showed that prostitutes suffered from PTSD.

I didn't dispute that for a second. I meant one study doesn't prove they suffer worse than soldiers.

I read through them. Whether a woman acts as a prostitute in this country or another is not relevant. Location is irrelevant. The act itself has the same effects on women.

Of course it matters. That's how you differentiate between correlation and causation.

Don't you care for other human beings? Wouldn't you want to see the number of prostitutes decreased for compassion for those who endure this industry?

This is becoming trying. By "I don't care if its criminalised" I meant I'm not objecting to it being criminalised therefore not biased.

It's all about supply and demand. It's possibly easier to reduce demand by criminalising clients. It's far more challenging for the authorities to reduce the supply end as it's more complex.

Besides, Ireland must keep inline with other EU countries, otherwise it could quite possibly become an attractive location for brothel owners and sex traffickers.

The reverse of this is that if criminalised the girls will just move to London, Amsterdam etc. You really think they're going to put up with working in mcdonalds after earning so much in prostitution? Get real.

Evidence from Norway and Sweden prove promising, even if you disagree.

You seem to be implying that streetwalker type prostitutes are worse off. I'm not going to sift through studies just now (I could cite one tomorrow), but, apparently, the myth that they are worse off is not true.

The gardai reported the normal situation in ireland is the woman keeps around half the money. If you go to escort sites they charge over 200euro per hour. That seems better than the street walking types. If properly legalised they'd get to keep a much higher proportion. They could just hire a security firm like anyone else to ensure their safety.

It is, and that's what you fail to accept. The act is abusive because it violates the person's body. Prostitutes endure it and that requires them to develop coping mechanisms like "switching off" in order to deal with the act itself.

I don't accept that as necessarily being fact. And a bunch of biased studies from the journal of women studies isn't going to change that.

Put yourself in her shoes - imagine you having to sleep with middle-aged men every day, who can do whatever they want to you. You said you'd choose that over touring in Afghan. I find that difficult to believe.

You're choosing the sex slave prostitutes as an example. Girls on escort sites can decide what men are allowed to do.

And yes I would prefer a few hours(amount required to match a soldier's pay) a week prostituting than a tour of Afghanistan. For a variety of reasons:

I don't think I could handle killing people. Be they taliban fighters or children who accidently get hit by my granade launcher when I was targeting someone else

I don't think I could deal with being blinded, maimed, loss of limbs.

I don't think I could deal with the fear of being kidknapped and tortured. Look at the Israeli guy who just got released by Hamas, he'll never be the same again.

I'm from Northern Ireland so I actually know people who've gone there. Its not at all like the MOD make it out to be in their recruitment drives.

ihacs

_Beau_ wrote: »

ihacs wrote:

I know men and women who pay people to cook dead animals for them so they can shove them down their throats. Other people are paid to kill the animals so the men and women can shove the dead animals down their throat.

Yep, and that's why I don't eat mammals.

I can't handle the reality of it; it sickens me.

But you’re free not to do it. Your opinion hasn’t been forced on other people who either want to earn money in the industry or who pay to use the industry.

ihacs

T runner wrote: »

Many men for, personal, economic, or job related reasons can not afford a criminal conviction.

That hardly needs to be said. Although it's hardly a gender specific trait.

T runner wrote: »

It also informs them that what they are doing is very wrong.

But not everyone agrees that if one person agrees to have sex with another person for money, it is wrong. Different people view different things as "wrong".

T runner

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Says YOU. I wonder what the prostitutes would have to say on the matter?

I think it has generally being demonstated that prostitutes suffer more physical and psychological injuries because of the nature of their work.

Some prostitutes are trafficked, some are vulnerable, and some may not admit to it for obvious reasons. So asking the prostitutes may not prove anything.

T runner

Alopex wrote: »

I'd say the ones who take the hit are the likes on escort ireland who are self employed prostitutes and make huge money. The businessmen who pay for them will probably just go to hookers on holiday instead of risking prison so a reduction will be seen there.

Can you provide a link to substantiate that these women are self employed?
Who set up their website? Who is organising their accommodation?
Looks to me that there is a layer above them making money.

The seedier ones where girls are enslaved? nah I doubt anything will change with them. So the Sweden and norway stats don't mean much. They make themselves look good by reducing the visible stats.

The facts are that the men who hire prostitutes dont know if they are trafficked, vulnerable, addicts or there 100% of their own free will. In every case but the latter the male is taking advantage of teh female and clearly commiting a crime.

Id take statistics from an authority in Sweden before youre unsubstantiated logic any day.

Though few really care about them. What this is all about is many people don't like that many men go to prostitutes. They'll use any measure available to try and reduce the number of men going to prostitutes.

They dont like it because it creates an industry where women are degraded sexually, physically and emotionally.

ihacs

_Beau_ wrote: »

ihacs wrote:

As I got no reply to the example I gave of the young model marrying the millionaire octogenarian, I thought I'd broaden it/put it in another way:

Some women marry it appears mainly due to the money the man has. Could that not be said to be worse than a woman who chooses prostitution but then is free i.e. isn't tied by marriage* to a man she might not have married if he had a smaller bank balance. Amongst other things, it would involve having sex with a man one might not have chosen if he had a smaller bank balance.

* including perhaps have one or more children with him

---

Or to put it briefly, the comparison could be said:
arranging for payment from somebody for having sex with them once vs marrying somebody largely for their money and part of the deal will be having sex with them at least once but most likely more than that and having to spend a lot of time in their company.

Some wealthy men only marry a woman because she is young and attractive and you consider those women to be prostitutes?

I consider this discussion is artificial if the only view allowed in it is that the only women in society who have sex with others to obtain money or material benefits are prostitutes.

And it's not just me who believe some other women behave in this way. Women will sometimes use the word "gold-digger" to describe a particular woman.

golddigger:
Any woman whose primary interest in a relationship is material benefits. A woman who cares more about a man's bank account than she does about the man. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=golddigger

And there are different ways to look at it in terms of who is exploiting who in such a relationship.

And we don't ban such relationships. We don't say, "you're a vulnerable woman, we think you may be at a vulnerable point in your life and shouldn't be allowed marry such a man". Nor do we criminalise the man.

T runner

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

So let me get this straight... The sex traffickers, who are already breaking very serious laws by trafficking in and holding a girl against her will and forcing her to be a prostitute: These lads are going to stop when prostitution becomes illegal?

Are you serious?

They will stop because the cowardly middleclass irish males who are their supply will dissapear once consequences are there for their criminal actions.

Cut demand and you cut supply

All criminalisation will do is drive the practice further underground and make the situation a whole lot worse! Do we ever learn anything in this country?

Were learning more than you think despite negative hangers on. Dont blame the country for your own lack of understanding.

I have never used a prostitute, nor do I ever plan on using one, but criminalising prostitution will simply create a lot more problems that it will solve. And we should know this by now.

Why should we know this by now?

Do you disagree with the blindingly obvious economic law that if demand goes down, then supply will follow?

28064212

T runner wrote: »

I think it has generally being demonstated that prostitutes suffer more physical and psychological injuries because of the nature of their work.

It hasn't actually

T runner wrote: »

Some prostitutes are trafficked, some are vulnerable, and some may not admit to it for obvious reasons. So asking the prostitutes may not prove anything.

If a person decides, competely informed and of her own free will, that, rather than work in McDonalds or go on the dole, she would like to be a prostitute. She was not coerced, she was not trafficked, she is not on drugs, she employs herself, she was not abused as a child, she practices sex that is as safe as possible and she has no objections to whether clients see her as a sex object or not. Should what she wants to do be illegal? Why?

_Beau_

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Not all prostitutes are women, _Beau_. What is your opinion re: gay prostitutes? i.e. both women and men who serve their own sex.

Studies cited in the following source state that they found that although it is sometimes assumed that the prostitution of males is qualitatively different to that of females, their studies did not find that to be true. Comparing women, men and transgendered prostitutes, there was no difference in PTSD. For men, boys and the transgendered, the experience of being a prostitute was similar to that of a woman; it was no less traumatic.

Source: Farley, M., et al, (1998) ‘Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder’ in Feminism and Psychology, Vol 8 (4) London: Sage at 405-425.

Were we to poll every prostitute in Ireland, what do you think the result would be? Would they, in your mind, be against or for the criminalization of their work?

Prostitutes don't want to be prostitutes - you're kidding yourself if you believe that they work as prostitutes because that's what they want to do with their lives.

The question is not, should one have the choice to be a prostitute? The question is, does one have the right not to be a prostitute?

It is the poor and the desperate who usually find themselves in this industry. It is not by choice. Prostitutes in First World countries are disproportionately from poor and racially marginalised groups.

Source: Raymond, J., (1995) Report to the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women. Geneva: United Nations

Those who end up as prostitutes are likely to have been abused as children and prostitution continues this history of sexual abuse. ‘Several studies report a positive correlation between a history of childhood sexual assault and symptoms of PTSD in adult women (Farley and Keaney, 1994, 1997; Rodriguez et al., 1997). Since almost all prostituted women have histories of childhood sexual abuse, this undoubtedly contributes to their current symptoms of post-traumatic stress. Prolonged and repeated trauma usually precedes entry into prostitution. From 55 to 90 percent of those in prostitution report a childhood sexual abuse history.’

‘Women in prostitution are often sought specifically for acts that are humiliating, degrading and violent. One study found that while there is more physical violence in street, as distinct from, brothel prostitution, there is no difference in the psychological trauma. The psychological damage is intrinsic to the act of prostitution.’

PTSD was widely prevalent among prostitutes across five different countries. Despite major cultural differences, the harm caused by prostitution is not culturally bound. The traumatic experience of prostitution is a more potent variable than race, gender or the country where the person was born.

Legalising or decriminalising of prostitution would normalise prostitution; it benefits customers and pimps, not prostitutes. It would not improve the lives of the prostitutes. Apparently, legalising prostitution makes their lives worse. It puts the State in the role of the pimp, ensuring that the customers are provided with prostitutes that are HIV and STI-free.

Source: Farley, M., et al, (1998) ‘Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder’ in Feminism and Psychology, Vol 8 (4) London: Sage at 405-425.

Systemised degradation inflicted on women in brothels is in many ways worse than street prostitution. Prostitutes in brothels are completely under the control of pimps and brothel owners. They’re not allowed to refuse customers. They are not allowed to choose their own physicians and are regularly sexually assaulted by physicians who practiced in brothels.

Source: Hoigard, C. and Finstad, L., (1992) Backstreets: Prostitution, Money and Love, Pennsylania: Pennsylviana State University Press.

So, what do you think? Do you think that prostitutes in Ireland would want the State to be their pimp?

T runner

T runner wrote: »

I think it has generally being demonstated that prostitutes suffer more physical and psychological injuries because of the nature of their work.

Some prostitutes are trafficked, some are vulnerable, and some may not admit to it for obvious reasons. So asking the prostitutes may not prove anything.

Why and how would a middle class man use some dodgy girl held against her will when there are literally thousands of girls who are independent?

Also, surely a prostitute would only have to have sex with one or two men a week to avoid starvation etc, why do they chose to service so many? Could it be that they want to make a ton of money while they can? I'm assuming they wont be prostituting when they are 50.


Seeing as _Beau_ won't answer my question, maybe you can: If there were to be a poll taken of all prostitutes in Ireland today, do you think any would be in favour of making the practice illegal?

I don't. I believe there would be a landslide victory for keeping the practice legal. So in essence you are saying that you know better than the women and men who are employed in the industry. And to be frank, you don't.

28064212

_Beau_ wrote: »

Prostitutes don't want to be prostitutes - you're kidding yourself if you believe that they work as prostitutes because that's what they want to do with their lives.

The question is not, should one have the choice to be a prostitute? The question is, does one have the right not to be a prostitute?

It is the poor and the desperate who usually find themselves in this industry. It is not by choice. Prostitutes in First World countries are disproportionately from poor and racially marginalised groups.

Replace "prostitute" with "fast-food worker" in those three paragraphs and they all still hold true.

One should have both the right to be and not be a prostitute. They should also have the right not to be assaulted, trafficked, abused, none of which people are trying to change. They should also have the rights that other employees/self-employed people have with regard to working conditions