Should prostitution be legalised? Or what...

jonniebgood1

This has been in the media lately- there was an examiner ad on the radio last week about their story regarding brothels in Cork. There was also a group looking for change in law earlier this year to change the focus from those who sell to those who buy.

Sex trade campaigners have claimed backing from 80 TDs and senators for their demands to criminalise prostitution in Ireland.

An umbrella group, calling itself 'Turn off the Red Light', want to see Nordic-style legislation introduced here which would grant sex workers immunity while those who buy sex are prosecuted. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0207/breaking49.html

The current situation is that vulnerable females are exploited in many cases. would different laws change that. What country has the best laws in regard of this?

Manach

If the issue is with human trafficking, then more resources and laws should be enabled to deal with this root cause. If the state is implying that there is a moral issue to be addressed here, this speaks loudly about their abandonment of any form of cohesive policy given the sea-change in traditional Western morality over this generation to the current progressive permissiveness.

jonniebgood1

Manach wrote: »

If the issue is with human trafficking, then more resources and laws should be enabled to deal with this root cause. If the state is implying that there is a moral issue to be addressed here, this speaks loudly about their abandonment of any form of cohesive policy given the sea-change in traditional Western morality over this generation to the current progressive permissiveness.

As I see it (and I emphasise this is off top of head) the main problems that need to be addressed start with that in first line of reply,
human trafficking,
expoloitation of vulnerable people (including drug addicts and underage children),
Safety of women (from violent attacks).

I am sure there are more nuanced problems but these are important issues. In terms of western morality Australia has different law on prostitution. I am not sure if they are successful. What I do know is that I find the current analysis (as per media recently) distressing in that it seems unnessesarily unfair to the women in this trade.

Sunnyisland

Prostitution should be legal and safely regulated & controlled,Its an normal act,A prostitute and her client agreeing on a fee for sex,it violates no ones rights and does not directly harm anyone else,So it should be legalised.

Woodward

It should definetely be legalised. Its a pity Ruhuma misrepresent the issue to further their own ideology and some feminists push for the swedish style laws to prosecute the users of prostitutes

Sleepy

I think one of the main problems with this debate is going to be Ruhama. As long as the primary source of data on prostitution reported in the media is a right-wing religious organisation, any debate is going to be fundamentally flawed. For example, while Ruhama seem to claim that the majority of women working in prostitution in Ireland are trafficked, the Gardaí report that they've come across very, very few cases.

The Corinthian

Sleepy wrote: »

I think one of the main problems with this debate is going to be Ruhama. As long as the primary source of data on prostitution reported in the media is a right-wing religious organisation, any debate is going to be fundamentally flawed. For example, while Ruhama seem to claim that the majority of women working in prostitution in Ireland are trafficked, the Gardaí report that they've come across very, very few cases.

I get the impression that the truth is often sacrificed on the alter of ideology or 'morality' on this particular subject. In the related area of pornography the US media has frequently been accused of intentionally distorting facts to push an anti-pornography agenda and there have been similar accusations of this where it comes to claims of trafficking by NGO's.

On a purely practical level, I cannot see trafficking being viable in a country where prostitution is legal and properly regulated, as regulated brothels would be monitored for this and those brothels that would continue to operate outside of the law would end up pricing themselves out of the market (illegal goods/services always carry a premium price point). Even before this though, first of all one would have to demonstrate that trafficking is a serious problem first, and this remains an open question.

Of course prostitution, as with pornography, is not an ideal occupation for anyone, and beyond the social stigma, health concerns would persist even in a regulated market. Nonetheless, neither are many other occupations ideal either; although as over 90% of work-related deaths are male and these occupations don't contravene religious morality there appears to be little interest in reforming or banning them simply on the basis of it being dangerous or degrading.

In reality, the motivation for its criminalization appears to be either religious and/or ideological and has little to do with prostitution itself, from what I can see.

miec

I am running against the consensus on this one. Before I go on I am discussing prostitution in the context of two adults who strike a bargain / deal so to speak so I won't be discussing human trafficking or underage prostitutes. Also my argument relates to both men and women. My issue is with the commodification of sex.

I used to be in favour of legalising prostitution as I believed it is a consensual act between two adults so let them on and who are they harming. However since learning more about it and examining it on a deeper level I see it as an immoral act from a spiritual perspective. When a person pays someone for sex it is either an act of power or desperation. Paid sex divorces sex from its spiritual element and by legalising prostitution it just feeds into that further.

Woodward

miec wrote: »

I am running against the consensus on this one. Before I go on I am discussing prostitution in the context of two adults who strike a bargain / deal so to speak so I won't be discussing human trafficking or underage prostitutes. Also my argument relates to both men and women. My issue is with the commodification of sex.

I used to be in favour of legalising prostitution as I believed it is a consensual act between two adults so let them on and who are they harming. However since learning more about it and examining it on a deeper level I see it as an immoral act from a spiritual perspective. When a person pays someone for sex it is either an act of power or desperation. Paid sex divorces sex from its spiritual element and by legalising prostitution it just feeds into that further.

If you feel sex is a spiritual experience good for you but not everyone does so why should your morality be forced on other people when it doesnt concern anyone but the people involved. You could say a massage is a spiritual affair so do you want massage parlours outlawed?

The Corinthian

miec wrote: »

I am running against the consensus on this one.

Thank God; this thread was beginning to look boring...

Before I go on I am discussing prostitution in the context of two adults who strike a bargain / deal so to speak so I won't be discussing human trafficking or underage prostitutes. Also my argument relates to both men and women.

I agree; I don't think that those are relevant to any such discussion as I don't think anyone is arguing for their legalization.

I used to be in favour of legalising prostitution as I believed it is a consensual act between two adults so let them on and who are they harming. However since learning more about it and examining it on a deeper level I see it as an immoral act from a spiritual perspective. When a person pays someone for sex it is either an act of power or desperation. Paid sex divorces sex from its spiritual element and by legalising prostitution it just feeds into that further.

Could you be a bit more specific? I'll have to be honest, when someone talks in general terms about something being immoral or about spirituality, my eyes begin to glaze over.

You'll need to better argue your objection as so far it appears to be little more than a 'gut feeling'.

jonniebgood1

It was looking a bit one sided there! I think it might be the demograph posting on boards in general and also on the humanities board are more liberal (in some ways). For example if the same type question was put to a referendum it would be defeated comfortably IMO.

In Victoria in Australia one of the problems with the legalisation has been that the number of brothels began rising to fast. It also gives a more difficult to regulate problem- the women find it harder to make a living as the 'cut' for their managers becomes larger. This and more is contained in this report into Victoria-

Women are thus forced to experience exploitation on the streets, illegally, or from sex
“businessmen” in brothels. For women in legal brothels, managers and owners demand
up to 50% to 60% of takings. This is in the face of strong competition among prostituted
women for “clients” as increasing numbers of women enter prostitution, and as men have
an excess of sexual services on offer for them to buy. Legalisation, then, makes it harder
for women to earn a living through prostitution.
.....

Those who defend prostitution and call for legalisation often say that it is consensual and
women “choose” this “work.” What does this “consent” consist of? Many women engage
in two forms of work to make enough money to survive. One third of prostituted women
working in brothels in Victoria earned less than 500 Australian dollars, with only one in
five earning more than $1,000 per week (The Age, 28 Feb, 1999). Thus a woman who
waits tables in the daytime, protected perhaps by a sexual harassment policy, against men
grabbing her breasts, will be considered to have “consented” at 5 p.m. to much more
violating acts in the licensed brothel. In fact the “consent” is likely to take the form
simply of dissociation.
......

Legalisation was supposed to get prostituted women off the streets. Street prostitution
remained illegal. It was thought that women would choose to work in brothels. In fact
street prostitution still exists because it is related to wider social problems. Women who
are homeless, seriously drug addicted, under age, or who want to avoid being exploited
by sex “businessmen” continue to work on the street and suffer severe violence there.
The government’s Advisory Committee on prostitution determined that women are the
vast majority of street prostitutes, though there are also boys and transsexuals. Women
remain in the industry for between 10–15 years, “entrenched in a life cycle of
prostitution, drugs and prison.” A Victorian study called Off Our Backs in 1996
confirmed that 80 percent of street prostituted women are heavy drug users, with a
$A100–500 a day drug problem. Forty–six percent are mothers with children in
protective care.
Street prostituted women, because of the illicit nature of their work, are doubly
vulnerable to rape, battery and murder from the men who use them and from male passers
by. Statistics produced by the Prostitutes’ Collective of Victoria prior to the passing of
the 1994 Act reveal that reported rapes of prostituted women averaged 2 per week, with
one assault per night and 2 murders over the last year. Street prostituted women are
harassed by police and gutter crawlers. However, when prostituted women are
criminalised they cannot demand police protection or claim legal recourse for robbery or
coercion, for they thereby expose themselves as implicated in a criminalised trade.

...

Conclusion
Opposition to men’s prostitution abuse, and challenging the social acceptance of the
prostitution industry, is aided in many countries by the existence of a prostitution
survivors’ movement that speaks out about what prostitution really means for women. It
was the speaking out of survivors that empowered the feminist challenges to other forms
of violence: domestic violence, rape, child sexual abuse. In a country like Australia, and a
state like Victoria, where prostitution abuse has been so normalised, it is particularly hard
for survivors to speak out against it. One resource run by and for prostitution survivors
does exist -- Linda’s House of Hope, in Perth, West Australia (see Linda’s House of
Hope, Compass, ABC TV, 29 April, 2001). As the prostitution survivors’ movement
develops, it will be easier to change the climate of acceptance that has allowed the
industry to flourish in Victoria and elsewhere, and gain an effective solution to the
problems of prostitution outlined here.
The reality is that prostitution cannot be made respectable. Legalisation does not make it
so. Prostitution is an industry that arises from the historical subordination of women and
the historical right of men to buy and exchange women simply as objects for sexual use.
It thrives on poverty, drug abuse, the trafficking in vulnerable women and children.
Prostitution teaches men how to mistreat women and damages the lives of both the
women who are used, the women whose partners, sons, brothers and workmates are the
abusers, and the status of all women in the state. Legalisation causes the business of
A generation of men in Victoria have now learned that it is acceptable to treat
women as objects for their sexual use.
13
sexual exploitation to flourish. As more and more women and children are drawn into the
industry, and more and more men become abusers, the profits from the abuse become an
indispensable part of the state’s revenue. The sex “businessmen” network with judges
and politicians, and float their brothels on the stock exchange. Once prostitution is
legalised, ending it becomes much more difficult, as a lobby of “respectable”
businessmen would have to be put out of business, and the government would have to tax
the rich instead of living off women’s bodies.
Ultimately the best way forward in Victoria would be to follow the example of Sweden
where model legislation in 1998 penalises the men who “buy sexual services” and
decriminalises the women. In combination with generous services to support prostituted
women in getting out, this would be effective. Unfortunately it will take some time to
create a social understanding of prostitution in Victoria that will make this possible.
Countries that have not yet gone down the path of legalisation are in a position to develop
policies to end the harms of prostitution. Legalisation compounds the harms of
prostitution rather than relieving them. It is not the answer.
SOURCE- http://action.web.ca/home/catw/attach/AUSTRALIAlegislation20001.pdf

In addition to the above quoted text and not wanting to quote the full report it has also been the experience in Victoria that trafficking has increased as has underage. This does not really need to form a part of our discussion if people wish not to. I would have thought though that one of the very purposes of legalising this trade would be to allow illimination of both these unfortunate features of prostitution.


Can all these problems be put down to legislation? The legalisation argument does have some merits but if the whole prostitution scene increases to the extent described then the overall problem with its darkside will also increase with legalisation. While this is the case (legalising it will increase the problems with it on the street) it won't even be considered.

Its the oldest profession in the world. It will always be there no matter what the legislation says. Therefore it is better to legalize it and provide protection to its workers. Pimps can get new jobs as union reps.

Sleepy

My "rabid feminist/misandrist" alarm is going off somewhat at the tone of that article jonniebgood1: so many unnecessary sexing of the "baddies": businessmen (when brothel management is traditionally a female dominated business), "vulnerable to rape, battery and murder from the men who use them and from male passers by" - are they not vulnerable to rape, battery and murder from the female passers by? Perhaps the author has never heard of Rosemary West?

The Corinthian

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

In addition to the above quoted text and not wanting to quote the full report it has also been the experience in Victoria that trafficking has increased as has underage.

Actually that report gives absolutely no evidence to this effect. At best it gives, largely anecdotal, evidence of the existence of trafficking (including quoting their own organization as a source), but no where do they show any actual figures examining increases in alleged, let alone confirmed, cases of trafficking.

I would have thought though that one of the very purposes of legalising this trade would be to allow illimination of both these unfortunate features of prostitution.

Legalization won't eliminate the darker side of prostitution, any more than criminalization will - it would be foolish to claim that either could.

Sleepy wrote: »

My "rabid feminist/misandrist" alarm is going off somewhat at the tone of that article jonniebgood1

I did get that feeling too; at one point it spoke disdainfully about "the “rights” of men that are being catered to". That they participate in events such as this, does not exactly fill me with faith as to their academic impartiality.

christmas2012

If you legalise prostitution,crime will go through the roof,how our government will be able to handle the cost of beefing up policing to deal with this new development im not so sure they will..

If handled properly it could rake in huge revenue,but the knock on effects of crime and other types of dealers and pimps using ireland as a stop off would be massive..And as our police force is now,they wouldnt have the man power to deal with that..

Decriminalisation of prostitution i think is the way to stay,being honest,if police need to see what is going on they should have the powers to do so..

Legalising it completely means the police cannot have the powers to see what crimes are being committed such as trafficking of young females and males..

There will always be an element of those who do not want a prostitution license or brothel license,and they will want to stay under the radar and legalising it completely may mean those people dont get ordinarily noticed at routine checks..

miec

If you feel sex is a spiritual experience good for you but not everyone does so why should your morality be forced on other people when it doesnt concern anyone but the people involved. You could say a massage is a spiritual affair so do you want massage parlours outlawed?

So should I say nothing? I thought this was a forum for debate on the subject.

@Corinthian in answer to your question, well as I am coming from a position that incorporates mind, body and soul then my argument may become fuzzy but I will do my best to be clear. First of I come from a belief that we have a mind, body and soul which interacts with each other and optimum health is when each of these interact as a whole. If I was to use a scientific analogy I would say matter, chemicals and energy that works in healthy symmetry.

Having sex is a physical act but it also induces chemicals and emotions. I believe that having sex can alter a person physically and spiritually. If we achieve orgasm and if it is powerful enough we can go into an altered state of consciousness. Now reduce that down into a transaction brings in a whole raft of problems in my opinion. You are reducing your bits by a price tag and in order to carry out the act in such a functional manner you have to fragment yourself which to my mind often creates mental illness. That for me applies to both parties involved. When society says yes lets commodify (aka legalise) the sex act then that normalises functional, soulless sex.

That is one aspect but on a more practical level, if prostitution is legalised then it should in theory become a career choice. Who in their right mind is going to choose prostitution as a career? Now I have read accounts of this, mainly women who enjoy having the extra money or having extra sex. Personally I wonder if they are either addicted to money or sex and so it comes back to my spiritual argument that they are fragmented and give a glowing account of how great it is to cover up their own unease.

The Corinthian

christmas2012 wrote: »

If you legalise prostitution,crime will go through the roof,how our government will be able to handle the cost of beefing up policing to deal with this new development im not so sure they will..

How would this happen? Can you point to any evidence supporting your logic? Or is this just your opinion?

Decriminalisation of prostitution i think is the way to stay,being honest,if police need to see what is going on they should have the powers to do so..

Decriminalization means making something that is illegal, legal, btw...

Legalising it completely means the police cannot have the powers to see what crimes are being committed such as trafficking of young females and males..

Again, what is your logic here?

The Corinthian

Should we make casual sex illegal then? Custodial sentences for swingers? Perhaps fines for one-night-stands?

I think you are overestimating the psychological aspect to sex and have not really given any evidence that it is simply a personal opinion or feeling. Not everyone sees sex in the same way as you do, so it would be wrong to legislate for them.

Secondly, the cynic in my has long thought that sex is already pretty much commodized even without prostitution. Many relationships (especially marriages) end up as little more than exchanges of sex for security eventually and some even begin that way - as Brendan Behan once quipped "the difference between sex for money and sex for free, is the former normally costs less".

christmas2012

''Secondly, the cynic in my has long thought that sex is already pretty much commodized even without prostitution. Many relationships (especially marriages) end up as little more than exchanges of sex for security eventually and some even begin that way - as Brendan Behan once quipped "the difference between sex for money and sex for free, is the former normally costs less". ''

I wouldnt say thats a reason to champion prostitution,there is the murkier side of it ,the young females that are forced into it,trafficked and beaten and threatened and raped if they dont do as asked..

Its all very well brendan behan making light of it,but that doesnt add valid weight to the argument.

christmas2012

to the poster above decriminilisation is slightly different to fully legalisting it BTW,it means if police want to they can still do a raid eventhough they have legal status,it is not fully legal..

christmas2012

''Legalising it completely means the police cannot have the powers to see what crimes are being committed such as trafficking of young females and males..
Again, what is your logic here?''

Fully legalising it,and at the current rate of our police force in ireland means busting up non licensed trafficking,and prostitution will be lower down the priority list and will go un noticed,so it will be an even bigger problem than before because of status..

The Corinthian

miec wrote: »

That is one aspect but on a more practical level, if prostitution is legalised then it should in theory become a career choice. Who in their right mind is going to choose prostitution as a career?

I forgot to address this point: Who in their right mind is going to choose sanitation as a career? Or coal mining? Or flipping burgers? Not everyone grows up to be an astronaut.

christmas2012 wrote: »

I wouldnt say thats a reason to champion prostitution,

I never said that it is a reason to champion prostitution, only that it cannot in good faith be used as a reason to oppose it.

there is the murkier side of it ,the young females that are forced into it,trafficked and beaten and threatened and raped if they dont do as asked..

Aside from the fact that it has already been questioned how much this actually occurs, legalization and regulation would be specifically designed to counteract such effects - the opposite of what you claim.

An excellent example is of the prohibition era in the US. Criminalizing alcohol resulted in a huge increase in crime, not to mention public health issues associated with bootleg alcohol. The whole thing was such a disaster that it was repealed after a decade and the organized crime that it spawned essentially evaporated as it could no longer compete in a legal and regulated industry.

Its all very well brendan behan making light of it,but that doesnt add valid weight to the argument.

It does underline that it is more than my own personal opinion - unlike anything you have written to date.

christmas2012 wrote: »

to the poster above decriminilisation is slightly different to fully legalisting it BTW,it means if police want to they can still do a raid eventhough they have legal status,it is not fully legal..

No one has suggested that it should not be regulated though.

christmas2012 wrote: »

Fully legalising it,and at the current rate of our police force in ireland means busting up non licensed trafficking,and prostitution will be lower down the priority list and will go un noticed,so it will be an even bigger problem than before because of status..

That makes no sense whatsoever. Regulation need not be carried out by law enforcement, but by specialized agencies that would in effect be funded by tax revenue from prostitution and only need to call upon law enforcement if necessary. If anything, law enforcement would end up with less work on their hands.

If it was legalized, there would be a lot more jobs going in Sallins (as per the primetime program).
Legalization could bring a lot more jobs and tax revenue. While at it they will need to legalize male prostitution as well.

Morag

Currently it is not illegal.
It is not illegal to pay for sex or to provide sex for a fee.

There are those who are working hard to present this as a loop hole in the law
which needs to be closed for the moral greater good, and with out consulting
those who are sex workers.

christmas2012

what about sex workers that are trafficked or under duress? have you asked those victims?

christmas2012

The Corinthian wrote: »

No one has suggested that it should not be regulated though.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Regulation need not be carried out by law enforcement, but by specialized agencies that would in effect be funded by tax revenue from prostitution and only need to call upon law enforcement if necessary. If anything, law enforcement would end up with less work on their hands.

Problem is if it does become fully legal,the problem IS as i stated before,that those who WANT to remain unlicensed will do so under the radar...And the fact it is legal ,means it will be lower down the priority list to check these places out..

As far as specialized agencies are concerned they COST money.. Which is money we dont currently have..

christmas2012

''Its all very well brendan behan making light of it,but that doesnt add valid weight to the argument.
It does underline that it is more than my own personal opinion - unlike anything you have written to date.''




Read here for my opinion on it,which i did express,maybe you should scroll back before shooting the mouth off on the keyboard..

christmas2012 wrote: »

If you legalise prostitution,crime will go through the roof,how our government will be able to handle the cost of beefing up policing to deal with this new development im not so sure they will..

If handled properly it could rake in huge revenue,but the knock on effects of crime and other types of dealers and pimps using ireland as a stop off would be massive..And as our police force is now,they wouldnt have the man power to deal with that..

Decriminalisation of prostitution i think is the way to stay,being honest,if police need to see what is going on they should have the powers to do so..

Legalising it completely means the police cannot have the powers to see what crimes are being committed such as trafficking of young females and males..

There will always be an element of those who do not want a prostitution license or brothel license,and they will want to stay under the radar and legalising it completely may mean those people dont get ordinarily noticed at routine checks..

Morag

christmas2012 wrote: »

what about sex workers that are trafficked or under duress? have you asked those victims?

Trafficking is illegal, so is that level of intimidation, trying to out law paying for sex due to those abuses is like trying to out law driving due to drunk drivers.

The Corinthian

christmas2012 wrote: »

what about sex workers that are trafficked or under duress? have you asked those victims?

How would legalizing prostitution increase trafficking? If anything it will decrease it.

christmas2012 wrote: »

Problem is if it does become fully legal,the problem IS as i stated before,that those who WANT to remain unlicensed will do so under the radar...And the fact it is legal ,means it will be lower down the priority list to check these places out..

Please read what I already wrote, both on the historical example of prohibition in the US and this:

The Corinthian wrote: »

On a purely practical level, I cannot see trafficking being viable in a country where prostitution is legal and properly regulated, as regulated brothels would be monitored for this and those brothels that would continue to operate outside of the law would end up pricing themselves out of the market (illegal goods/services always carry a premium price point). Even before this though, first of all one would have to demonstrate that trafficking is a serious problem first, and this remains an open question.

christmas2012 wrote: »

As far as specialized agencies are concerned they COST money.. Which is money we dont currently have..

Again, you don't seem to be reading what is posted:

The Corinthian wrote: »

Regulation need not be carried out by law enforcement, but by specialized agencies that would in effect be funded by tax revenue from prostitution and only need to call upon law enforcement if necessary.

I've emboldened the relevant part to make it easier for you to read.

christmas2012 wrote: »

Read here for my opinion on it,which i did express,maybe you should scroll back before shooting the mouth off on the keyboard..

I know it's your personal opinion, but that's all it is. My quoting Behan was not meant to really add much, but it did demonstrate that it is more than just my personal opinion.

From what I can see, you've really done little than give your opinion in the shape of sweeping claims, without even explaining the logic behind them (let alone give evidence supporting them) and often without reading the replies given to you.

christmas2012

Sharrow wrote: »

Trafficking is illegal, so is that level of intimidation, trying to out law paying for sex due to those abuses is like trying to out law driving due to drunk drivers.

not the same thing,thats a bad analogy if i ever saw one,as trafficking and prostitution are interlinked,they go hand in hand,drink driving does not..

christmas2012

''what about sex workers that are trafficked or under duress? have you asked those victims?
How would legalizing prostitution increase trafficking? If anything it will decrease it.''


In holland prostitution trafficking has increased since legislation of prostitution,the same result could easily happen in ireland.

Lets just say legilslation of prostitution occured(all your dreams come true)..Think of the market,there are plenty of sex tourists in ireland landing,as a result there is a huge market,so you will find this will in turn attract sex traffickers who want to follow the money and who want to remain unlicensed..

The problem with fully legalising it means the gards wont have any power to do searches on premises,and it will go down on the priority to do list of the gardai..

The Corinthian

christmas2012 wrote: »

not the same thing,thats a bad analogy if i ever saw one,as trafficking and prostitution are interlinked,they go hand in hand,drink driving does not..

Actually, she made a very good analogy. Drunk driving is an abuse of legal driving. Trafficking would similarly be an abuse of legal prosecution - presuming your predictions are correct which is dubious.

Driving and drunk driving are just as interlinked as any abuses to anything else which is otherwise considered acceptable. Another example is the prohibition of alcohol to stop alcoholism and alcohol related violence, which is precisely why it got banned in the US - and did you see how well that worked?

christmas2012 wrote: »

'In holland prostitution trafficking has increased since legislation of prostitution,the same result could easily happen in ireland.

Has it? I would be genuinely very interested in seeing some reliable figures on that. And that's the problem, those figures are pretty thin on the ground from what I can see, with many of the reports published (such as the one earlier in this thread) being blatant pieces of propaganda, with little or no evidence to back any of their claims up.

And, of course, even if trafficking does increase in countries where prostitution is legal, one has to compare it against countries where prostitution is not legal, so see if it is more of a global trend rather than a result of legalization - correlation does not imply causation, after all.

Lets just say legilslation of prostitution occured(all your dreams come true)..

If you think that such a scenario would affect me in the slightest, you're sadly mistaken, so it's hardly any dream come true - or was that simply an attempt at an ad hominem attack?

Think of the market,there are plenty of sex tourists in ireland landing,as a result there is a huge market,so you will find this will in turn attract sex traffickers who want to follow the money and who want to remain unlicensed..

Why would sex tourists come to Ireland? Holland or Germany easier, and cheaper, to get to and stay in.

Also you are making gigantic presumptions about how the market would react to such a scenario - given the increased costs associated with illicit business, such venues would be out-priced by the legal ones.

Even if demand outstripped supply (which is unlikely given that sex tourists are hardly going to come to a country just to avail of illegal brothels when the attraction - according to you - is the legal ones.

Your scenario makes no logical sense.

The problem with fully legalising it means the gards wont have any power to do searches on premises,and it will go down on the priority to do list of the gardai..

Didn't I already respond to this - twice? Is there any reason you're ignoring this?

Also as you didn't respond to my other rebuttals, in my last post, I'll take it you've accepted them.

christmas2012

no i dont accept what youre saying - you should look up the statistics for yourself crime in holland is a huge huge problem and the very well staffed police force as it is,have a lot of trouble dealing with it..paddy vans out every night,its like a busy saturday night in glasgow every night over in amsterdam..

christmas2012

''Think of the market,there are plenty of sex tourists in ireland landing,as a result there is a huge market,so you will find this will in turn attract sex traffickers who want to follow the money and who want to remain unlicensed..''


''Why would sex tourists come to Ireland? Holland or Germany easier, and cheaper, to get to and stay in.

Also you are making gigantic presumptions about how the market would react to such a scenario - given the increased costs associated with illicit business, such venues would be out-priced by the legal ones.''

Legal ones would be more costly as they would be liable for taxing by the government and would have to pay inner city rents..

The attraction of the unlicensed illegal trades would be great,and with an existing prostitution market with heaps of tourists the temptation would be there for a lot of people who want to make big money all untaxed..


You ask why would sex tourists come to ireland..isnt it obvious why they would to avail of sex with a prostitute in a legal setting..

If prostitution did become fully legal ,it would in no way go to protect those who abuse the system and traffick prostitutes into the country who want to remain off the radar,because there would be a prostitution market,they would follow the money to ireland,and in turn attracting sex tourists also,which would boost revenue,but would not protect those trafficked into prostitution as the gards would not look it up due to 'legal' status..

I do think it should be decriminialised but not legalisted to the full degree..

jonniebgood1

The Corinthian wrote: »

Originally Posted by jonniebgood1 View Post
In addition to the above quoted text and not wanting to quote the full report it has also been the experience in Victoria that trafficking has increased as has underage

Actually that report gives absolutely no evidence to this effect. At best it gives, largely anecdotal, evidence of the existence of trafficking (including quoting their own organization as a source), but no where do they show any actual figures examining increases in alleged, let alone confirmed, cases of trafficking.

It does. See page 10- reference to Fred Lelah.
Also reference to ECPAT report.

christmas2012 wrote: »

Lets just say legilslation of prostitution occured(all your dreams come true)......

What a ridiculous comment- It is an opinion based discussion and should stay that way rather than snide insinuations.

christmas2012 wrote: »

The problem with fully legalising it means the gards wont have any power to do searches on premises,and it will go down on the priority to do list of the gardai..

Could'nt unwarned searches/ inspections form part of any legislation?

miec

@Corinthian (I must say your responses make me smile)

Should we make casual sex illegal then? Custodial sentences for swingers? Perhaps fines for one-night-stands?

Prostitution involves the transfer of money for sex. One night stands and swinging is just pure sex. This type of arguing where one throws in the red herring detracts from the core issue.

I think you are overestimating the psychological aspect to sex and have not really given any evidence that it is simply a personal opinion or feeling. Not everyone sees sex in the same way as you do, so it would be wrong to legislate for them.

Yes I am giving an opinion, who isn't? This is a very subjective matter and to assert otherwise is deeply naive. Even when people produce evidence or data they approach that data in a subjective manner. For instance if I want to prove a point I could gather up loads of stats etc as to why prostitution should remain illegal and I will find it and you or others will find suitable evidence to back up why it should be legalised. It then becomes an arguement about who has the best evidence and why my evidence is wrong, yaddy yaddy ya ad finenutum. I have decided to come at this topic in a purely subjective manner and lay my thoughts out there. To further my point lets say it comes to a referendum and we are asked to vote on whether prostitution should be legalised. I would vote no based on my opinions. Judging by your comments you would vote yes. As we live in a democracy if the yes side win then prostitution is legalised and I will have to suck it up and visa versa.

Secondly, the cynic in my has long thought that sex is already pretty much commodized even without prostitution. Many relationships (especially marriages) end up as little more than exchanges of sex for security eventually

Certainly historically the above is true, women were bargaining chips and it was a trade off. Anyone who marries for money today (be they male or female) is setting themselves up for a life time of misery and I really would not want to be in their shoes.

Who in their right mind is going to choose sanitation as a career? Or coal mining? Or flipping burgers? Not everyone grows up to be an astronaut.

I find nothing morally or spiritually wrong with the above jobs. I've cleaned toilets in my time but ask me to put a price tag on my vagina and farm it out to any man willing to pay the price and the answer is no fricking way.

The thought of selling my body makes me feel ill and I suspect just about every prostitute who rents out his or her bits feels the same. It is my belief that in order to do that you have to shut off huge parts of yourself to do it. I suspect that is why many prostitutes have a drink / drug problem.

A number of months back Channel 4 did a documentary on phone sex workers and one girl in particular started doing it for the money but as time wore on she found she could no longer relate to men and it was seriously affecting how she viewed them. That was just phone sex. For balance I should say that another woman loved doing it and even found a partner through it but if it was difficult for one woman to do that via the phone, I suspect full on contact is 100% worse.

jonniebgood1

miec wrote: »

I find nothing morally or spiritually wrong with the above jobs. I've cleaned toilets in my time but ask me to put a price tag on my vagina and farm it out to any man willing to pay the price and the answer is no fricking way.

The thought of selling my body makes me feel ill and I suspect just about every prostitute who rents out his or her bits feels the same. It is my belief that in order to do that you have to shut off huge parts of yourself to do it.

Very insightful IMO. The problem of course being that people will have different moral values and morals on different levels. Some people may have morals that make them see cleaning toilets as beyond them (think of victorian posh). The laws of the land do not though. With prostitution they do.

miec wrote: »

I suspect that is why many prostitutes have a drink / drug problem.

Which comes first?
I think that is a strong argument against legalising. Being forced into prostitution as a way to getting money for satisfying a drug problem is a real danger as things are in some areas. This would be a more widespread problem if prostitution were legalised as many people retain some of their morals based on what the law tells them is correct (forgive my slight paradox!).

The Corinthian

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

It does. See page 10- reference to Fred Lelah.
Also reference to ECPAT report.

The Fred Lelah case is anecdotal - individual cases do not denote rampant problems.

As to the brief reference to ECPAT, it gives one one rough statistic from an NGO - and the objectivity of such organizations has already been called into question in this discussion.

Interestingly, it then goes on after mentioning ECPAT, to cite "feminist campaigners who who worked through the League of Nations against the traffic in women between the World Wars I and II" - hardly compelling evidence 80 years later.

I do think that reliable, objective data is both difficult to come by on this topic. In part because it is difficult to collect, but also because from what I can see, the only one's collecting, or presenting, data of any kind appear to be pushing ulterior agendas. And the above report is an example of this IMHO.

miec wrote: »

Prostitution involves the transfer of money for sex. One night stands and swinging is just pure sex. This type of arguing where one throws in the red herring detracts from the core issue.

Apologies, I see that you specifically cited the transaction in paid sex, however you did also talk about "having sex can alter a person physically and spiritually" and suggested that if so, sexual practices that reject the spiritual aspect would be equally damaging to the individual.

Yes I am giving an opinion, who isn't? This is a very subjective matter and to assert otherwise is deeply naive. Even when people produce evidence or data they approach that data in a subjective manner.

I disagree. One can be objective, even utilitarian on this topic, but to suggest that subjective data is all that one can hope to find is to ignore the tools available in statistical analysis to eliminate such subjectivity and almost acts as a justification for NGO agendas that seek to manipulate result.

We all know that surveys may be manipulated, but that does not mean that they will be. What is needed is for data to be collected by someone who has no vested interest other than to find the truth, or the best solution for a problem. As long as those doing so are in reality simply using such 'data' to prove that prostitution is right or wrong for ideological or religious reasons, that won't happen, but it does not mean it cannot.

Certainly historically the above is true, women were bargaining chips and it was a trade off. Anyone who marries for money today (be they male or female) is setting themselves up for a life time of misery and I really would not want to be in their shoes.

Why not? You can get divorced and if you're a woman the odds are on your side.

While less common than in the past the sex-for-security transaction till happens today, although it has been cleverly camouflaged using tradition, social acceptance and diamond rings. Doesn't make it any less of a transaction in the end just because there's a wedding.

The thought of selling my body makes me feel ill and I suspect just about every prostitute who rents out his or her bits feels the same. It is my belief that in order to do that you have to shut off huge parts of yourself to do it. I suspect that is why many prostitutes have a drink / drug problem.

While I accept that this discussion is largely based upon opinions, I do think we're getting to a point where we've got a Schrödinger's cat scenario building up here, with two alternative realities based upon people's opinions and dubious reports (on all sides). And until we actually have real data to back things up, we won't know if this cat is dead or not.

miec

And until we actually have real data to back things up, we won't know if this cat is dead or not.

Well I guess there isn't much more that I can add to this debate, I can't get my head around the need for data on a subject such as this.

The Corinthian

miec wrote: »

I can't get my head around the need for data on a subject such as this.

Objective data is necessary so that we can understand the true nature of the issue and decide if it is, on balance, good or bad for both those involved and society in general.

Choosing policy based on clearly dubious data or simply on 'gut feeling' is the way of the mob.

miec

Choosing policy based on clearly dubious data or simply on 'gut feeling' is the way of the mob.

Just because I do not provide stats / data, does not negate the fact that I provide thoughtful commentary on this subject. There is such a thing as qualitative analysis.

The Corinthian

miec wrote: »

Just because I do not provide stats / data, does not negate the fact that I provide thoughtful commentary on this subject.

I'm not denying you're providing thoughtful commentary (opinion) on this subject at all, but simply because it is thoughtful does not make it valid.

We all have a right to an opinion, but we do not have a right to have it taken seriously.

There is such a thing as qualitative analysis.

Qualitative analysis employs the collection of data to arrive at conclusions.

miec

Qualitative analysis employs the collection of data to arrive at conclusions.

Now I conduct and collate data for work related purposes and qualitative analysis is in a nutshell commentaries from X persons. Data can be broken down into figures eg: X no of people are unemployed, or eat X product and qualitative analysis is those who said why they like x product or why they find themselves unemployed but it is an opinion all the same.

Anyhow for some strange reason I actually came across some data in relation to the issue of prostitution, which interestingly you haven't.

Accounts from former prostitutes which taps into the psychological effects of selling ones body:
http://theprostitutionexperience.com/

http://secretdiaryofadublincallgirl.wordpress.com/

Now I've not sold my body but the above blogs do examine its effects. I'm not sure if I would compare prostitution with sexual abuse as one of the above bloggers claim to make that link but I think there is an interlinking. I read through some of the postings and there are instances where men who pay women for sex think it is okay to abuse that prostitute.

I could also add links to Rhuhama but the problem I have with them is that they do not cover men who sell their bodies for sex. My ex brother in law was a rent boy and I think he sold his body because a) he needed the money and did not know of another way to make money and b) he had major problems psychologically (his whole family did) but knowing him and his circumstances has made me aware of male prostitution.

The Corinthian

miec wrote: »

Anyhow for some strange reason I actually came across some data in relation to the issue of prostitution, which interestingly you haven't.

Accounts from former prostitutes which taps into the psychological effects of selling ones body:
http://theprostitutionexperience.com/

http://secretdiaryofadublincallgirl.wordpress.com/

With respects, the above two link not to data, but to anecdotal accounts of prostitution. In fact the latter is named after the now famous blog 'Diary of a London Call Girl' by Brooke Magnanti (a.k.a. Belle de Jour) who worked as a prostitute and wrote on her own experiences. Anecdotally, her take on working in the sex industry contradicts those given in your anecdotes and later went on to write a rather scathing criticism of both the conservative and liberal moralists who seek to attack that industry. Indeed, for every negative account of prostitution, you'll probably find more positive ones out there, with many sex workers campaigning for the legalization and regulation of prostitution.

Nonetheless, it's still anecdotal evidence, and little more. It does not really answer questions of such as whether legalized prostitution improves life, on balance, for those working in that industry, or it's effect on alleged trafficking and other illegal activities.

I will fully admit that my anecdotal knowledge of prostitution is tiny. It's limited to being asked if I was "looking for business" by the rather pitiful, drug addicted, prostitutes you find in Dublin (and there I believe the problem is drugs rather than prostitution) and one curious occasion where I and my girlfriend ended up being brought to a legal brothel in Germany by a Canadian friend for a last drink after a night on the town. Comparing the two, my personal opinion became that prostitutes are better off in a legal and regulated industry.

However, if you're looking to impose policy for society, anecdotes and personal opinion don't cut it - including my own. You need to make an objective assessment of whether a policy will be good for both those involved and society as a whole. And from what I can see there's little objectivity in the debate at present, leaving us in a situation whereby we cannot really say.

I could also add links to Rhuhama but the problem I have with them is that they do not cover men who sell their bodies for sex.

This is the problem with objectivity on this subject; everyone appears to be pushing an agenda beneath the surface, be it christian or feminist. As such, I genuinely have little faith in much of the 'data' and 'reports' published out there on the subject.

nozzferrahhtoo

christmas2012 wrote: »

If you legalise prostitution,crime will go through the roof

Which crimes, what roof, and why do you think so? I am not seeing much support at all for this statement/assumption at all and would be keen to read some.

miec wrote: »

So should I say nothing? I thought this was a forum for debate on the subject.

It is. Which is why you should not say "nothing" but if you insist on saying something you should very much be prepared for people to debate your view or ask you to substantiate it, without having a tantrum. People disagreeing with you and explaining why IS what debate is. What did you think it meant? Something more like speakers corner in London where you stand up, express your view, and leave before anyone retorts?

miec wrote: »

First of I come from a belief that we have a mind, body and soul which interacts with each other and optimum health is when each of these interact as a whole.

I am with you as far as mind and body. But not sure what you mean by "soul". Is this not just another word for "mind" or are you trying to introduce some magic or metaphysics here?

miec wrote: »

Who in their right mind is going to choose prostitution as a career?

That is for them to decide I guess, not you or me. Perspectives are massively different on this one. I for one find myself often wondering who in their "Right mind" would choose a career in television. I also, in my line of work, wonder who in their right mind ever takes "Software Testing" as a career as I personally find it the most mundane, repetitive and soul destroying career I ever had the danger to almost fall into.

The point is that it is not for any of us to question the careers, or career choices, or motivations of others. Perhaps the career path is not for YOU but be careful before extrapolating "I do not want/like it" into "Therefore no one else should either".

Also just because a career exists does not mean it is "chosen". How many people working in McDonalds, Tesco, Sewage cleaning, Dog food taste testing and more actually chose to enter that career? I am not saying none of them do, but I do not think the %s are going to come anywhere even close to supporting your point here.

christmas2012 wrote: »

what about sex workers that are trafficked or under duress? have you asked those victims?

I think it is risky to mix up prostitution with sex trafficking. I doubt there are many people on threads like this who are defending the idea of fully legalizing and regulating prostitution who do not also share your concerns about human trafficking.

Mixing the two is unhelpful and irrelevant unless you could show with actual argument, rather than assumption, that full legalizing of prostitution would increase human trafficking rather than decrease it. Such an argument requires back up and so far the only back up you appear to offer is "Go find the figures yourself" which tells me nothing except you do not HAVE the figures/arguments to present. Alarm bells should always go off if someone says "The figures are there... go find them".

It is also risky and dangerous to conflate the bad actions of some in any industry with the industry as a whole. In recent years for example there was a lot in the press made of certain clothing manufacturers that were using child labor to produce their clothing products.

The result was those firms were targeted for prosecution, product boycotts and more. At no point did anyone stand up and say "Because child slave labor is used to produce some clothes, clothes are evil and immoral and should be banned".

It is similarly ridiculous to say "Because some people capture and traffic women into sex slavery, therefore all kinds of prostitution is wrong".

jonniebgood1

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I think it is risky to mix up prostitution with sex trafficking. I doubt there are many people on threads like this who are defending the idea of fully legalizing and regulating prostitution who do not also share your concerns about human trafficking.

Mixing the two is unhelpful and irrelevant unless you could show with actual argument, rather than assumption, that full legalizing of prostitution would increase human trafficking rather than decrease it. Such an argument requires back up and so far the only back up you appear to offer is "Go find the figures yourself" which tells me nothing except you do not HAVE the figures/arguments to present. Alarm bells should always go off if someone says "The figures are there... go find them".
...

It is similarly ridiculous to say "Because some people capture and traffic women into sex slavery, therefore all kinds of prostitution is wrong".

I would have shared that view when starting this thread.
However the evidence seems to show that despite the intentions of laws legalising prostitution the result in a number of cases has always been an increase in trafficking of people. There is no reason I can see to see why an Irish law would not follow this if it is accepted as a norm in the process. The evidence seems to show this-

A top German law enforcement official has warned of a climbing number of human trafficking cases in the country with an 11-percent rise in the figure.


"Over the course of the last five years, the number of investigations has risen continuously from 317 to 534. This means an increase of 70 percent over five years and 11 percent last year alone. We attach great importance to this form of criminal activity because the human dignity of the victims is violated," said Jorg Ziercke, the Chief Commissioner of the Federal Criminal Police Office of Germany, Press TV reported Monday. http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/127565.html

Also this report concludes the same http://www2.vwl.wiso.uni-goettingen.de/courant-papers/CRC-PEG_DP_96.pdf after goin into detail on the consideration of this with the 'scale effect' of legalisation, i.e. more people will use prostitutes if it is legal thus trafficking will rise proportionally:

The likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution, thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn 2005).

also from same report

Additionally, Di Nicola et al. (2004) provide annual estimates of trafficking
victims used for sexual exploitation in Germany over the 1996 to 2003 period, which can shed
some light on the changing number of trafficked prostitutes. The estimates show that the
number of victims gradually declined between 1996/97, the first years of data collection, and
2001, when the minimum estimate was 9,870 and the maximum 19,740.31 However, this
number increased upon fully legalizing prostitution in 2002, as well as in 2003, rising to
11,080-22,160 and 12,350-24,700, respectively.32 This is consistent with our result from the
quantitative analysis indicating that the legalization of prostitution leads to an increase in
inward trafficking.

gcgirl

Just legalise it, it's the oldest profession and not everyone is trafficked, as one of the above stated where is the data concerning the guys selling their wears ? The tax would come in handy and it can be properly policed

The Corinthian

Good and interesting report. Nonetheless it is very balanced in that it fully admits that this correlation is by no means proven with certainty:

"Naturally, this qualitative evidence is also somewhat tentative as there is no “smoking gun” proving that the scale effect dominates the substitution effect and that the legalization of prostitution definitely increases inward trafficking flows."

More importantly it concludes:

"The likely negative consequences of legalized prostitution on a country’s inflows of human trafficking might be seen to support those who argue in favor of banning prostitution, thereby reducing the flows of trafficking (e.g., Outshoorn 2005). However, such line of argumentation overlooks potential benefits that the legalization of prostitution might have on those employed in the industry. Working conditions could be substantially improved for prostitutes – at least those legally employed – if prostitution is legalized. Prohibiting prostitution also raises tricky “freedom of choice” issues concerning both the potential suppliers and clients of prostitution services. A full evaluation of the costs and benefits, as well as of the broader merits of prohibiting prostitution, is beyond the scope of the present article."

And this is ultimately the core of the argument. Trafficking is only one facet of it, there is also the question of those who choose to work in the industry and the conditions under which they work, monitoring of health issues, taxation, insurance and so on.

In short, as with most 'solutions' the question of whether prostitution should be legalized or not will never be without negative consequences, only the solution that has the least negative consequences. It's like prohibiting alcohol because legalizing it will see a marked increase in road accidents (it will, but as 1920's America discovered, it was better than the alternative).

I do believe that studies such as these are important to the debate however and am not overly surprised that it did not originate from an Anglophone university.

nozzferrahhtoo

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

I would have shared that view when starting this thread.

The issue is that there are no useful figures or arguments to support the idea regulation is the cause of such increases. Correlation does not imply causation and your quote from a German Cop is not a "report" or "study" of any kind. It is merely an observation that a certain type of case has increased. The causes for that increase are not even speculated upon in the quote. Also note that the officer in question said the number of INVESTIGATIONS has increased. Not the number of convictions or cases solved. This does not, therefore, directly mean an increase in cases..... but can mean many other things such as an increase in people reporting the cases.... or an increase in resources to divert to making such investigations.

Corinthian raises the same objections essentially, as well as others, about the report you do link to however so I will not go over the same ground but as pointed out in the post above mine there are many parts of your report that support my position, not the counter one. It is a speculative report and little more though.

I think if the average punter has a choice between a slightly more expensive but credited, licensed, medically checked and professional option.... or a cheaper unlicensed illegal product in a back room through a scary pimp.... one can expect the majority to go with the former. There will always be some who will go with the latter but we need to deal with that separately. The same as we do for any product that has an illegal black market alternative.

But indicting an industry because a black market version of the industry exists is not a rational option in my opinion. We do not ban cigarettes and alcohol because louts down the end of Henry Street sell illegal black market cheaper alternatives of the same product. Why should we therefore do the same with prostitution?

miec

@nozzferrahhtoo

I was responding to this:

If you feel sex is a spiritual experience good for you but not everyone does so why should your morality be forced on other people when it doesnt concern anyone but the people involved.

I fail to see how my below comment is having a tantrum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miec
So should I say nothing? I thought this was a forum for debate on the subject.

It is. Which is why you should not say "nothing" but if you insist on saying something you should very much be prepared for people to debate your view or ask you to substantiate it, without having a tantrum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miec
First of I come from a belief that we have a mind, body and soul which interacts with each other and optimum health is when each of these interact as a whole.

I am with you as far as mind and body. But not sure what you mean by "soul". Is this not just another word for "mind" or are you trying to introduce some magic or metaphysics here?

Considering I see a distinction between mind and soul then the answer to your question is yes I am introducing magic / metaphysics if that is what you would like to call it.

nozzferrahhtoo

Tantrum, stamping your feet, throwing toys out of the pram, whatever you want to call it is irrelevant to me. The main point is that no one said you should "say nothing". They simply disagreed with you, which is what happens on a debate forum. If you think debate means something else, or if you can not handle when people disagree with you, then I simply question the wisdom of posting here at all. But certainly saying "I thought this was a debate forum" at someone who was debating you is not making much sense.

Being a debate forum it is expected that you might try and back up your claims and such too. So if you want to introduce some concept of souls then perhaps you would be so good as to evidence their existence before using them as a basis for argument.