Should the purchase of sex be legal or illegal in Ireland?

nozzferrahhtoo

smash wrote: »

Human trafficking.

The issue for me there is that generally what we appear to do with criminal elements within an industry.... is target and prosecute the criminal elements within the industry. I can not right now think of good examples of where we nuke the industry itself in order to blow up the criminals.

For example when famous high street clothing brands are found to be using under paid child slave labor..... those brands were targeted. No one appeared to stand up and call out to have clothing banned.

When horrific practices in the meat industry are found, the people engaged in them are targeted. The number of people pointing at the meat industry as a whole and demanding it's end are small, and shrill.

So why should it be any different in the trade of sex? If there are criminal elements in the sex industry, then we should target them with all the tools, legislation, regulation and justice that we can.

But jumping on the industry itself, indicting it with the crimes going on within it, and wanting to shut it down and make it illegal..... that just seems lazy and ill thought out to me.

Huntergonzo

Oh definitely illegal, because as we all know, once you make something illegal it instantly goes away thus solving the problem. I'm absolutely delighted to live in a completely prostitute free Ireland and I hope it always stays that way.

smash

Speedwell wrote: »

You know, I and others have addressed this argument multiple times. Boiled down, it consists of, "If sex work were legalized, you couldn't trap exploited sex workers by threatening them with a criminal record."

I don't think a criminal record has anything to do with it really. Even where legalised there are massive underlying issues with girls being forced in to the industry.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

The issue for me there is that generally what we appear to do with criminal elements within an industry.... is target and prosecute the criminal elements within the industry. I can not right now think of good examples of where we nuke the industry itself in order to blow up the criminals.

For example when famous high street clothing brands are found to be using under paid child slave labor..... those brands were targeted. No one appeared to stand up and call out to have clothing banned.

When horrific practices in the meat industry are found, the people engaged in them are targeted. The number of people pointing at the meat industry as a whole and demanding it's end are small, and shrill.

So why should it be any different in the trade of sex? If there are criminal elements in the sex industry, then we should target them with all the tools, legislation, regulation and justice that we can.

But jumping on the industry itself, indicting it with the crimes going on within it, and wanting to shut it down and make it illegal..... that just seems lazy and ill thought out to me.

I've already stated that it should be legalised but it would need a huge amount of support services and regulation. The problem is that these services and regulations would never be put in place, nor would they be adhered to.

esforum

Eramen wrote: »

I see that nobody commented on the issues I brought up about Saarland, Germany on page 5. As usual AH likes to seer well clear of factual discourse.

Plenty of European countries or regions have legalised prostitution to some extent. We need to look here for the evidence before we do anything because there are many negative social and public health issues you needs to take into consideration. Simply appealing to emotion and saying 'it's an agreement between consenting adults' is short-sighted and weak. The reason our government (and most others) haven't legalised it is because of the multifaceted problems associated with the legal sex trade.

For a start legal brothels are deeply unpopular among the Dutch. There have been a record number of closures due to the rise in organised crime using them to launder money and to force people into sexual slavery. There number of hotels and coffeeshops in the area is also being reduced via government policy. Again because of serious crime.

The operators of 18% of the licensed companies have a criminal record; while the managers of 49% of the licensed companies have a criminal record

Other considerations:

Only 5% of prostitutes are registered to pay tax in the Netherlands, with a similar number in Saarland - the public coffers argument goes out the window here.

The average age of a girl entering the sex trade is only 14 in the Netherlands

In 2008, six men were convicted of the "largest case of human trafficking ever brought to trial in the Netherlands."

According to the investigation: "some of the victims were compelled to have breast enlargement surgery, and one defendant was convicted of forcing at least one woman to have an abortion.


Rather look at the Swedish model which criminalises the buying and selling of sex, reducing the prevalence of prostitution, as well as the number of people trafficked into sex slavery. That some people think prostitution empowers a woman is laughable. It usually binds them into a life of servitude under various criminal enterprises.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/where-paying-for-sex-is-a-crime-prostitution-fell-attitudes-changed-235351.html

I did, you never answered

you cant compare a study of a legal trade with a criminal enterprise. You cant even compare two countries operating the same trade that effectively.

esforum

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Oh definitely illegal, because as we all know, once you make something illegal it instantly goes away thus solving the problem. I'm absolutely delighted to live in a completely prostitute free Ireland and I hope it always stays that way.

Except prostitution is actually legal

One eyed Jack

silverharp wrote: »

it might have some benefits . I'd imagine a society that banned prostitution (and actually enforced the ban) and porn would tend to have more rape or sexual violence. surely its better to give frustrated men an outlet? should a disabled man for instance be denied sex as one would assume paying for sex it is the only way it will happen for him?

That's a terrible argument silverharp and you know it - "Legeslate for prostitution or men will get frustrated and rape people"? I think we can give men more credit than that. I think we can also give women more credit than that, that they won't develop those tendencies either. Disabled people, I assure you, are not denied sex, have never been, unless by disabled you mean a cognitive disability? Some of them get ferociously horny, but under current law it is unlawful for anyone to have sex with them anyway.

But I think the more important thing is that realistically there will always be a demand for it so its about avoiding downsides rather than setting a high bar of social benefits. We live in a society where everything is presumed to be legal until its not , not the other way round.

Sure, there will always be a demand for it, but the issue of prostitution itself is a social issue, it's not just "two consenting adults" nonsense. We live in a society that's changing all the time, and while purchasing sex under certain conditions is legal now, as soon as we adopt the Swedish model, it won't be.

What should be happening is putting social supports in place so that young people do not see prostitution as a viable career choice, and they don't have to visit sex workers either because they are able to communicate effectively with their sexual partners.

nozzferrahhtoo

smash wrote: »

I've already stated that it should be legalised but it would need a huge amount of support services and regulation. The problem is that these services and regulations would never be put in place, nor would they be adhered to.

It would entirely be down to what the regulations were and how they were implemented.... as to how successful or adhered to they would be. I am quite optimistic that it COULD be done and done right. I would probably share your pessimism however that it WOULD be done and done right.

But even with that pessimism I still think it wrong to indict an entire industry with the crimes of elements within it. For me at least, and YMMV, the arguments to make something illegal need to be made on the merits or demerits of that something..... not the potential for someone to abuse it.

For those making that argument though, if trafficking of sex workers is going to happen however, I am not seeing how making the legitimate sex trade illegal will address those concerns. Whereas at least making it legal and regulated gives us tools and procedures to at least make the attempt.

I think targeting the consumer in some ways is the right way to go about it. Not by making the consumer a criminal, as some have suggested on the thread, but in implementing regulation that will genuinely compel the user to WANT to purchase sex from a legitimate conscientious source.

If, for example, I wanted to purchase sex this evening and I went cruising the websites......... and website 1 had a girl I liked but was not regulated or licensed......... and website 2 had a girl I liked who was licensed......... and I knew as a consumer that that licensing involves compulsory regular doctor visits to check for her general well being, infection with sexual diseases, and a private session where she is interviewed about whether she is in the sex trade openly and willingly and not under coercion........... I have genuine reasons related to my well being, her well being, and conformity to law......... to go with the legitimate licensed practitioner.

In an underground industry unregulated I have NONE of that to compel or entice me into sourcing the service conscientiously or legitimately.

So my position remains on the thread in general that 1) am not seeing any arguments against the morality or ethics of the sex trade in and of itself and 2) what concerns people DO have about workers in that trade appear to be concerns that legalization with proper regulation will address better than criminalization of the seller or the buyer.

Speedwell

That's a terrible argument silverharp and you know it - "Legeslate for prostitution or men will get frustrated and rape people"

Dead on. Rapists are violent criminals, not normal men deranged by severe horniness.

Huntergonzo

esforum wrote: »

Except prostitution is actually legal

Well legalish, but it's a very covert industry in Ireland, there's a lot of offenses attached to it, we're not exactly like Amsterdam over here.

smash

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

It would entirely be down to what the regulations were and how they were implemented.... as to how successful or adhered to they would be. I am quite optimistic that it COULD be done and done right. I would probably share your pessimism however that it WOULD be done and done right.

But even with that pessimism I still think it wrong to indict an entire industry with the crimes of elements within it. For me at least, and YMMV, the arguments to make something illegal need to be made on the merits or demerits of that something..... not the potential for someone to abuse it.

Has it actually been successful anywhere in the world on a large scale? As far as I'm aware, it has not.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

For those making that argument though, if trafficking of sex workers is going to happen however, I am not seeing how making the legitimate sex trade illegal will address those concerns. Whereas at least making it legal and regulated gives us tools and procedures to at least make the attempt.

Given the severity of the emotional and mental impact the act of being a prostitute will have on someone's life(as well as the medical/physical health issues), is it ever ok to suggest that we should "at least make the attempt"? Even where legalised there are enormous issues with human trafficking and forced sex work, even in regulated businesses.

silverharp

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's a terrible argument silverharp and you know it - "Legeslate for prostitution or men will get frustrated and rape people"? I think we can give men more credit than that. I think we can also give women more credit than that, that they won't develop those tendencies either. Disabled people, I assure you, are not denied sex, have never been, unless by disabled you mean a cognitive disability? Some of them get ferociously horny, but under current law it is unlawful for anyone to have sex with them anyway.

My stance is 95% on the criminal aspects of it and the fact that as sex is a strong biological need a market will always be there. Its not a case of legislate or else but it is a case if you cheapen access to sex, it becomes less of an issue. Contrast that with our Islamic friends.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Sure, there will always be a demand for it, but the issue of prostitution itself is a social issue, it's not just "two consenting adults" nonsense. We live in a society that's changing all the time, and while purchasing sex under certain conditions is legal now, as soon as we adopt the Swedish model, it won't be.

What should be happening is putting social supports in place so that young people do not see prostitution as a viable career choice, and they don't have to visit sex workers either because they are able to communicate effectively with their sexual partners.

what supports? If people want quick money , based on no skills or effort on their part there will tend to be a supply. On the other side there might be some failure behind it or again just convenience.

Eramen

esforum wrote: »

I did, you never answered

you cant compare a study of a legal trade with a criminal enterprise. You cant even compare two countries operating the same trade that effectively.

You can compare them when they heavily intersect in given circumstances and the Dutch, Germans and Swedish already do. The line you've drawn between legal and illegal in terms of the prostitution industry doesn't exist. It's a mixed bag that needs to be taken as a whole if you want to enact policy, reform and penalties.

I seen your response, and I've no plans to provide you with anything. You can get all this yourself if you're interested in constructing anything else other than a biased worldview.

Yamanoto

Eramen wrote: »

The average age of a girl entering the sex trade is only 14 in the Netherlands

Hell of a statistic, but you provide no source.

Olishi4

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Are you forgetting people are individuals here for a reason? Or do you just genuinely forget?

Oh right sorry. So sex work is "sexual liberation", "a right to choice", "empowering" and allows people to be "individuals" and something they are proud of. A few of the comments made in this thread.

Don't forget yourself that it is part of a job to promote it. You would hardly ever hear a business person say they are ashamed of their own business. You really think the majority of sex workers are proud and enjoy it and it is a positive for their career and life? I don't buy that part of them either. Probably some do, but I'm more concerned about the sex workers that are negatively impacted which IMO there are going to be more of because of the nature of the "profession".

Speedwell

Olishi4 wrote: »

Oh right sorry. So sex work is "sexual liberation", "a right to choice", "empowering" and allows people to be "individuals" and something they are proud of. A few of the comments made in this thread.

Don't forget yourself that it is part of a job to promote it. You would hardly ever hear a business person say they are ashamed of their own business. You really think the majority of sex workers are proud and enjoy it and it is a positive for their career and life? I don't buy that part of them either. Probably some do, but I'm more concerned about the sex workers that are negatively impacted which IMO there are going to be more of because of the nature of the "profession".

The nature of the profession, today, is that sex workers are shamed for what they do. If that were to go away, who would consider their sex work something to be ashamed of? I think that's really what people who want to criminalize sex work are afraid of, that sex workers won't feel guilt for being sexual "deviants".

Olishi4

Speedwell wrote: »

The nature of the profession, today, is that sex workers are shamed for what they do. If that were to go away, who would consider their sex work something to be ashamed of? I think that's really what people who want to criminalize sex work are afraid of, that sex workers won't feel guilt for being sexual "deviants".

People will feel shame naturally by having sex with someone they are not attracted to.

One eyed Jack

Speedwell wrote: »

Indirect impact. And if it were legalized... then the legality problem goes away, no?

Legislation to criminalise, or decriminalise the sex industry in Ireland, has a direct impact upon Irish society as a whole, but it has an indirect impact on individuals who choose to abide by the law anyway, in that the law doesn't directly affect them. Those individuals who think they are above the law, would be directly impacted by the enforcement of the law if they are found to be in contravention of the law.

That's why it doesn't take a whole lot of resources to police the current laws as they are, and it wouldn't take a whole lot of resources to police the Swedish model when it is introduced.

In contrast to that - facilitating the sex industry and attempting to regulate the industry would cost the State far more than it's worth. We keep hearing these figures of revenue generated, but in order for that to happen, sex workers would have to be resident and paying tax in Ireland. There aren't too many Irish residents are interested in a career in prostitution which generally only averages about four years (let's not include the ould one we all know who's still going strong, we're talking about the average career lifespan of sex workers here!), after which they experience burnout. Many of them have no education or transferable skills to be able to do anything else, and so they become the State's problem, again.

The lucky few, the elite, the cream of the crop - the sex workers who are well educated, affluent, top tier charlie sheen level sex workers by choice, are an incredibly rare breed, and they have the transferable skills and so on to be able to stay in, or transfer out of the industry as they please, they don't have to worry about their future employment prospects or anything else.

If people want to get into the sex industry, they're going to do it regardless of whether it's fully decriminalised or not, and that is their choice, but society, instead of encouraging and allowing for, and facilitating that choice, should be focused on enabling people and giving them more choices so that they aren't choosing the sex industry out of necessity. Society shouldn't be charged with the duty of cleaning up people's messes after they've already two-fingered society by saying as much as "you're not the boss of me, I'll do what I like". And that's fine, people will do what they like, but society should have no obligation then to facilitate those people doing what they like if they already think they're above the laws of that society that everyone else has to abide by the same as they should have to do.

silverharp wrote: »

My stance is 95% on the criminal aspects of it and the fact that as sex is a strong biological need a market will always be there. Its not a case of legislate or else but it is a case if you cheapen access to sex, it becomes less of an issue. Contrast that with our Islamic friends.

But sex is already freely available, to anyone! It's prostitution that creates an artificial demand for putting a value on something that anyone can get for free! The last time I checked, sex workers were still human beings, and as such didn't possess any mystical powers that other human being don't already possess. The sex industry makes an issue where there is none. There was a point in the sex industry's existence when we lived in a society where people were not as liberated as they are now, but that time is gone, society has moved on, and the sex industry simply isn't necessary in Western society any more! Our Islamic friends have a bit of catching up to do, sure, but we don't have to go backwards to their level where we imagine sex is this thing that is a limited resource and therefore market forces dictate that it becomes artificially inflated to jack up the price, when really it's freely available to anyone!

That's how marketing works, that's how they were able to monetise bottled water even though 70% of the planet is covered in it!

silverharp wrote: »

what supports? If people want quick money , based on no skills or effort on their part there will tend to be a supply. On the other side there might be some failure behind it or again just convenience.

Social supports as was mentioned in one of the videos earlier on this thread. Sweden introduced the law, without introducing any social supports, and that's why it's gone so badly wrong. We'll likely do the same because the cost of these social supports is far more than it costs to police prostitution, and far less than it costs to regulate the industry. Give people the skills and the opportunities so that they can support themselves long term, because sex work isn't the quick and easy money many people think it is, and that's why they fail, because they don't have that many options open to them from an early age. It's no use trying to tackle the issue when people are adults - it has to be tackled long before that, to have any future long term benefits for all of society, not just the minority of the population that visit sex workers, or the vast majority of tourist sex workers that come here to work for a few months and then fcuk off home again having contributed nothing to the Irish economy.

Speedwell

Olishi4 wrote: »

People will feel shame naturally by having sex with someone they are not attracted to.

Then they won't want to do sex work, will they? So if they feel like they are forced into it, they'll be able to seek assistance without feeling trapped by the need to confess to crimes. So people sleep around, or do it for money, in a period of necessity. How much more shameful is it to have to live with a criminal record?

Olishi4

Speedwell wrote: »

Then they won't want to do sex work, will they? So if they feel like they are forced into it, they'll be able to seek assistance without feeling trapped by the need to confess to crimes. So people sleep around, or do it for money, in a period of necessity. How much more shameful is it to have to live with a criminal record?

Exactly, then they won't want to do it. But some still do.

I never said that it should be a crime for the sex worker. I guess what you are doing there is actually putting forward the point (although not intended) for making it illegal for the client which has been discussed on this thread and I am not close minded with that idea.

One eyed Jack

Speedwell wrote: »

Then they won't want to do sex work, will they? So if they feel like they are forced into it, they'll be able to seek assistance without feeling trapped by the need to confess to crimes. So people sleep around, or do it for money, in a period of necessity. How much more shameful is it to have to live with a criminal record?

That's the whole point of the Swedish model though - is that the seller won't be criminalised, but the buyer will. The other thing I don't think you're acknowledging is that many of the sex workers are from other countries where their first language isn't english, so their ability to seek assistance in a country they know nothing about is somewhat hampered by the fact they also don't speak the language (you asked earlier about asking them were they trafficked, they may not be able to tell you simply because they don't understand what you're saying!).

silverharp

One eyed Jack wrote: »

But sex is already freely available, to anyone! It's prostitution that creates an artificial demand for putting a value on something that anyone can get for free! The last time I checked, sex workers were still human beings, and as such didn't possess any mystical powers that other human being don't already possess. The sex industry makes an issue where there is none. There was a point in the sex industry's existence when we lived in a society where people were not as liberated as they are now, but that time is gone, society has moved on, and the sex industry simply isn't necessary in Western society any more! Our Islamic friends have a bit of catching up to do, sure, but we don't have to go backwards to their level where we imagine sex is this thing that is a limited resource and therefore market forces dictate that it becomes artificially inflated to jack up the price, when really it's freely available to anyone!

That's how marketing works, that's how they were able to monetise bottled water even though 70% of the planet is covered in it!

but that's presumptuous on your part. Its like saying you don't need weed, do a trail run, the buzz is better than any artificial chemical

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Social supports as was mentioned in one of the videos earlier on this thread. Sweden introduced the law, without introducing any social supports, and that's why it's gone so badly wrong. We'll likely do the same because the cost of these social supports is far more than it costs to police prostitution, and far less than it costs to regulate the industry. Give people the skills and the opportunities so that they can support themselves long term, because sex work isn't the quick and easy money many people think it is, and that's why they fail, because they don't have that many options open to them from an early age. It's no use trying to tackle the issue when people are adults - it has to be tackled long before that, to have any future long term benefits for all of society, not just the minority of the population that visit sex workers, or the vast majority of tourist sex workers that come here to work for a few months and then fcuk off home again having contributed nothing to the Irish economy.

but nobody knows who future sex workers are going to be , if they include girls going to college its not people in dire straits , its just a choice to make a credit card debt go away or what not. I assume a lot are not even from the host country so it wouldn't be Ireland's problem to sort in this case.

ofcork

But sex is already freely available, to anyone! It's prostitution that creates an artificial demand for putting a value on something that anyone can get for free! The last time I checked, sex workers were still human beings, and as such didn't possess any mystical powers that other human being don't already possess. The sex industry makes an issue where there is none. There was a point in the sex industry's existence when we lived in a society where people were not as liberated as they are now, but that time is gone, society has moved on, and the sex industry simply isn't necessary in Western society any more! Our Islamic friends have a bit of catching up to do, sure, but we don't have to go backwards to their level where we imagine sex is this thing that is a limited resource and therefore market forces dictate that it becomes artificially inflated to jack up the price, when really it's freely available to anyone!

If sex was freely available you wouldnt have prostitution alot of guys are not confident when it comes to women so live a life of frustration otherwise.

Yeah_Right

smash wrote: »

Has it actually been successful anywhere in the world on a large scale? As far as I'm aware, it has not.


Given the severity of the emotional and mental impact the act of being a prostitute will have on someone's life(as well as the medical/physical health issues), is it ever ok to suggest that we should "at least make the attempt"? Even where legalised there are enormous issues with human trafficking and forced sex work, even in regulated businesses.

Prostitution has been legal in NZ for over a decade now and as far as I have heard/seen, there haven't been any big problems. Apart from the odd controversy about a suburban brothel being near a school (I think that's been regulated against now) it doesn't seem to make it on to any major NZ news sites. The last article I remember reading about the sex industry in NZ was something to do with planning permission during renovations or around liquor licensing.

nozzferrahhtoo

smash wrote: »

Has it actually been successful anywhere in the world on a large scale? As far as I'm aware, it has not.

Which is where my pessimism is rooted. But as I said I am optimistic it could be done if done right. Has such an attempt even been made? I am not aware that it has either. EDIT: But as per the post from another user above, it seems I have to investigate the NZ model further. I admit I know nothing about the industry in that country.

smash wrote: »

Given the severity of the emotional and mental impact the act of being a prostitute

I have not seen anyone establish what those things are. They appear mostly to be assumed, usually based on people citing the impact of being FORCED into it rather than open and honest evaluations of people who CHOSE it. So I am not sure your "given" is... well... a given

smash wrote: »

will have on someone's life(as well as the medical/physical health issues), is it ever ok to suggest that we should "at least make the attempt"?

Given the severity of the emotional and mental impact the act of being forced into prostitution has, or being a prostitute in an underground or illegal industry, is it ever ok NOT to suggest that we make our best attempts to rectify or mediate as best we can the current realities?

smash wrote: »

Even where legalised there are enormous issues with human trafficking and forced sex work, even in regulated businesses.

Then we need to explore why and how that is, why regulation has failed to address it, whether regulation can be improved to address it and so forth. Alas I am seeing no actual details here from people pointing out that trafficking occurs? Where? Under what regulations exactly? How did trafficking change exactly before and after the regulation in question? How were the regulations enforced or policed, if at all? And so forth.

These are DETAILS we would need to be able to discuss it meaningfully. Otherwise we are just engaging with vague hand waving without any actual specifics.

nozzferrahhtoo

Olishi4 wrote: »

Oh right sorry. So sex work is "sexual liberation", "a right to choice", "empowering" and allows people to be "individuals" and something they are proud of. A few of the comments made in this thread.

By all means take comments you disagree with up with the people who made them. As I said NONE of these things, I am not sure why you are replying to me with them instead of.... say.... replying to the actual questions and comments I directed at you myself.

Olishi4 wrote: »

I'm more concerned about the sex workers that are negatively impacted which IMO there are going to be more of because of the nature of the "profession".

I have those concerns too. Let us not pretend I do not. The issue is I see nothing in making the sex trade illegal that will address those concerns. I see some aspects of making it illegal that EXACERBATE those concerns. And I see at least the POTENTIAL to address those concerns in a regulated and legal industry.

So while people are citing those concerns, I see little in their comments to suggest they are actually interested in alleviating or addressing those concerns..... so much as they appear to merely by happy to use those concerns to legitimize their anti prostitution position.

Speedwell

ofcork wrote: »

But sex is already freely available... If sex was freely available...

Uh huh.

MarkAnthony

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

their anti prostitution position.

Legs crossed, arms folded?

Olishi4

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

By all means take comments you disagree with up with the people who made them. As I said NONE of these things, I am not sure why you are replying to me with them instead of.... say.... replying to the actual questions and comments I directed at you myself.



I have those concerns too. Let us not pretend I do not. The issue is I see nothing in making the sex trade illegal that will address those concerns. I see some aspects of making it illegal that EXACERBATE those concerns. And I see at least the POTENTIAL to address those concerns in a regulated and legal industry.

So while people are citing those concerns, I see little in their comments to suggest they are actually interested in alleviating or addressing those concerns..... so much as they appear to merely by happy to use those concerns to legitimize their anti prostitution position.

Read the thread and that is the message that people seem to be giving. When I am making a point, it is not always about you or what you said directly. If you don't understand the point, fine but it's a waste of time explaining in detail every single sentence. Sexual liberation, empowerment etc. have been associated with sex work in the thread. YOU spoke about right to choice and implied that criminalizing it was suppressing people's right to individuality.

They are the problems that you cannot see. These are the issues. Glamorising it. If a sex worker is negatively effected by the work, they have nowhere to go if society is telling them that it is a good thing.

The fact of it being made illegal, validates a person who it is having a negative effect on and let's not pretend that the negative effect is not the experience for the majority of sex workers.

smash

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Which is where my pessimism is rooted. But as I said I am optimistic it could be done if done right. Has such an attempt even been made? I am not aware that it has either. EDIT: But as per the post from another user above, it seems I have to investigate the NZ model further. I admit I know nothing about the industry in that country.

I have not seen anyone establish what those things are. They appear mostly to be assumed, usually based on people citing the impact of being FORCED into it rather than open and honest evaluations of people who CHOSE it. So I am not sure your "given" is... well... a given

Given the severity of the emotional and mental impact the act of being forced into prostitution has, or being a prostitute in an underground or illegal industry, is it ever ok NOT to suggest that we make our best attempts to rectify or mediate as best we can the current realities?

Then we need to explore why and how that is, why regulation has failed to address it, whether regulation can be improved to address it and so forth. Alas I am seeing no actual details here from people pointing out that trafficking occurs? Where? Under what regulations exactly? How did trafficking change exactly before and after the regulation in question? How were the regulations enforced or policed, if at all? And so forth.

These are DETAILS we would need to be able to discuss it meaningfully. Otherwise we are just engaging with vague hand waving without any actual specifics.

There was a documentary on C4, I think it was called mega brothel or super brothel. It was based on the largest brothel chain in Germany. It interviewed staff, customers and prostitutes. Even though it was a C4 doc it was informative. Worth a watch!

Edit:

There is “absolutely” a correlation between legalised prostitution and trafficking, says Andrea Matolcsi, the programme officer for sexual violence and trafficking at Equality Now. “For a trafficker it’s much easier to go to a country where it’s legal to have brothels and it’s legal to manage people in prostitution. It’s just a more attractive environment.”

http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/projects/welcome-to-paradise/

esforum

Eramen wrote: »

You can compare them when they heavily intersect in given circumstances and the Dutch, Germans and Swedish already do. The line you've drawn between legal and illegal in terms of the prostitution industry doesn't exist. It's a mixed bag that needs to be taken as a whole if you want to enact policy, reform and penalties.

what line have I drawn? I have dealt with a lot of prostitutes, some as a result of drugs, some pushed by pimps and others voluntary. Some Irish, many not. I am basing my opinion on those interactions.

Eramen wrote: »

I seen your response, and I've no plans to provide you with anything. You can get all this yourself if you're interested in constructing anything else other than a biased worldview.

Generally when someone makes a statement in a debate, they are required to provide some proof to back it up, not expect the other side of the debate to go research evidence they neither accept nor believe.

That would be like telling an athiest to go and research proof of god!