The myth of 'the happy hooker' is dispelled

Ulysses Gaze

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Making prostitution legal hasn't had the intended effect of making prostitution safer either for the women or the men who work in the industry. It's not a question of telling people what they can and can't do with their own bodies, people are free to do whatever they want with their own bodies, and other people are free to campaign for an end to prostitution by means of not allowing for it to be facilitated by the State. If people still want to do whatever they want to do with their own bodies, knowing that the State does not facilitate prostitution, then that's their responsibility, and not something that the rest of society can be held responsible for.

As compared to prostitution being illegal?

Do you have any proof of this? Any statistical evidence to back it up?

Blitzkrieger

Flower124 wrote: »

The point is that many of these people are trafficked and are working against their will.

Prove it.

The last time we were told about the huge numbers of women being traded as sex slaves in Holland it was made up. They found a few, reasoned that there must be some they didn't find, then picked a massive number out of the air that suited their agenda. It doesn't work that way.

Prove it.

There are women (and men) who want to be prostitutes. Without being forced or coerced. Who are intelligent and educated and have other options and still want to be paid (large amounts of) money for sex. Not everybody in the world shares the moral view that this is wrong. I think they should be allowed to do what they want with their own body.

Now if this was only about slavery and trafficking we'd all be supporting you. If you tell us how we can help fight against that rather than preach at us we'll all be a lot happier.

GritBiscuit

Yamanoto wrote: »

Odd how so many proponents of 'Repeal the 8th' on the Left are the very same folks who'd shout down, dismiss & label as gullible victims, women who freely choose sex work as something that suits them for however long they so wish.

Seems you can only be a strong & independent woman, once it fits in nicely with prevailing third-wave orthodoxy.

Is it any odder than the pro-prostitution/anti-repeal lot? Or the pro-8th/anti-welfare lot? Or any of the other weird and wonderful pairings voters convince themselves aren't at complete odds with each other?

Meh. Politics is chock full of hypocrites. IME wanting both legal, legislated for and safer would be the prevailing view of the repealers I know.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

I think the point of the article is though that it’s not a safe legal environment. Legal yes, safe, no. And what would be the definition of “most”

I find it interesting the way that people believe that just because something is made legal, that it will suddenly become safe for those involved. The legalisation of prostitution was a first step, with many more steps involved in providing protection to those people involved. But it's far better than what went before.

By making it legal, it’s allowed the traffickers and pimps operate under a cloak of legality. But it hasn’t made it safe and protected the vulnerable like those in the article. It’s protected the punters, not the workers.

Really depends on how it's done. There are major differences in how, say Germany approaches its prostitution (which frankly is far bigger than Holland), compared to other countries.

And it's silly to believe that legalising prostitution protects the punters, not the workers. The workers now have legal rights, have the ability to register as a business, can call for police protection, have legal forms of redress against "punters" who break the law etc. Never mind that they won't be arrested and abused by the police themselves.

The article references the increasing number of trafficking cases coming up before the Dutch Courts so much so that they are finding it necessary to look into and possibly revise the legislation. They are doing this not because it’s working, but because clearly it’s not.

If the cultural and economic landscape of Europe wasn't changing, I'd be inclined to agree with you, but Europe is seeing unprecedented migration which floods countries with people living on the borders of our societies. Oh, sure the government makes the gesture of providing limited resources or rights to migrants, but if you look at the sex industry, those most at risk tend to be those from other countries, or with uncertain legal rights.

The legalised prostitution system isn't perfect. It needs to be improved upon, not scrapped. But legalised prostitution at least sets a system in place to do the research needed, and determine what needs to be done... although more likely people will continue wanting to push it into the background rather than actually dealing with the problems.

Hector Bellend

everlast75 wrote: »

I'd say there's at least one happy hooker in Ireland after the win yesterday...

Even they have to sell their arse every now and again

Pepefrogok

Why is prostitution illegal yet making a porn movie is not? So you can pay a woman to have sex but only if you video it and sell the video? Dosent make sense.

Day Lewin

You can't prove any of this except by interviewing the sex workers themselves, a right-across-the-board representative sample. And in countries where it is illegal - (a lot) they won't be very willing to tell.

Nor will they be very eager to report abuse, since they can be prosecuted: this general secrecy feeds right into the hands of pimps and traffickers.

It can be very good money for a service that is always in demand: it is madness imo to keep it illegal.
Safer for everyone if it is regulated - and then they can also pay tax!

ToddyDoody

...good name fo a rugby pub tho

Sleeper12

I've met a couple few escorts over the years. I owned a security company doing pubs and nightclubs and you meet all sorts. I've never met one that said that they didn't love the job or the job was great. Having said that I've never met one that didn't have a serious coke or drink problem.

My own thoughts is that deep down they dislike what they do and & dislike themselves for doing it. The drink & coke are their way of coping. That's my amateur shrink diagnosis anyway.

I've no idea about trafficking. The girls I met were all Irish. I'm all for letting them earn money that way if they want but they definitely weren't happy hookers. All had serious issues. The happy hookers thing is in the clients imagination imo. It is easier to fool yourself that you aren't exploiting someone by believing she loves her job

One eyed Jack

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

As compared to prostitution being illegal?

Do you have any proof of this? Any statistical evidence to back it up?

Do I have any proof that making prostitution legal hasn't had the intended effect of making prostitution safer? Well yes, the evidence in other countries has shown that it was a well intended social experiment that appears to have gone horribly wrong -


Does legalised prostitution increase human trafficking?


Abstract


This paper investigates the impact of legalized prostitution on human trafficking inflows. According to economic theory, there are two opposing effects of unknown magnitude. The scale effect of legalized prostitution leads to an expansion of the prostitution market, increasing human trafficking, while the substitution effect reduces demand for trafficked women as legal prostitutes are favored over trafficked ones. Our empirical analysis for a cross-section of up to 150 countries shows that the scale effect dominates the substitution effect. On average, countries where prostitution is legal experience larger reported human trafficking inflows.

_Dara_

Yamanoto wrote: »

Odd how so many proponents of 'Repeal the 8th' on the Left are the very same folks who'd shout down, dismiss & label as gullible victims, women who freely choose sex work as something that suits them for however long they so wish.

Seems you can only be a strong & independent woman, once it fits in nicely with prevailing third-wave orthodoxy.

How many people have you met that hold both of the above stances?

I don’t think many of the above people think women working in prostitution are gullible, it’s more that it’s likely that even many women entering it of their free will are probably not happy about that. It’s likely hastened by desperate circumstances in many cases. That doesn’t sit well with many people understandably. I certainly don’t judge any prostitutes and I’ve had some up close encounters with some. I did and still do wonder about their lives though and what got them to that point.

Stonedpilot

Flower124 wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5376077/Amsterdam-call-time-myth-happy-hooker.html

A female prostitute in Amsterdam speaks out about being trafficked, being held against her will, forced to have sex with out condoms for 12 hours a day, and speaks of people urinating on her and hurtig her and beating her. Very sad.

What a stupid law. Suspect of being trafficked?. How would someone know. Field day in courts

snotboogie

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Do I have any proof that making prostitution legal hasn't had the intended effect of making prostitution safer? Well yes, the evidence in other countries has shown that it was a well intended social experiment that appears to have gone horribly wrong -


Does legalised prostitution increase human trafficking?


Abstract


This paper investigates the impact of legalized prostitution on human trafficking inflows. According to economic theory, there are two opposing effects of unknown magnitude. The scale effect of legalized prostitution leads to an expansion of the prostitution market, increasing human trafficking, while the substitution effect reduces demand for trafficked women as legal prostitutes are favored over trafficked ones. Our empirical analysis for a cross-section of up to 150 countries shows that the scale effect dominates the substitution effect. On average, countries where prostitution is legal experience larger reported human trafficking inflows.

What an interesting place to end your quote.... why don't I finish it for you:

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. The problem here lies in the clandestine nature of both the prostitution and trafficking markets, making it difficult, perhaps impossible, to find hard evidence establishing this relationship. Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny. More research in this area is definitely warranted, but it will require the collection of more reliable data to establish firmer conclusions.
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 a 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.

One eyed Jack

snotboogie wrote: »

What an interesting place to end your quote.... why don't I finish it for you:.

I only cited the abstract as a starting point, feel free to quote the other 49 pages if you like. It wouldn't be any more interesting than it wasn't before. The point is that human trafficking is only one aspect of legalising prostitution, and it's one of the most negative aspects of legalising prostitution, so in that respect, it certainly doesn't make prostitution safer for women, it puts women at even greater risk.

I could reference citations all day on the subject, and still those who believe legalising prostitution would make it safer for the women and men who work in the sex industry, and no amount of evidence will overcome that belief because hey, they can find one happy hooker on twitter or whatever. Well yes, if someone is selling you a service, it stands to reason that they're going to say they're happy to sell you that service. They'd be a shìt salesperson otherwise and wouldn't make a whole lot of money.

Sleeper12

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I've no idea about trafficking. The girls I met were all Irish. I'm all for letting them earn money that way if they want but they definitely weren't happy hookers. All had serious issues. The happy hookers thing is in the clients imagination imo. It is easier to fool yourself that you aren't exploiting someone by believing she loves her job

I doubt anyone is suggesting that they're skipping down the street singing happily on the way to work.

I've also known a variety of escorts or hookers in a number of countries. Some were young students paying their own way through university, students looking for extra cash, or young women with little to no education just looking to survive. None of them ever described what they did in glowing terms. They spoke about what they wanted from life, their ability to get it (through sex), and the "nice" men they met through it. I've seen them with their bruises too, although they tended to dismiss those experiences as being rare.

I also know women who have married ugly/older men for the financial support that they or their families received. Or the women that dated men for the financial benefits rather than any actual liking of the guy (not that they're honest about it).

I think anyone that is offering sex for money is going to have some issues. I remember two women I knew who said they couldn't orgasm (or gain any pleasure) from sex but saw sex as being a great way to make money. It's definitely warped from my perception, but then I haven't had to live their lives.

snotboogie

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I only cited the abstract as a starting point, feel free to quote the other 49 pages if you like. It wouldn't be any more interesting than it wasn't before. The point is that human trafficking is only one aspect of legalising prostitution, and it's one of the most negative aspects of legalising prostitution, so in that respect, it certainly doesn't make prostitution safer for women, it puts women at even greater risk.

I could reference citations all day on the subject, and still those who believe legalising prostitution would make it safer for the women and men who work in the sex industry, and no amount of evidence will overcome that belief because hey, they can find one happy hooker on twitter or whatever. Well yes, if someone is selling you a service, it stands to reason that they're going to say they're happy to sell you that service. They'd be a shìt salesperson otherwise and wouldn't make a whole lot of money.

I quoted the conclusion, which acknowledges the blatently obvious fact that if prostitution is legalized there will be greater incidences of reporting trafficking. It also talks about the better working conditions under legalization. This paper does not say that legalization makes prostitution less safe, it says that legalization means greater incidences of reporting of human trafficking.

suicide_circus

Ideally we all have a chance at the pursuit of happiness. But actually attaining happiness is guaranteed to no one.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I only cited the abstract as a starting point, feel free to quote the other 49 pages if you like. It wouldn't be any more interesting than it wasn't before. The point is that human trafficking is only one aspect of legalising prostitution, and it's one of the most negative aspects of legalising prostitution, so in that respect, it certainly doesn't make prostitution safer for women, it puts women at even greater risk.

Only in terms of trafficking, whereas multiple studies/reports show that prostitutes are significantly better protected, that violence & abuse decreases, HIV spread decreases, etc. It's also noteworthy that rape cases drop by quite a percentage when Prostitution zones are in effect... so it suggests that prostitution does reduce the risk to women in general.

It makes sense increase the measures that are effective against trafficking while also encouraging a better environment for the existing population of prostitutes, which frankly, are not going to disappear simply because the law does.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Only in terms of trafficking, whereas multiple studies/reports show that prostitutes are significantly better protected, that violence & abuse decreases, HIV spread decreases, etc. It's also noteworthy that rape cases drop by quite a percentage when Prostitution zones are in effect... so it suggests that prostitution does reduce the risk to women in general.

It makes sense increase the measures that are effective against trafficking while also encouraging a better environment for the existing population of prostitutes, which frankly, are not going to disappear simply because the law does.

Well yeah, I would agree that in an ideal society that there would be no issues with prostitution, and of course there are multiple studies which provide evidence that better conditions make prostitution safer for some women, but those studies not only ignore the fact that we don't live in an ideal society, they also ignore the fact that for the vast, vast majority of people, the outcomes of prostitution whether legal or illegal, are overwhelmingly negative.

Of course prostitution isn't going to disappear simply because the law is changed to make the purchase of sex illegal, but what that does do is it tends to make prostitution a less viable prospect for people who are considering putting themselves at risk to earn some fast, easy money, and of course it criminalises people who seek to exploit those people who are considering prostitution as a way to make money.

professore

I think any stats on trafficking in legal vs illegal countries are going to be suspect. The illegal countries tend to be the more conservative sweep it under the carpet type countries like Ireland that don't keep proper stats whereas the legal countries actually care about keeping accurate stats. For example in 1950s Ireland there was no child sex abuse according to the official stats but we know now how untrue that was.

It's not Illegal to shag someone else's wife or husband and destroy a family in the process, so I fail to see why consensual sex for money should be illegal. The state has no more right to be involved than in the case of infidelity, except maybe for tax collection.

For the same reason drug addicts or selling drugs in a controlled regulated environment shouldn't be criminalised either.

Trafficking and coercion absolutely - this needs to be stamped on hard.

Mutant z

Yes there are cases of trafficking and that needs to be stomped out but the overwhelming majority of sex workers do it willingly and are quite happy about it what consenting adults do is no one else's business but the consenting adults involved.

One eyed Jack

professore wrote: »

I think any stats on trafficking in legal vs illegal countries are going to be suspect. The illegal countries tend to be the more conservative sweep it under the carpet type countries like Ireland that don't keep proper stats whereas the legal countries actually care about keeping accurate stats. For example in 1950s Ireland there was no child sex abuse according to the official stats but we know now how untrue that was.

Dunno 'bout that now. When the Swedish model was introduced in... Sweden, statistics relating to how they recorded incidents of rape were also changed, and incidents of reported and recorded rapes shot up astronomically -

Rape in Sweden


It's also had the unintended effect of handing those people who argue against mass immigration, their argument on a plate -


Sweden: Rape Capital of the West

professore

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Dunno 'bout that now. When the Swedish model was introduced in... Sweden, statistics relating to how they recorded incidents of rape were also changed, and incidents of reported and recorded rapes shot up astronomically -

Rape in Sweden


It's also had the unintended effect of handing those people who argue against mass immigration, their argument on a plate -


Sweden: Rape Capital of the West

Sweden is a special case. They are quite puritanical there. And isn't buying sex illegal there? So prostitution is still criminalised from one side.

professore

Mutant z wrote: »

Yes there are cases of trafficking and that needs to be stomped out but the overwhelming majority of sex workers do it willingly and are quite happy about it what consenting adults do is no one else's business but the consenting adults involved.

I'm not sure how anyone can really know what % do it willingly. I certainly couldn't even make an educated guess.

Hector Bellend

Men like fanny.

Women like money.

This should be a no brainer.

One eyed Jack

professore wrote: »

Sweden is a special case. They are quite puritanical there. And isn't buying sex illegal there? So prostitution is still criminalised from one side.

I don't agree that Sweden is in any way a special case. The purchase of sex (the Swedish model) is illegal there now not only because of the history of prostitution in Sweden (it hasn't gone well), but also because of politics rather than puritanism. I mean, you said it was conservatives that sweep prostitution under the carpet and want to pretend it doesn't exist, but I don't think the politics of prostitution are quite that simple. One wouldn't normally associate puritanism with liberalism, and hasn't Europe at least had a long history of being influenced by more liberal ideas?

It's because of liberalism rather than conservativism that prostitution was legalised in the first place, and it's now a more progressive liberalism is sweeping across the developed world which is arguing that legalising prostitution is not in the interests of women's welfare, and of course there are the other side of progressive liberalism which argues 'prostitutes rights' -


Amnesty International's New Policy Defends Pimps and Sex Traffickers


You really can't put conservatives on the hook for this one.

eviltwin

Hector Bellend wrote: »

Men like fanny.

Women like money.

This should be a no brainer.

Really is that simple but for some reason we can't have a mature conversation about it.

Guy:Incognito

Flower124 wrote: »

She was working in a country where prostitution was legal. She was held illegally and was working against her will. So making prostitution legal did not work for her.

Labouring is legal in the UK. Those pikeys that held the eastern Europeans lads as slaves for years labouring for them did it illegally. So legally working for money doesn t work. Make working illegal?
.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well yeah, I would agree that in an ideal society that there would be no issues with prostitution, and of course there are multiple studies which provide evidence that better conditions make prostitution safer for some women, but those studies not only ignore the fact that we don't live in an ideal society, they also ignore the fact that for the vast, vast majority of people, the outcomes of prostitution whether legal or illegal, are overwhelmingly negative.

I find it interesting that you raise an ideal society... when the fact remains that prostitution persists regardless of the measures that the law or society brings against it. Even when our societies were far more structured and constraining regards to peoples behavior, prostitution continued.

It also points that in spite of modern technology, and far more advanced economies, we cannot provide for all the members of a society, and that the poor will remain a factor in that society. People will turn to prostitution as a form of income either due to purely economic necessity or the belief that the negatives are outweighed by the rather higher incomes possible.

We can talk all day about what would be better for people, but the reality is that we are nowhere even close to being capable in providing enough of an income to remove the attraction of prostitution as an income, and frankly, making it illegal simply increases that attraction (since illegal activities typically bring in higher returns).

Of course prostitution isn't going to disappear simply because the law is changed to make the purchase of sex illegal, but what that does do is it tends to make prostitution a less viable prospect for people who are considering putting themselves at risk to earn some fast, easy money, and of course it criminalises people who seek to exploit those people who are considering prostitution as a way to make money.

Criminalization of prostitution makes it harder for the prostitutes than for anyone else.

Sure, punish those who are abusing men/women or forcing them into prostitution. But punishing the men/women themselves for being prostitutes (regardless of their reasons for being so) seems more about being sadistic than actually trying to help.

Selling sex for money isn't going to become acceptable behavior in any western society. It's not going to become a normal profession. We're already getting rid of jobs like the F1 Girls or the presentation girls in sports. So, no, I don't have much fear that legalising prostitution will do anything to encourage women into the job. Even in countries with a traditional history of prostitution, (like Japan or China), prostitutes are shunned socially.

Hector Bellend

eviltwin wrote: »

Really is that simple but for some reason we can't have a mature conversation about it.

I don't understand it Myself. It's called the worlds oldest profession for a reason and to legalise it seems to me to be absolutely the most sensible thing to do.