The myth of 'the happy hooker' is dispelled

Hector Bellend

Happy hookers = Happy f*ckers

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

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).

I agree with a lot of what you've said, which is why I said that in an ideal society, prostitution could exist and everything would be fine, but that's already been tried in other societies, and the outcomes haven't been what they were expecting. Instead of a reduction in prostitution and an increase in women's safety, the prostitution industry has grown, and legalisation hasn't made it any safer for women.

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

Yeah that's the same line Amnesty International are taking with their 'prostitutes rights' argument, but that argument only works if you ignore peoples value as human beings, and focus on their value as a commodity. It's an unusual, but not all that surprising stance for Amnesty to take given their current political persuasions. They sure as hell aren't the organisation they once were, and are fast losing all credibility with regard to human rights.

The point is - nobody is ever just a prostitute, they are a person, and they are a person before they were ever a prostitute, so arguing that any laws which criminalise prostitution make it harder on prostitutes than for anyone else, ignores the fact that these women aren't just prostitutes. It's not something that they can't stop doing, it's making it harder for anyone to get into prostitution in the first place, but I'd see that as a good thing, because the people who it makes things even harder on are the people who profit from exploiting other people in poor circumstances.

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.

Nobody is suggesting a law that punishes people for being prostitutes, so in fairness if you're going to claim anyone is being sadistic, you're going to have to look at the people who keep the prostitution industry going, because it sure as hell isn't just about two consenting adults having sex for money when the reality is that the prostitution industry itself presents issues for society as a whole in relation to all sorts of public policies. Legalising prostitution for one thing is a matter of public policy.

Selling sex for money isn't going to become acceptable behavior in any western society. It's not going to become a normal profession. Even in countries with a traditional history of prostitution, (like Japan or China), prostitutes are shunned socially.

I agree with you there, and certainly in the current political climate I can't see Ireland rolling back on it's recently introduced legislation, nor can I ever see prostitution being regarded as a legitimate profession, let alone one that anyone should be encouraged to aspire to.

ceadaoin.

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 know this is what comes up on Google now when you try to look but most studies show that the vast majority of sex workers would like to get out of the industry but feel they have no choice or no other options. They are trapped

For example

We interviewed 854 people currently or recently in prostitution in 9 countries (Canada, Colombia, Germany, Mexico, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, United States, and Zambia), inquiring about current and lifetime history of sexual and physical violence. We found that prostitution was multitraumatic: 71% were physically assaulted in prostitution; 63% were raped; 89% of these respondents wanted to escape prostitution, but did not have other options for survival. A total of 75% had been homeless at some point in their lives; 68% met criteria for PTSD. Severity of PTSD symptoms was strongly associated with the number of different types of lifetime sexual and physical violence

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J189v02n03_03

Rjd2

Sadly as a society our attitude towards sex work is the equivalent of our attitude towards abortion and gay marriage 20 years ago. Its a women's choice what she wants to do with her body. Amnesty deserve a lot of credit for there stance.

Does trafficking exist? Yep and obviously that should not be ignored, but there has plenty of studies and numerous sex workers have spoken extensively in how much they enjoy there work.

The recent law change was aimed at the backward conservative element of the country who have no empathy with women who choose to do this work. Thankfully with such a progressive youthful generation coming through attitudes will change and in the next decade or so we will have a more tolerant approach to sex workers and there choices.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I agree with a lot of what you've said, which is why I said that in an ideal society, prostitution could exist and everything would be fine, but that's already been tried in other societies, and the outcomes haven't been what they were expecting. Instead of a reduction in prostitution and an increase in women's safety, the prostitution industry has grown, and legalisation hasn't made it any safer for women.

Considering that we're not in an ideal society, surely that put more weight in allowing prostitution to exist under regulated circumstances?

I find your statements that it hasn't made it safer for women a bit illogical. Considering that the vast majority of those involved in prostitution are women, the reports on legalised prostitution show a decrease in violence towards them and a reduction in the spread of STDs. Various reports also point to decreases in rape within the areas that prostitution zones are allowed.

Can i see this research or these reports that legalised prostitution makes it more dangerous for women as opposed to reducing the dangers?

Deleted User wrote:

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

One eyed Jack wrote:

Yeah that's the same line Amnesty International are taking with their 'prostitutes rights' argument, but that argument only works if you ignore peoples value as human beings, and focus on their value as a commodity.

err.. no. All you have to do is look at the dangers that exist for prostitutes both from the law and those outside of the law, versus the protections that prostitutes can avail of by being within the law. Seems pretty obvious to me.

It's an unusual, but not all that surprising stance for Amnesty to take given their current political persuasions. They sure as hell aren't the organisation they once were, and are fast losing all credibility with regard to human rights.

I haven't believed in them for decades.

The point is - nobody is ever just a prostitute, they are a person, and they are a person before they were ever a prostitute, so arguing that any laws which criminalise prostitution make it harder on prostitutes than for anyone else, ignores the fact that these women aren't just prostitutes. It's not something that they can't stop doing, it's making it harder for anyone to get into prostitution in the first place, but I'd see that as a good thing, because the people who it makes things even harder on are the people who profit from exploiting other people in poor circumstances.

Except that it doesn't make it harder for women to become prostitutes. They can easily do that walking down the street or offering services in any number of ways. Instead, it exposes those women to the dangers by forcing them to avoid public scrutiny and entering into agreements that they wouldn't need to accept if the law was on their side.

Nobody is suggesting a law that punishes people for being prostitutes, so in fairness if you're going to claim anyone is being sadistic, you're going to have to look at the people who keep the prostitution industry going,

Prove to me that it's entirely possible stop or prevent the prostitution industry from existing.... Go on.

Otherwise, you are seeking to punish those people involved in the industry regardless of the circumstances for them being there.

I agree with you there, and certainly in the current political climate I can't see Ireland rolling back on it's recently introduced legislation, nor can I ever see prostitution being regarded as a legitimate profession, let alone one that anyone should be encouraged to aspire to.

I used to think the same thing about smoking, divorce, gay marriage and abortion. I never thought the Irish people would accept them into the law and society...

Prostitution under controlled circumstances with proper planning and research assigned makes far more sense than pretending that it's just going to disappear... It won't.

Guy:Incognito

Presumably all the people so against prostitution have never watched porn? Or does the camera and you watching on the computer at home fiddling with yourself somehow legitimise the whole thing? ( the law seems to say it does anyway)

Let people decide to pay for and receive money for sex if they want. It's hurting no one.

ceadaoin.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I know this is what comes up on Google now when you try to look but most studies show that the vast majority of sex workers would like to get out of the industry but feel they have no choice or no other options. They are trapped

And it makes sense to provide real and lasting alternatives before we decide to remove that source of income. (and research as to whether they would actually leave the industry, rather than simply speaking about it)

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Considering that we're not in an ideal society, surely that put more weight in allowing prostitution to exist under regulated circumstances?

I find your statements that it hasn't made it safer for women a bit illogical. Considering that the vast majority of those involved in prostitution are women, the reports on legalised prostitution show a decrease in violence towards them and a reduction in the spread of STDs. Various reports also point to decreases in rape within the areas that prostitution zones are allowed.

Can i see this research or these reports that legalised prostitution makes it more dangerous for women as opposed to reducing the dangers?

It's been tried in other countries already klaz, and now they're rolling back on it because it hasn't had the effect of making women safer. It's made things worse.

The thing is like I said, I could cite reports all day, and I'm sure you could too to support your position, but this was one of the submissions made at the time Amnesty International were deciding their position on prostitution -

Ten Reasons for Not Legalizing Prostitution And a Legal Response to the Demand for Prostitution

err.. no. All you have to do is look at the dangers that exist for prostitutes both from the law and those outside of the law, versus the protections that prostitutes can avail of by being within the law. Seems pretty obvious to me.

It's probably not so obvious to me because I don't see any danger present from the law anyone who is a prostitute. I see plenty of danger from people outside the law, and that has flourished in other countries where prostitution has been legalised. It shouldn't and wouldn't be happening at all if there were a system in place in which women didn't feel the need to prostitute themselves to survive, and legalisation won't change that. It just makes running brothels a more profitable business for pimps.

Except that it doesn't make it harder for women to become prostitutes. They can easily do that walking down the street or offering services in any number of ways. Instead, it exposes those women to the dangers by forcing them to avoid public scrutiny and entering into agreements that they wouldn't need to accept if the law was on their side.

Well it discourages them from seeing prostitution as a viable way to make money if there isn't a market for their services because the buyers of sex are criminalised.

Prove to me that it's entirely possible stop or prevent the prostitution industry from existing.... Go on.

Otherwise, you are seeking to punish those people involved in the industry regardless of the circumstances for them being there.

Would you have previously said the same thing about smoking, divorce, gay marriage and abortion?

No, nobody is seeking to punish anyone involved in the industry who is being exploited, and no, people who feel they were over-charged for a shìtty service aren't generally regarded as having been exploited. That's another difference between prostitution and any other industry - you really have no legal recourse if you aren't satisfied with the service provided, and it's not as though you can make a complaint about false or misleading advertising.

I used to think the same thing about smoking, divorce, gay marriage and abortion. I never thought the Irish people would accept them into the law and society...

Prostitution under controlled circumstances with proper planning and research assigned makes far more sense than pretending that it's just going to disappear... It won't.

But that's a direct reply to what you had said previously? This is what you said, and I agreed with you because I don't see prostitution becoming acceptable in society, and in particular in Irish society either -

[Deleted User] wrote: »

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.

I don't think it's going to disappear either, I think it's just going to become less common though as women gain more power in being able to determine their own futures independently. It probably won't become any less common in underdeveloped and Middle Eastern societies then where women are still generally regarded as a mans property.

nozzferrahhtoo

Flower124 wrote: »

A female prostitute in Amsterdam speaks out about being trafficked, being held against her will

That is not a prostitute. That is a slave and a captive. This is no small difference.

If you want to discuss how happy, or otherwise, actual prostitutes are then you need to consider men and women who WILLINGLY trade sexual services for money.

If you want to instead discuss kidnapping, rape, and torture then that is another subject entirely.

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.

Making prostitution legal is not going to be a magic wand that fixes all the ills of the underground sex industry. Nor do I think anyone here is suggesting it will. The kind of horrors you describe exist in countries where it is legal AND illegal.

But, making the sex industry legal AND regulated in the right way DOES give us the tools to fight that fight. A lot more tools that when the entire industry is underground and illegal. And THAT is the point people are making when they discuss it being legal.

Suffice to say though, merely making the sex trade fully legal is not enough. It depends heavily on HOW that is done.

strandroad wrote: »

I seriously wonder what would "happy hooker" people say upon hearing that their daughter is gearing up for the career?

All I want as a parent is to know that my child picks a career of their own volition, and is happy doing it. If that happens to be sex work then yes, I am good with that.

anewme wrote: »

Maybe teach children as they grow up to respect the other sex, it’s not ok for gangs of lads to go to Amsterdam and piss on a Prozzie for a laugh.

If the "gang" is happy to pay for it and the service provider is happy to provide the service, then it actually is very much "ok" for them to do it. It might not be your cup of tea, but that is not the yard stick anyone else should be using to measure by.

Then again it is weird to be lectured on "respect" by someone who calls a sex worker a "prozzie". It seems the lack of respect is coming from you, not the sex worker or the "gang" paying her in that scenario.

anewme wrote: »

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.

As I always say on this issue though, merely making it legal is not enough. And point out problems that occur where it is legal is not enough. It depends HOW it is made legal, how it is regulated, and how the regulations are enforced. Merely saying "it is legal now" is not a wise move.

You mention they want to revise legislation. Great. What are the revisions to be? Because I am yet to see that many countries implement a system all that well. So I would be greatly interested to see what revisions they propose to see if they want to get it right this time.

Yamanoto

_Dara_ wrote: »

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

Folks I've met personally? I couldn't tell you, as it's not a topic I've found myself discussing in either a work or social situation.

What I can tell you is that many of those same organisations who weighed in behind TORL & the Swedish model - ICTU, Immigrant Council of Ireland, Labour, Irish Feminist Network, National Women’s Council of Ireland etc. are also prominent proponents of repeal the 8th.

Again, what those organisations are saying is that women should have the right to choose what they do with their bodies - unless, that is, we disagree with their choices.

The Rape of Lucretia

Pretty Woman is quite a good film on the topic and shows that hooking can be a lifestyle choice that works for some women. That it is not for all is like any other profession, and depends on the aptitude, goals, and character of the individual. In the film is works out very well for her, although I dont think anyone would claim that all cases can work out as positively as that one.

_Dara_

Yamanoto wrote: »

Folks I've met personally? I couldn't tell you, as it's not a topic I've found myself discussing in either a work or social situation.

What I can tell you is that many of those same organisations who weighed in behind TORL & the Swedish model - ICTU, Immigrant Council of Ireland, Labour, Irish Feminist Network, National Women’s Council of Ireland etc. are also prominent proponents of repeal the 8th.

Again, what those organisations are saying is that women should have the right to choose what they do with their bodies - unless, that is, we disagree with their choices.

I think that’s simplistic. I think that they are working on the assumption that many of the women doing prostitution of their free will don’t particularly like the work and may downright hate it but for whatever reason, they feel that it’s the only real option open to them. The Swedish model is a clumsy way to deal with it but I don’t see it as a judgement on these women. Who knows how many of the free will workers hate the work but I can’t help thinking it’s a not insignificant figure because I accidentally ended up living in the flat beneath a brothel in Dublin and knew some of the girls working there and whilst they all were choosing to do it, they seemed a bit miserable and it just seemed like a miserable enough existence. The Swedish model appears to aim to educate women so that they see that there are other options. I can’t see the issue with that. After all, even if legalised (which is something I support), prostitutes are still at risk because a small portion of clients will class them as subhuman and treat them accordingly. So there is always that risk there. Why not help women see that they don’t need to risk their lives or health like that? Why would anyone have an issue with that?

anewme

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

That is not a prostitute. That is a slave and a captive. This is no small difference.

If you want to discuss how happy, or otherwise, actual prostitutes are then you need to consider men and women who WILLINGLY trade sexual services for money.

If you want to instead discuss kidnapping, rape, and torture then that is another subject entirely.



Making prostitution legal is not going to be a magic wand that fixes all the ills of the underground sex industry. Nor do I think anyone here is suggesting it will. The kind of horrors you describe exist in countries where it is legal AND illegal.

But, making the sex industry legal AND regulated in the right way DOES give us the tools to fight that fight. A lot more tools that when the entire industry is underground and illegal. And THAT is the point people are making when they discuss it being legal.

Suffice to say though, merely making the sex trade fully legal is not enough. It depends heavily on HOW that is done.



All I want as a parent is to know that my child picks a career of their own volition, and is happy doing it. If that happens to be sex work then yes, I am good with that.



If the "gang" is happy to pay for it and the service provider is happy to provide the service, then it actually is very much "ok" for them to do it. It might not be your cup of tea, but that is not the yard stick anyone else should be using to measure by.

Then again it is weird to be lectured on "respect" by someone who calls a sex worker a "prozzie". It seems the lack of respect is coming from you, not the sex worker or the "gang" paying her in that scenario.



As I always say on this issue though, merely making it legal is not enough. And point out problems that occur where it is legal is not enough. It depends HOW it is made legal, how it is regulated, and how the regulations are enforced. Merely saying "it is legal now" is not a wise move.

You mention they want to revise legislation. Great. What are the revisions to be? Because I am yet to see that many countries implement a system all that well. So I would be greatly interested to see what revisions they propose to see if they want to get it right this time.

You are missing the point...in the article, the lady was complaining about the gangs of English stags, one of whom urinated on her. I would not refer to a sex either as a prissy, it's the term used here and if you actually look at the other thread on the Sex party, it's used a fair bit by the "lads" there. So it's not necusibg the term.

Maybe I should have used the inverted commas to make it crystal clear.

This was not part of the service she was providing.

This is not ok.

This is not respect no matter what way you wany to justify it.

Educating young people about what goes on in these places is not a lecture, it's giving them information to make their own moral choices.

If you think pissing in a sex worker in Amsterdam without her consent is ok, it's you that has no respect or moral code.

Neyite

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Pretty Woman is quite a good film on the topic and shows that hooking can be a lifestyle choice that works for some women. That it is not for all is like any other profession, and depends on the aptitude, goals, and character of the individual. In the film is works out very well for her, although I dont think anyone would claim that all cases can work out as positively as that one.

That wasn't a Louis Theroux documenary, that was a rom-com and utter fiction.

The only happy ending prostitutes working Hollywood Boulevard experience is giving them, not receiving. That film is responsible for a spike in young naive women getting into the trade thinking that Richard bloody Gere was going to whisk them away in his porsche forever. They've more chances of winning the euromillions than that happening to them.

kylith

Prostitution's illegality means that women who are trafficked into it are too afraid to seek help because they believe they will be jailed, and as they are often from countries where law enforcement is arbitrary and brutal their captors play into that fear.

_Dara_

Neyite wrote: »

That wasn't a Louis Theroux documenary, that was a rom-com and utter fiction.

The only happy ending prostitutes working Hollywood Boulevard experience is giving them, not receiving. That film is responsible for a spike in young naive women getting into the trade thinking that Richard bloody Gere was going to whisk them away in his porsche forever. They've more chances of winning the euromillions than that happening to them.

Are you serious? :eek:

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

_Dara_ wrote: »

Are you serious? :eek:

You may return those fishnets to Penney’s in the morning.

Neyite

_Dara_ wrote: »

Are you serious? :eek:

Sorry to burst that bubble

anewme

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Pretty Woman is quite a good film on the topic and shows that hooking can be a lifestyle choice that works for some women. That it is not for all is like any other profession, and depends on the aptitude, goals, and character of the individual. In the film is works out very well for her, although I dont think anyone would claim that all cases can work out as positively as that one.

this has to be a joke.
No one could seriously believe that pretty Woman is a “good film on the topic”

You have to be taking the piss.

professore

_Dara_ wrote: »

I think that’s simplistic. I think that they are working on the assumption that many of the women doing prostitution of their free will don’t particularly like the work and may downright hate it but for whatever reason, they feel that it’s the only real option open to them. The Swedish model is a clumsy way to deal with it but I don’t see it as a judgement on these women. Who knows how many of the free will workers hate the work but I can’t help thinking it’s a not insignificant figure because I accidentally ended up living in the flat beneath a brothel in Dublin and knew some of the girls working there and whilst they all were choosing to do it, they seemed a bit miserable and it just seemed like a miserable enough existence. The Swedish model appears to aim to educate women so that they see that there are other options. I can’t see the issue with that. After all, even if legalised (which is something I support), prostitutes are still at risk because a small portion of clients will class them as subhuman and treat them accordingly. So there is always that risk there. Why not help women see that they don’t need to risk their lives or health like that? Why would anyone have an issue with that?

There's nothing at all wrong with it.

The Swedish model also criminalises men who pay for sex with a willing partner. I really don't understand this. Criminalising pimps and traffickers I have no issue with - but criminalising some guy for wanting to get his rocks off? Don't understand it at all. Sex is only freely available to a minority of men. The rest will have long dry spells - so what's the harm in hiring some from time to time. Seems like some sort of power and shaming thing to me, reminiscent of the Irish Catholic Church in the 1950s. Women and gays had their sexual revolutions - but straight white men are condemned back to the last century. It makes no sense.

_Dara_

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy wrote: »

You may return those fishnets to Penney’s in the morning.

Neyite wrote: »

Sorry to burst that bubble

Lol. :P

But no, I meant did it seriously cause a prostitution spike?

Neyite

_Dara_ wrote: »

Lol. :P

But no, I meant did it seriously cause a prostitution spike?

Apparently so. Now, it's about a decade or more since I remember reading about it but a heap of girls got on buses from their respective hicksvilles to Hollywood to work the strip and for many it meant they ended up exploited, raped, addict or murdered.It glamorised the industry unfortunately, and particularly street work which is often the lower end of sex work and far more dangerous to the workers. I read quite a few articles that quoted addicts support, police, and social services all saying that movie had them inundated with cases of girls who had watched it and thought it was a career option for them,

Even the script itself was sanitised. Originally the main character and her flatmate/co-worker were supposed to be strung out addicts and a condition of her getting the weeks work was to not do drugs. But that's not a fairy tale...

nozzferrahhtoo

anewme wrote: »

You are missing the point...

Not agreeing with a point is not the same as missing it. A difference worth learning I feel. However it would appear the one missing the point is you, not me, because...........

anewme wrote: »

in the article, the lady was complaining

...... the article is about a sex slave and the victim of rape and kidnapping. Not a prostitute. There is a CHASM of difference between the two. And I dealt with this when I replied to you with:

"If the "gang" is happy to pay for it and the service provider is happy to provide the service, then it actually is very much "ok" for them to do it. It might not be your cup of tea, but that is not the yard stick anyone else should be using to measure by. "

You want to lecture people about "respect", well then start by learning to respect peoples free will and free choices. Because if both parties consent then you can scream "not ok" at it all you like. You will be wrong.

anewme wrote: »

This was not part of the service she was providing.

A person kidnapped and trafficked into sex work against their will is NOT "providing a service" in the first place. You can "respect" such a person all you want and it would not make a blind bit of difference to the fact she is a captive, not a sex worker. And THAT is not ok.

Going over to "piss on" a sex worker as a "gang" IS ok however, if the sex worker is there of their own free will and wishes to provide such a service.

anewme wrote: »

If you think pissing in a sex worker in Amsterdam without her consent is ok, it's you that has no respect or moral code.

Great then perhaps you could go back and quote me suggesting ANY such thing please?

Koala Sunshine

As an advocate of bodily autonomy I don't think anyone should have the right to tell women (or men) that they can't have sex in exchange for money.

Victor

Dr_serious2 wrote: »

It is unfortunate what she went through but prostitution should be legal.

Prostitution is legal, although there are several related offences.

Neyite wrote: »

Make pimping of others illegal.

Pimping and similar activities are already illegal.

suicide_circus

Koala Sunshine wrote: »

As an advocate of bodily autonomy I don't think anyone should have the right to tell women (or men) that they can't have sex in exchange for money.

Right2Choose

Guy:Incognito

There's nothing in the article that says "gangs" are going over to all piss on prostitutes. It literally say it was one person.

"One even urinated all over me and laughed while he was doing it"

If this was a proper brothel with girls there working of their own free will that wouldn't have happened. And if he did do something like that before anyone could physically stop him he'd probably have found himself being kicked up and down an alley and /or hauled off by police.

Sleepy

Neyite wrote: »

But the way forward is to let the workers be independent and self employed with licences, health checks, security, and maybe even a union with standardised pricing.

All the rest makes sense but I can't for the life of me imagine how standardised pricing could possibly work. Without trying to be unkind, some providers will always be able to sell their services at a premium whilst others will have to target the budget-conscious section of the market...

Guy:Incognito

Victor wrote: »

Prostitution is legal, although there are several related offences.

Pimping and similar activities are already illegal.

I think we can all accept that by legal, people are advocating for things like the girl in the ama last year to be out in the open, taxable, covered by employment laws etc and for safe, clean brothels for women and men to work in.

Neyite

Sleepy wrote: »

All the rest makes sense but I can't for the life of me imagine how standardised pricing could possibly work. Without trying to be unkind, some providers will always be able to sell their services at a premium whilst others will have to target the budget-conscious section of the market...

I think I phrased that badly, sorry, I meant more along the lines of a standard minimum price per service in the industry. Workers could charge upwards of that for their own services but that the ones that are the lowest /riskiest in the profession are at least bringing home a decent wage for what they do.