Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Call to legalese brothels in Ireland.

245678

Comments

  • #32
    dr.bollocko
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 35,948 Mod ✭✭✭✭dr.bollocko


    Degsy wrote: »
    FFS,football fans are the most idiotic people on earth..
    Please lay off the generalisations in future.


  • #33
    panda100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭panda100


    Yes I definatly think it should be legalised. The grey area around escorting in Ireland means that many women are put at risk on a daily basis beacuse the law cannot protect them.

    If a prostiute is in trouble with a client ,where they are being physically threatening or abusive, then there first port of call should be the police. Most escorts in Ireland at the moment wouldnt feel safe calling the police as there is no real law to protect them.

    Also, regular std screening etc should be mandatory and medical examinations undertaken regularly. There should be a state agency regulating this sort of thing. Also,the state agency can inform prositutes of bad and dangerous clients.

    Like it or lump it,prostiution exists in Ireland but it remains a dangerous,seedy underworld. Proper enforced legislation surrounding it would mean more saftey for both the client and the escort.


  • #34
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    panda100 wrote: »
    Yes I definatly think it should be legalised. The grey area around escorting in Ireland means that many women are put at risk on a daily basis beacuse the law cannot protect them.

    Why should the law protect people carrying out illegal activity?
    panda100 wrote: »
    If a prostiute is in trouble with a client ,where they are being physically threatening or abusive, then there first port of call should be the police. Most escorts in Ireland at the moment wouldnt feel safe calling the police as there is no real law to protect them.

    The question is should a prostitute be with a client anyway? Should it be happening if it is illegal?
    panda100 wrote: »
    Also, regular std screening etc should be mandatory and medical examinations undertaken regularly. There should be a state agency regulating this sort of thing. Also,the state agency can inform prositutes of bad and dangerous clients.

    Sure STD screening and medical examinations are all well and good apart from the fact that in Amsterdam there is still a huge gang grip on prositution and a lot are illegally trafficked even where it is legal. It's just easier money for the gangs. They had to take a bit of effort beforehand, now they don't have to.
    panda100 wrote: »
    Like it or lump it,prostiution exists in Ireland but it remains a dangerous,seedy underworld. Proper enforced legislation surrounding it would mean more saftey for both the client and the escort.

    Considering that the clamp down on street prostitution in Swedish cities has been a huge success by police force, I assume the same could be done in Ireland. You're right prostitution will always exist, but we can minimise it significantly. Women shouldn't have to feel that the only way they can make money is through degrading themselves.


  • #35
    Pop's Diner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 423 ✭✭Pop's Diner


    dr.bollocko wrote: »
    Please lay off the generalisations in future.

    Agree! You should have said (nearly all) football fans are the most idiotic people on earth.

    Back on topic however I sometimes wonder why prostitution is illegial in the first place? The only conclusion I can come to is that the government want to encourage coupling and the nuclear family as much as possible but they know that if a man was given a choice between paying a few quid for a ride or sacrafise months and years of his life suffering nagging and compromising he'd probably choose the former.


  • #36
    The Walsho
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,251 ✭✭✭The Walsho


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Why should the law protect people carrying out illegal activity?


    The question is should a prostitute be with a client anyway? Should it be happening if it is illegal?

    This is why we're saying legalise it. So women will be more protected by the law. Legal or not, there's gonna be prostitution. Legalise it and you can control it and protect the women involved. It'd benefit all parties involved.

    Your argument seems to be that we shouldn't legalise it because it's illegal.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    The Walsho wrote: »
    This is why we're saying legalise it. So women will be more protected by the law. Legal or not, there's gonna be prostitution. Legalise it and you can control it and protect the women involved. It'd benefit all parties involved.

    Your argument seems to be that we shouldn't legalise it because it's illegal.

    If one legalises something, more women will be used as prostitutes most likely. Whereas if you put a relatively strict police effort on it you can minimise it. Just because something exists doesn't mean it should be legal. Murder exists, rape exists, theft exists, yet nobody in their right mind would legalise any of these things. Legalising something doesn't remove the connection with criminality or with human trafficking as we've seen in the Dutch case.


  • #38
    partyguinness
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,202 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Why should the law protect people carrying out illegal activity?



    The question is should a prostitute be with a client anyway? Should it be happening if it is illegal?



    Sure STD screening and medical examinations are all well and good apart from the fact that in Amsterdam there is still a huge gang grip on prositution and a lot are illegally trafficked even where it is legal. It's just easier money for the gangs. They had to take a bit of effort beforehand, now they don't have to.



    Considering that the clamp down on street prostitution in Swedish cities has been a huge success by police force, I assume the same could be done in Ireland. You're right prostitution will always exist, but we can minimise it significantly. Women shouldn't have to feel that the only way they can make money is through degrading themselves.

    And what about the women who would actually like to work as prostitutes/escorts and see it as a decent wage..not all of them are downdrodden and exploited.

    I honestly know a women (friend) who would like to work as an escort..she has a proper job but she says getting paid for someting she likes and enjoys..;)


  • #39
    panda100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭panda100


    Jakkass wrote: »
    You're right prostitution will always exist, but we can minimise it significantly. Women shouldn't have to feel that the only way they can make money is through degrading themselves.

    Sorry I should have made myself clearer. I don't believe prostitution will always exist and I do completley agree with your last statement.

    Prostitution will only exist in a society where money is vital to survive and not only that but a patriachal society where womens bodies have become,and always have been, mere cheap commoditys.

    The main reason why anyone goes into prostitution is for money. Despite programmes such as 'Confession of a call girl' that try and glamourise it and make it seem like an independent career choice for an independent women,the reality of life as an escort is not nice.
    I find it very hard to believe that a women could 'choose' this career for anything other than financial reasons. Check out any of the escort websites in Ireland to just see what escorts have to deal with and what a degrading job it is. Having to deal with foot fetishes,golden showers etc from men you would never be turned on by in a million years. Also the health and security risks are immense.

    There are many articles popping up in magazines of late of true life storys from women saying how they turned to prostiution to pay off their debts in recessionary times.
    There was a very positive article in 'Now' magazine this week painting the life of an escort as a glamorous life of expensive underwear and luxorious apartments,making thousands of euro a night. From what I know of escorts in Ireland, this is far from the case!


  • #40
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    partyguinness wrote: »
    And what about the women who would actually like to work as prostitutes/escorts and see it as a decent wage..not all of them are downdrodden and exploited.

    I honestly know a women (friend) who would like to work as an escort..she has a proper job but she says getting paid for someting she likes and enjoys..;)

    If you are to promote this as being legal you need to show me how you intend to minimize the risk of abuse, or women coming to be prostitutes as a last resort. If you cannot, I personally can't support it because there is no way of ensuring that this horrible act doesn't happen to any woman. No woman deserves to be treated only as a sexual object.


  • #41
    partyguinness
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,202 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Jakkass wrote: »
    If one legalises something, more women will be used as prostitutes most likely. Whereas if you put a relatively strict police effort on it you can minimise it. Just because something exists doesn't mean it should be legal. Murder exists, rape exists, theft exists, yet nobody in their right mind would legalise any of these things. Legalising something doesn't remove the connection with criminality or with human trafficking as we've seen in the Dutch case.


    How can you equate murder and rape with a decision to provide sexual services?

    You are missing the point to an extent. It works in other countries, other cultures and socities like ours, so no reason why it cant work here. And if more women became prostitues, then so what? A free market etc.

    I am sure people who clean our toilets feel exploited and downtrodden but they need the money..is that any different in your eyes from a prostitute?

    Yes it prob will not remove links with criminals but criminals are connected in every walk of life. They will only move onto to something else. Its more about providing a safer environment, healthy conditions and respectability.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    partyguinness wrote: »
    Basically you are assuming that all women in the sex industry are being exploited. That is nonsense.

    Considering that most in Holland are of foreign origin it seems to suggest that many become prostitutes due to not being able to get work due to lack of command of the language amongst other reasons. Hence why they see prostitution as a last resort.
    partyguinness wrote: »
    Just like saying that all Lapdancers and Page 3 girls are being exploited. They make conscience decisions to use the body they were given and in fact most enjoy the fact they make a good living from it.

    Do most? Financially they are being exploited, but at least they don't actually have to bear through the process of having a stranger having sex with them.

    I find it funny that people in the West think that a woman covered up in a headscarf is disrespectful to women but yet are quite happy with the notion of women wearing absolutely nothing or nearly nothing. It's a strange phenomenon isn't it?
    partyguinness wrote: »
    In fact, they would be better placed to protect themselves and work for themselves.

    Better protected against what? It's very difficult to tell the difference between rape and hired work when dealing with prostitutes.


  • #43
    partyguinness
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,202 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Jakkass wrote: »
    If you are to promote this as being legal you need to show me how you intend to minimize the risk of abuse, or women coming to be prostitutes as a last resort. If you cannot, I personally can't support it because there is no way of ensuring that this horrible act doesn't happen to any woman. No woman deserves to be treated only as a sexual object.


    What "horrible act"? You should give women more credit. Are you this offended by pornography?

    It seems to me that you have a deep and irrational objection and you are not prepared to listen to any pro arguments no matter what.

    Are your issues based on religion?


  • #44
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    partyguinness wrote: »
    What "horrible act"? You should give women more credit. Are you this offended by pornography?

    I think that there could be abuse involved in pornography also. I would also consider that the objectification of people for purely sexual purposes.
    partyguinness wrote: »
    It seems to me that you have a deep and irrational objection and you are not prepared to listen to any pro arguments no matter what.

    It's not irrational to respect women as being more than sexual objects. I am listening to pro arguments, but that doesn't mean I have to:

    a) buy into them.
    b) hold them as valid.
    partyguinness wrote: »
    Are your issues based on religion?

    I haven't mentioned religion in this argument so far. I think even if you are not religious you can find something in you that would encourage you to respect women as being more than sexual objects.


  • #45
    partyguinness
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,202 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Considering that most in Holland are of foreign origin it seems to suggest that many become prostitutes due to not being able to get work due to lack of command of the language amongst other reasons. Hence why they see prostitution as a last resort.



    Do most? Financially they are being exploited, but at least they don't actually have to bear through the process of having a stranger having sex with them.

    I find it funny that people in the West think that a woman covered up in a headscarf is disrespectful to women but yet are quite happy with the notion of women wearing absolutely nothing or nearly nothing. It's a strange phenomenon isn't it?



    Better protected against what? It's very difficult to tell the difference between rape and hired work when dealing with prostitutes.
    #

    Mate, its about choice.

    Some people find that not giving a women a choice re education, work and being forced to wear a headscarf is wrong because it is imposing somebody elses will. It doesnt give them a choice. If they want to wear a head scarf then so what? but if they dont have a choice, then that is wrong.

    Women should have a choice. If they want to work as prostitutes/escorts then let them at it.

    How are Page 3 girls/lapdancers being exploited? For working? Sure we are all being exploited by our employers if that is your logic.

    No doubt, there are women who go into prostitution out of desperation in Holland...but they have a choice and at least it is better than being down some dark alley way last at night. There is always a choice.


  • #46
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Why should the law protect people carrying out illegal activity?

    The question is should a prostitute be with a client anyway? Should it be happening if it is illegal?
    Something should be illegal if it is wrong. Being illegal doesn't automatically make something wrong. It used to be illegal for women to vote for example

    Jakkass wrote: »
    Sure STD screening and medical examinations are all well and good apart from the fact that in Amsterdam there is still a huge gang grip on prositution and a lot are illegally trafficked even where it is legal. It's just easier money for the gangs. They had to take a bit of effort beforehand, now they don't have to.
    Link?

    And that's an argument for better regulation, not for no regulation. Trafficking is made worse by making it illegal.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    Considering that the clamp down on street prostitution in Swedish cities has been a huge success by police force, I assume the same could be done in Ireland. You're right prostitution will always exist, but we can minimise it significantly. Women shouldn't have to feel that the only way they can make money is through degrading themselves.
    I remember the article you linked to quoting that. You ignored the bit where the prostitutes themselves said it had just gone underground. Not visible=/= not there

    Jakkass wrote: »
    If one legalises something, more women will be used as prostitutes most likely. Whereas if you put a relatively strict police effort on it you can minimise it. Just because something exists doesn't mean it should be legal. Murder exists, rape exists, theft exists, yet nobody in their right mind would legalise any of these things. Legalising something doesn't remove the connection with criminality or with human trafficking as we've seen in the Dutch case.
    Murder is illegal because you're killing someone, rape is illegal because you are violating someone who is unwilling, theft is illegal because you are depriving someone of their property. Whereas prostitution is illegal because it's possible that some of the women might be trafficked, a problem which is exacerbated by it being illegal. There was a foreign guy working in a restaurant in Dublin a few years who was effectively a slave, only getting food and unable to escape because he had no money. Should we make working in restaurants illegal or regulate it to make sure that doesn't happen?

    Something should not be legal just because it exists, no, but it should be legal if proper controls can allow it to happen without anyone being harmed. For example, driving kills over 300 people every year and yet it's legal with certain restrictions such as requiring a licence and imposing speed limits etc. The only outcome of making prostitution illegal is to dramatically increase all of the problems that can possibly be associated with it.


  • #47
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I think that there could be abuse involved in pornography also. I would also consider that the objectification of people for purely sexual purposes.

    What exactly is wrong with objectifying someone for sexual purposes if they are willing and eager to be objectified?


  • #48
    partyguinness
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,202 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I think that there could be abuse involved in pornography also. I would also consider that the objectification of people for purely sexual purposes.



    It's not irrational to respect women as being more than sexual objects. I am listening to pro arguments, but that doesn't mean I have to:

    a) buy into them.
    b) hold them as valid.



    I haven't mentioned religion in this argument so far. I think even if you are not religious you can find something in you that would encourage you to respect women as being more than sexual objects.


    But you need to give men, some more credit.

    Women are of course more than just sexual objects. Nobody wld dispute that for a second. But it must be accepted that

    a, There is a sex industry
    b. There has always been and always will be a sex industry
    c. Putting safe and legal controls can only be a good thing even if you abhorr the whole idea

    Do you accept that some women make deliberate and conscience decisions to work as escorts etc because:

    a. The money is good, no qualifications needed, flexible hours etc.
    b. They perhaps enjoy it
    c. They just see it as a job and nothing else

    For example, I do not agree with abortion but that doesnt mean I think it should be illegal.

    Abortions will be carried out no matter what and I would prefer to see them being carried out in hospitals under medical supervision rather than down some back alley by some randon person with a clothes hanger.

    Do you see my point? I do not expect you to agree with prostitution but to accept some realities.


  • #49
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Something should be illegal if it is wrong. Being illegal doesn't automatically make something wrong.

    Right. I agree with this much.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Link?
    Since then, a significant number of brothels and "windows" have been closed because of supected criminal activity. In 2009 the The Dutch justice ministry announced plans to close 320 prostitution "windows" from Amsterdam.
    At the end of 2008, mayor Job Cohen announced plans to close half of the city’s 400 prostitution windows because of suspected criminal gang activity.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    And that's an argument for better regulation, not for no regulation. Trafficking is made worse by making it illegal, not better

    You need to substantiate this. You'd also need to give reasons as to how you could regulate it instead of just saying it needs "better regulation".

    The mere number of prostitutes compared to the UK also shows that the number of prostitutes is not higher when it is illegal. I personally would prefer minimalisation instead of exascerbation.
    . In 2003 it was estimated that in Amsterdam, one woman in 35 was working as prostitute, compared to one in 300 in London
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    I remember the article you linked to quoting that. You ignored the bit where the prostitutes themselves said it had just gone underground. Not visible=/= not there

    I said in the post you are quoting that open prostitution decreased. Which is true, it decreased very very radically. You would need to demonstrably show me that prostitution online was to the same volume as street prostitution. I somehow doubt this but I will wait for you to do some research.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Murder is illegal because you're killing someone, rape is illegal because you are violating someone who is unwilling, theft is illegal because you are depriving someone of their property. Whereas prostitution is illegal because it's possible that some of the women might be trafficked, a problem which is exacerbated by it being illegal.

    It could be argued that if there is financial coercion the sex between a prostitute doing it out of desperation is not consensual but coerced. I would argue that that is also rape.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Something should not be legal just because it exists, no, but it should be legal if proper controls can allow it to happen without anyone being harmed. For example, driving kills over 300 people every year and yet its legal with certain restrictions such as requiring a licence and imposing speed limits etc. The only outcome of making prostitution illegal is to dramatically increase all of the problems that can possibly be associated with it.

    I totally disagree with you here. I have shown you the difference in prostitution between Amsterdam and London. It is far far more widespread in Amsterdam than it is in London. Minimising by police activity is far better if you want to limit how widespread prostitution is. If you want to increase prostitution and regard it as acceptable that's when legalising kicks in.


  • #50
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    partyguinness wrote: »
    For example, I do not agree with abortion but that doesnt mean I think it should be illegal.

    Abortions will be carried out no matter what and I would prefer to see them being carried out in hospitals under medical supervision rather than down some back alley by some randon person with a clothes hanger.

    Do you see my point? I do not expect you to agree with prostitution but to accept some realities.

    I wouldn't bring abortion into it. For people who are against it, legalising it is exactly the same as legalising murder. You might not agree with that but a person who is against abortion thinks that argument is as ridiculous as:

    "Murder will be carried out no matter what and I would prefer to see them being carried out in safe place rather than down some back alley."


  • #51
    Quint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,407 ✭✭✭Quint


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Women shouldn't have to feel that the only way they can make money is through degrading themselves.

    First of all, I don't think women will think it's the only way to make money. Second of all, who are you to say what jobs are degrading or not? You seem to think sex is dirty. Personally, I think working 40 hours a week behind a desk in a job you hate for a pittance is more degrading. If someone wants to become a prostitute they should be.
    And as mentioned before, it's already legal, just very strict rules about it which forces it underground


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    partyguinness wrote: »
    But you need to give men, some more credit.

    Considering that I am male, I think that men in general are genuine decent people. I don't think I need to give men who use women as mere sexual objects more respect though, especially if the prostitute is young, vulnerable and desperate.
    partyguinness wrote: »
    Women are of course more than just sexual objects. Nobody wld dispute that for a second. But it must be accepted that

    a, There is a sex industry
    b. There has always been and always will be a sex industry
    c. Putting safe and legal controls can only be a good thing even if you abhorr the whole idea

    I disagree with these I'll tell you why.

    a. Just because there is one doesn't mean the State should encourage it.
    b. Yes, there has been, but we can minimise it.
    c. No, they cannot be a good thing. It will encourage the widespread exploitation of women for sexual purposes, and it will exascerbate the prostitution problem.
    partyguinness wrote: »
    Do you accept that some women make deliberate and conscience decisions to work as escorts etc because:

    a. The money is good, no qualifications needed, flexible hours etc.
    b. They perhaps enjoy it
    c. They just see it as a job and nothing else

    A minority probably. Even if it was most, you would need to guarantee me that there is no risk of abuse, or rape (unwilling sex due to financial coercion) due to legalising prostitution. If you cannot, I cannot ever support it.
    partyguinness wrote: »
    For example, I do not agree with abortion but that doesnt mean I think it should be illegal.

    I'm pro-life, it isn't the best example to use.
    partyguinness wrote: »
    Abortions will be carried out no matter what and I would prefer to see them being carried out in hospitals under medical supervision rather than down some back alley by some randon person with a clothes hanger.

    We can limit prostitution just as much as we can limit back alley abortions. These things might happen, but if they are bad we should minimise them to their smallest extent instead of allowing them out in the open and encouraging harm to women in the case of both abortions and prostitutions (N.B I am not looking for an abortion debate here).
    partyguinness wrote: »
    Do you see my point? I do not expect you to agree with prostitution but to accept some realities.

    I see your point, but I disagree about where it is leading. Reality tells us that we can limit these things effectively with police operations. I personally would volunteer more tax to the Government if they would promote a Garda program to crack down on prostitution and drugs. Why? Because it's for a very good cause.


  • #53
    partyguinness
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,202 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    I wouldn't bring abortion into it. For people who are against it, legalising it is exactly the same as legalising murder. You might not agree with that but a person who is against abortion thinks that argument is as ridiculous as:

    "Murder will be carried out no matter what and I would prefer to see them being carried out in safe place rather than down some back alley."


    I should clarify for point.

    My point being that just because you dont agree with something (be it abortion, prostitution, blood transfusions whatever) doesnt mean that it should be outlawed or ignored ab initio.

    Certain realities/truths must be accepted and we as a society should provide necessary safeguards.

    Taking a point from above. Cars kill thousand every year all over the world but what do we do? We impose traffic laws, safety measures, education etc to make driving safer for everyone. We dont ban cars.

    That is the best analogy and I certainly do not want an abortion debate. I was only using that to illustrate a point.


  • #54
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Quint wrote: »
    First of all, I don't think women will think it's the only way to make money.

    A lot of women do especially if you arrive in a new country and can't find work. Let's be a bit realistic?
    Quint wrote: »
    Second of all, who are you to say what jobs are degrading or not? You seem to think sex is dirty.

    Well considering that prostitution causes mental health issues for a lot of prostitutes I am going to conclude that many find it degrading.

    As for finding sex dirty. This is ridiculous.

    Having sex with your spouse who you love is the furthest thing from dirty that you could imagine.

    Having sex with absolute strangers? I wouldn't agree that it is clean in that case no.
    Quint wrote: »
    Personally, I think working 40 hours a week behind a desk in a job you hate for a pittance is more degrading. If someone wants to become a prostitute they should be.

    Ever concluded that a lot of people hate having sex with strangers?
    Quint wrote: »
    And as mentioned before, it's already legal, just very strict rules about it which forces it underground

    Strict rules minimise it. It may exist but it is minimal compared to Holland.


  • #55
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Right. I agree with this much.

    Since then, a significant number of brothels and "windows" have been closed because of supected criminal activity. In 2009 the The Dutch justice ministry announced plans to close 320 prostitution "windows" from Amsterdam.

    At the end of 2008, mayor Job Cohen announced plans to close half of the city’s 400 prostitution windows because of suspected criminal gang activity.
    You are simply proving my point. They were found to be involved in criminal activity and so the government closed them down. They used the powers that they had only because it was legal.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    You need to substantiate this. You'd also need to give reasons as to how you could regulate it instead of just saying it needs "better regulation".
    Scenario 1: A man wants to traffic a woman. He flies her over, keeps her in his apartment where she sees no one and cannot escape. He controls her through drugs

    Scenario 2: A man wants to traffic a woman. He flies her over, keeps her in a brothel that has to answer to a regulator. He tries to addict her to drugs, the regulator sees this and frees the woman and jails the man.

    How can some control possibly be worse than no control?

    I don't need to give a point by point plan of exactly how it will be done. That is an exercise in bureaucracy. Lots of regulatory authorities already exist and they could be run along the same lines.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    The mere number of prostitutes compared to the UK also shows that the number of prostitutes is not higher when it is illegal. I personally would prefer minimalisation instead of exascerbation.
    The number of prostitutes is not the problem as long as the women involved are there of their own free will and are not being coerced. Unless you see something inherently wrong with a woman willingly choosing to have sex for money and the whole trafficking and exploitation excuses are just that?


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I said in the post you are quoting that open prostitution decreased. Which is true, it decreased very very radically. You would need to demonstrably show me that prostitution online was to the same volume as street prostitution. I somehow doubt this but I will wait for you to do some research.
    I need to show no such thing until you do the same. Visible prostitution has decreased and that does not mean that all prostitution has decreased. Making it illegal has the inherent problem that these things cannot be gauged. That's one reason why it should be legal.

    Jakkass wrote: »
    It could be argued that if there is financial coercion the sex between a prostitute doing it out of desperation is not consensual but coerced. I would argue that that is also rape.
    Everyone does something for money. As long as the woman has the opportunity to give up prostitution and is there because, for example, the money and hours are good it's not rape. Of course, as long as it's illegal a lot of women don't have that choice.

    Jakkass wrote: »
    I totally disagree with you here. I have shown you the difference in prostitution between Amsterdam and London. It is far far more widespread in Amsterdam than it is in London. Minimising by police activity is far better if you want to limit how widespread prostitution is. If you want to increase prostitution and regard it as acceptable that's when legalising kicks in.
    As I said above, I don't want to limit prostitution as long as it's done the right way. Just like driving, there is nothing inherently wrong with it but things can go wrong which is why you need to regulate it


  • #56
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    partyguinness wrote: »
    I should clarify for point.

    My point being that just because you dont agree with something (be it abortion, prostitution, blood transfusions whatever) doesnt mean that it should be outlawed or ignored ab initio.

    Certain realities/truths must be accepted and we as a society should provide necessary safeguards.

    Taking a point from above. Cars kill thousand every year all over the world but what do we do? We impose traffic laws, safety measures, education etc to make driving safer for everyone. We dont ban cars.

    That is the best analogy and I certainly do not want an abortion debate. I was only using that to illustrate a point.

    Well that's a better analogy. The best examples to use are ones where the thing itself is not inherently wrong as long as the possible side effects can be avoided, like driving. People who are against abortion don't see it as one of those cases, they see it as inherently and always wrong, just like murder.

    Now back to the hookers.......


  • #57
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    You are simply proving my point. They were found to be involved in criminal activity and so the government closed them down. They used the powers that they had only because it was legal.

    The Government closed them down, yes. That isn't regulation that's minimising. Just like I am suggesting. The only difference is it is legal there, it is illegal here. Through police control it is possible to minimise prostitution.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Scenario 1: A man wants to traffic a woman. He flies her over, keeps her in his apartment where she sees no one and cannot escape. He controls her through drugs

    Scenario 2: A man wants to traffic a woman. He flies her over, keeps her in a brothel that has to answer to a regulator. He tries to addict her to drugs, the regulator sees this and frees the woman and jails the man.

    How can some control possibly be worse than no control?

    This is absurd. You act as if there are only two choices.

    I would add scenario 3: Woman is brought into police custody, woman is offered rehabilitation to help her get out of a life of prostitution and to get into a fulfilling job elsewhere dependant on what skills she has. If she has no skills, she will be encouarged to seek training with Government assistance.

    I think the State should be carrying out scenario 3.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    I don't need to give a point by point plan of exactly how it will be done. That is an exercise in bureaucracy. Lots of regulatory authorities already exist and they could be run along the same lines.

    I think we can do better without permitting it.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    The number of prostitutes is not the problem as long as the women involved are there of their own free will and are not being coerced. Unless you see something inherently wrong with a woman willingly choosing to have sex for money and the whole trafficking and exploitation excuses are just that?

    You cannot ensure that in any meaningful way. It is the primary reason I am still opposed. You cannot show that women will not be there without their will through financial coercion. As for seeing something inherently wrong with having sex for money I personally do, but that isn't the issue I am referring to. You say I use trafficking and exploitation as excuses. This is pathetic considering that these actually do take place to a huge extent even in countries where it is legal. They are valid reasons and unless you can demonstrate that there is a way whereby we can defeat these two I personally cannot be assured that it is best for anyone.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    I need to show no such thing until you do the same. Visible prostitution has decreased and that does not mean that all prostitution has decreased. Making it illegal has the inherent problem that these things cannot be gauged. That's one reason why it should be legal.

    Police activity can limit prostitution. If prostitution cannot be gauged however (which I doubt), how did the Swedish police force come up with statistics concerning decreases?

    So your argument is because we can't see numbers we should just open the doors right up completely to make an already questionable situation more widespread? Ever thought that this is effectively just adding fuel to the fire?
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Everyone does something for money. As long as the woman has the opportunity to give up prostitution and is there because, for example, the money and hours are good it's not rape. Of course, as long as it's illegal a lot of women don't have that choice.

    Yes, they do. The question is is there a difference between doing office work and involving yourself sexually with a stranger. Considering how emotionally attached sex and sexuality are to mental health I think it's dangerous to expect women to do this. I also think it could be dangerous physically, but one thing at a time.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    As I said above, I don't want to limit prostitution as long as it's done the right way. Just like driving, there is nothing inherently wrong with it but things can go wrong which is why you need to regulate it

    Sex is different than driving. You know that I know that. People get more emotionally attached about sex. We aren't comparing like with like.


  • #58
    PK2008
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭PK2008


    Once something is legalised for public sale the business is subject to all sorts of legislation. If you forget the morality for a minute and just focus on the logistics of setting up a business- you've got all kinds of insurance, not to mention consumer rights/standards and all that, and I assume some kind of licensing/regulation would come into force.

    From a commercial point of view it just wouldnt work because first fo all the taxes they would have to pay would dent their profits and/or drive their prices up over illegal competition prices and the regulations they would be under would make it less attractive than just doing what they currently do.

    I assume alot of these girls dont want people to know what they do and their clients the same- if you legalised it as a business you would be moving into a paper trail which could expose them both.

    The sentiment is right but its short sighted- its the same with drug legalisation, the measures necessary to make it safe for public consumption would ultimately make it commercially unviable and black market/street competition would still win

    The problem is people think these laws are simply about a moral code being imposed on them but they're not- theres a huge minefield when it comes to business- especially products which can potentially effect consumers health


  • #59
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Jakkass wrote: »
    The Government closed them down, yes. That isn't regulation that's minimising. Just like I am suggesting. The only difference is it is legal there, it is illegal here. Through police control it is possible to minimise prostitution.
    Ummmm, no it's not minimising. They were perfectly entitled to be there until they broke the law. It's much more difficult to close something down if it's in the criminal underworld instead of on the main street in Amstrerdam and that's the whole point
    Jakkass wrote: »
    This is absurd. You act as if there are only two choices.

    I would add scenario 3: Woman is brought into police custody, woman is offered rehabilitation to help her get out of a life of prostitution and to get into a fulfilling job elsewhere dependant on what skills she has. If she has no skills, she will be encouarged to seek training with Government assistance.

    I think the State should be carrying out scenario 3.
    Why would they do that if the woman wants to be a prostitute because the money is good?

    And surely if you want to get women out of a life of prostitution it's much easier if they are in a government approved establishment instead of hiding away, afraid to come out?
    Jakkass wrote: »
    You cannot ensure that in any meaningful way. It is the primary reason I am still opposed. You cannot show that women will not be there without their will through financial coercion.
    No it cannot be ensured at all. No regulator can ensure 100% effectiveness. But when it's illegal they have exactly 0% effectiveness. Surely any amount of control is better than none?
    Jakkass wrote: »
    As for seeing something inherently wrong with having sex for money I personally do, but that isn't the issue I am referring to.
    Ah now I think it is Jakkass ;) It's easy to come up with reasons for something when you already believe it. You haven't decided prostitution should be illegal because of exploitation and trafficking etc, you already decided it's wrong and have sought out reasons to back up your belief. Different things entirely.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    You say I use trafficking and exploitation as excuses. This is pathetic considering that these actually do take place to a huge extent even in countries where it is legal. They are valid reasons and unless you can demonstrate that there is a way whereby we can defeat these two I personally cannot be assured that it is best for anyone.
    We can never defeat them but do you not think it is ridiculous to use the reasons of trafficking and exploitation when those problems are made worse by it being illegal?
    Jakkass wrote: »
    Police activity can limit prostitution. If prostitution cannot be gauged however (which I doubt), how did the Swedish police force come up with statistics concerning decreases?
    I would presume they looked at the fact that the legal brothels were closed and they couldn't find any prostitutes. Of course they couldn't poll all of the prostitutes simply because they were in hiding because their profession was made illegal
    Jakkass wrote: »
    So your argument is because we can't see numbers we should just open the doors right up completely to make an already questionable situation more widespread? Ever thought that this is effectively just adding fuel to the fire?
    No, that's not my argument at all. My argument is that a questionable situation can be made considerably less questionable by legalising it.

    Jakkass wrote: »
    Yes, they do. The question is is there a difference between doing office work and involving yourself sexually with a stranger. Considering how emotionally attached sex and sexuality are to mental health I think it's dangerous to expect women to do this. I also think it could be dangerous physically, but one thing at a time.
    I don't expect anyone to do it but if a responsible adult wants to do it, who are you to stop them?
    Jakkass wrote: »
    Sex is different than driving. You know that I know that. People get more emotionally attached about sex. We aren't comparing like with like.

    You see this is the problem. You think that a woman being paid for sex is wrong, end of story. Everything else is just window dressing. Do you agree that if exploitation and trafficking and all the other side effects could be completely eliminated, meaning that only willing and eager women were involved, that you would still think that prostitution should be illegal? I'd appreciate a direct yes or no answer to this question. Whether you think it can be achieved or not is beside the point, I just want to know if you would still have the same opinion if it could be done


  • #60
    Quint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,407 ✭✭✭Quint


    Jakkass wrote: »
    A lot of women do especially if you arrive in a new country and can't find work. Let's be a bit realistic?
    At least you changed your "only way for women to make money" to "a lot of women who arrive in a new country that can't find work". Either way, it's done already, might as well control it properly.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    Well considering that prostitution causes mental health issues for a lot of prostitutes I am going to conclude that many find it degrading.
    Do they? Any source to back that up?
    Jakkass wrote: »
    As for finding sex dirty. This is ridiculous.

    Having sex with your spouse who you love is the furthest thing from dirty that you could imagine.

    Having sex with absolute strangers? I wouldn't agree that it is clean in that case no.
    So one night stands should be illegal? Lots of people like meaningless sex, and not just dirty old perverts.

    Jakkass wrote: »
    Ever concluded that a lot of people hate having sex with strangers?
    a lot of people like it too


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    liah
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,750 ✭✭✭liah


    Jakkass you're using a very "Thank You For Smoking" argument here-- every time someone brings up the crux of the matter (women's choice) you fall back and try to make yourself out like you're fighting for the Good Cause (being against degradation and exploitation) to turn the argument in your favour without addressing the issue at hand.

    Unfortunately, that won't work here.

    Nobody here cares what your opinion is as to whether or not it's exploitation, degradation and objectification. Seriously. You're not an authority on the matter and your religious or moral beliefs truly don't factor in a thing.

    The point, and tbh the only point that matters is the following:

    Women CAN and DO enjoy working in a sex trade.

    Shock horror for you, O Christian Fellow, I know. But it's true. Women enjoy sex. Women enjoy getting paid for things they enjoy. Thus, women can enjoy getting paid for sex.

    Your argument seems to be that because YOU think it's degrading and because YOU think it's exploitation and because YOU think it's objectification, that it's wrong and should not be legal.

    There are an awful lot of women out there being degraded/exploited/objectified against their will. I won't argue that for a second. But there's an equal amount of women who feel themselves empowered by their trade-- be it sex or anything else. Your morals DON'T factor in. Just because you see things from an exceedingly small worldview doesn't mean everyone else does.

    If they have the choice, if they enjoy what they're doing, then who the hell do you think you are to decide that it's objectification? Who on earth are you to decree that how she uses her body, how she chooses to use it, is wrong? Arrogance. Simple arrogance on your part.

    Judge not lest ye be judged.


Advertisement
Advertisement