Prostitution in Ireland.

Millicent · 06-12-2010 8:31pm

Jakkass wrote: »

As for ban everything where consent might be hard to tell. It isn't only this. Protect as many as possible by limiting what is severely harmful to people. This is the reason why I see it as being essential to prohibit this.

I think what people are driving at is: what is severely harmful about it?

rubadub · 06-12-2010 9:14pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Lower number of visits, less prostitution business, win win. People are freed from this.

For many people it would be "lose lose", you seem to assume every protistute is "trapped" or needs "freeing", what about those who do not have the same obvious religious/moral beliefs that you do? To many people having sex is no big deal, whether you like it or not. I suppose some might think a masseuse is a morally wrong job, giving manual bodily pleasure to other people for cash. Many might enjoy their job very much.

Some might think gambling is morally bad and could consider banning gambling to be win win, while the bookie and the casual gambler would view it as lose lose (pardon the pun).

Jakkass wrote: »

Prostitution isn't work, it's abuse and exploitation.

And many would disagree, my brother thinks people holding up advertising signs like on grafton street is exploitation and demeaning, those people might be prefectly happy doing it though.

Jakkass wrote: »

We are mammals, but we are people with the capability of knowing what is right from wrong.

Yes and many people know/believe it is not wrong.

Jakkass wrote: »

As for ban everything where consent might be hard to tell. It isn't only this. Protect as many as possible by limiting what is severely harmful to people. This is the reason why I see it as being essential to prohibit this.

Are there any other jobs you would ban? Aalaskan fishermen perhaps? their job is dangerous. People involved in testing recognised harmful drugs? People working on sundays?

philologos · 06-12-2010 9:24pm

The law is meant to prohibit harmful activities taking place within a society. Given the high levels of abuse, and exploitation in prostitution it is only reasonable to prohibit it, and aim to reduce its influence rather than to increase its influence in society.

People may differ and to be honest with you it makes very little difference as I wouldn't hold morality to be relative or indeed I can't see how it makes pragmatic sense for it to be relative (which is the assumption behind your emphasis on it not being widely agreed upon), but that's where I'm coming from in holding that it should be illegal. This is something I can't tolerate given what is widely known about it as an "industry".

You've missed the point right along with the others on the Alaskan fishermen nonsense. You will see I dealt with this a few posts ago.

FreudianSlippers · 06-12-2010 9:56pm

Jakkass wrote: »

The law is meant to prohibit harmful activities taking place within a society. Given the high levels of abuse, and exploitation in prostitution it is only reasonable to prohibit it, and aim to reduce its influence rather than to increase its influence in society.

People may differ and to be honest with you it makes very little difference as I wouldn't hold morality to be relative or indeed I can't see how it makes pragmatic sense for it to be relative (which is the assumption behind your emphasis on it not being widely agreed upon), but that's where I'm coming from in holding that it should be illegal. This is something I can't tolerate given what is widely known about it as an "industry".

You've missed the point right along with the others on the Alaskan fishermen nonsense. You will see I dealt with this a few posts ago.

It's not really that simple... it fully depends on what school of Jurisprudence one subscribes to.

One may subscribe to a natural law mentality while others are legal positivists and divorce law from morality entirely.

Thomas Aquinas believed that "good is to be done and promoted, and evil is to be avoided. All other precepts of the natural law are based on this"

Bentham and others observed "commands, backed by threat of sanctions, from a sovereign, to whom people have a habit of obedience" as what the law was.

HLA Hart thought this was an oversimplification and went on to specify types and/or levels of laws.
His followers are even split between those who believe that law can never depend on moral correctness and those that believe that law may be influenced by morality but it does not have to be.

Ronald Dworkin really has the most interesting and modern view. He discusses the idea of law being "fit" for its purpose and time - he rejects separating law from morals but looks at it differently, basically saying that laws are detached from morals but it is the implementation and interpretation of those laws by the judiciary that brings in the morals of each individual.

I'd highly recommend reading Dworkin's book "Law's Empire" if you're interested in law/morality debate and what law is meant to do, jurisprudentially.

philologos · 06-12-2010 10:00pm

I guess I'm not a positivist in respect to law. There are issues in politics which will ultimately require moral opinion in some shape or form to resolve. How can one even begin to discuss human rights unless one is willing to think about how we ought to treat one another in larger society?

As for Bentham, he also argued that human rights were nonsense on stilts if I remember correctly from my assessment of studying utilitarianism at university.

I'm a big fan of Aquinas, but I wouldn't see him as being the main influence on my understanding of ethics.

FreudianSlippers · 06-12-2010 10:09pm

Jakkass wrote: »

I guess I'm not a positivist in respect to law. There are issues in politics which will ultimately require moral opinion in some shape or form to resolve. How can one even begin to discuss human rights unless one is willing to think about how we ought to treat one another in larger society?

As for Bentham, he also argued that human rights were nonsense on stilts if I remember correctly from my assessment of studying utilitarianism at university.

I'm a big fan of Aquinas, but I wouldn't see him as being the main influence on my understanding of ethics.

Certainly it's quite more meaty than my abridged AH version

I don't know exactly where I fit in there. Probably closest to Dworkin though.

desertcircus · 06-12-2010 11:12pm

I still haven't seen a serious explanation of what makes prostitution different to any other form of manual labour. If I want to dance the tango but have no willing volunteers, I can hire a partner. If I want to box but have no willing opponents, I can hire a sparring partner. If I want to undertake a dangerous mission of some sort which requires help, I can hire a partner. If I want to have sex but have no willing volunteers*, I cannot pay someone who would willingly have sex with me for money. Why?

Prostitution happens: is it better that it happens in a completely unregulated environment or in one we can exercise some form of control over?

*insert standard disclaimer about how I'm so awesome that I have no shortage of willing volunteers...

rossie1977 · 06-12-2010 11:48pm

desertcircus wrote: »

Prostitution happens: is it better that it happens in a completely unregulated environment or in one we can exercise some form of control over?

our friends on the conservative right don't believe in such things as regulation and taxation

philologos · 07-12-2010 9:02am

rossie1977 wrote: »

our friends on the conservative right don't believe in such things as regulation and taxation

Your position is far more right wing than mine or others are :pac:

You are the one advocating that we should capitalise on sexuality. In a socialist system or even a system with a greater degree of economic equality, there would be no place for prostitution as I've already pointed out. If everyone had an equal provision of assets and wealth there would be no reason why prostitutes would be in business.

Drawing limits on what can be bought and sold != "right wing".

As for regulation, it has failed in the countries where it is legal. This is why I don't believe in it.

Mike 1972 · 08-12-2010 12:37am

Jakkass wrote: »

In a socialist system ... there would be no place for prostitution.

I seriously doubt that prostitution was completely unheard of in Eastern Europe between 1944 and 1989 (or Cuba today) In fact I daresay It was readily available to anyone who had access to hard currency.

sandmanporto · 08-12-2010 12:56am

I am a man, but I do not know how I will think as I get older! I fear that!
Ever see the programme "TAKE ME OUT" on TV3? maybe thats why men here resort to the ladies of the night!

08-12-2010 1:34am

Only saw this thread now, so sort of related, all the lads who head off to Thailand etc for holidays or on their way to Oz, the vast majority of them are having a shagfest over there. Always think it so funny when some one's Mum boasts about little Johnny gone travelling to Thailand or South America with his buddies, oh if the Mammies only knew, there'd be no Sunday dinners when they return :pac:

MD1990 · 08-12-2010 1:47am

depends on if she was pretty

FreudianSlippers · 08-12-2010 1:51am

MD1990 wrote: »

depends on if she was pretty

She's not, or else she probably wouldn't be a prozzy.

rubadub · 08-12-2010 2:20am

Jakkass wrote: »

If everyone had an equal provision of assets and wealth there would be no reason why prostitutes would be in business.

I don't understand this reasoning. Why would they not be in business, no punters willing to pay? or nobody willing to be a prostitute. Surely you accept some people enjoy working as prostitutes.

Jakkass wrote: »

The law is meant to prohibit harmful activities taking place within a society.....

You've missed the point right along with the others on the Alaskan fishermen nonsense. You will see I dealt with this a few posts ago.

I don't see how it is nonsense. They are working to satisfy peoples urge to eat fish, it is an unneccesary job, people could eat something else and control their urge/appetite for eating fish -just like you say people can control the urge/appetite for sex.

I still would like to know if there are any jobs you would like to see banned, like humans testing out known harmful drugs.

OisinT wrote: »

She's not, or else she probably wouldn't be a prozzy.

I do not understand your logic at all, it makes far more sense that a prostitute would be attractive, otherwise people would not be as willing to pay. I could not imagine a woman paying am obese, bald ugly man for sex. If that poster had said "depends on if he was handsome" would you have said "he's not, or else he probably wouldn't be a prozzy"?

If she was pretty what job would she be doing instead? Why would unpretty/ugly girls be more likely to be prostitutes? are they unable to get other jobs? most jobs/careers do not rely on looks much, models & prostitutes would be 2 that certainly do.

You must never have been to a windowed red light district like amsterdam or germany, many of them are stunning looking, model material. The most shocked visitors are usually women going through the red light who cannot believe how good looking they are, I have heard it commented on by plenty of women who went there.

FreudianSlippers · 08-12-2010 2:25am

rubadub wrote: »

I don't understand this reasoning. Why would they not be in business, no punters willing to pay? or nobody willing to be a prostitute. Surely you accept some people enjoy working as prostitutes.

I don't see how it is nonsense. They are working to satisfy peoples urge to eat fish, it is an unneccesary job, people could eat something else and control their urge/appetite for eating fish -just like you say people can control the urge/appetite for sex.

I still would like to know if there are any jobs you would like to see banned, like humans testing out known harmful drugs.

I do not understand your logic at all, it makes far more sense that a prostitute would be attractive, otherwise people would not be as willing to pay. I could not imagine a woman paying am obese, bald ugly man for sex. If that poster had said "depends on if he was handsome" would you have said "he's not, or else he probably wouldn't be a prozzy"?

If she was pretty what job would she be doing instead? Why would unpretty/ugly girls be more likely to be prostitutes? are they unable to get other jobs? most jobs/careers do not rely on looks much, models & prostitutes would be 2 that certainly do.

You must never have been to a windowed red light district like amsterdam or germany, many of them are stunning looking, model material. The most shocked visitors are usually women going through the red light who cannot believe how good looking they are, I have heard it commented on by plenty of women who went there.

PWC

/discussion

JG009 · 08-12-2010 3:19am

Ive asked some of the hookers in the dam why they do this job and they have all said the same thing, money. Where else would we get 3 grand a week? Its not like I'm going to do it forever.

Majority of them are good looking. Ive been there with female friends and like other posters have said, yeah even the females have said they were great looking. If it was made legal in Ireland it would be mainly foreign women anyway, who the hell would pay to ride an Irish girl.

sandmanporto · 08-12-2010 6:38am

Do any of you people defending anti prostitution acknowlodge that it is human nature for the older god damn man to pay for sex? i hate this reality but i cant escape that it will always be a reality that men will pay for sex!!
sick

sandmanporto · 08-12-2010 6:46am

JG009 wrote: »

Ive asked some of the hookers in the dam why they do this job and they have all said the same thing, money. Where else would we get 3 grand a week? Its not like I'm going to do it forever.

Majority of them are good looking. Ive been there with female friends and like other posters have said, yeah even the females have said they were great looking. If it was made legal in Ireland it would be mainly foreign women anyway, who the hell would pay to ride an Irish girl.

Im very sorry to say this, but a lot of Irish men are influenced by the old fashioned way( the catholic way).
The catholic influence of the past is having a hold of us still! time to break loose and show the world, we are not backward.
For prostitution, it is a money making business. You may see that as a moral essay or a freedom speech; depending on whether you are liberal or the extreme opposite! However, men are ultimately pigs, sex mad etc.
I wont totally slate men here, women also take advantage too! In the Dam many of these girls work to get thru college!

So can we not get thru these feminist and male chauvinistic points of view for once? remember, we're both human after all!

philologos · 08-12-2010 8:33am

Mike 1972 wrote: »

I seriously doubt that prostitution was completely unheard of in Eastern Europe between 1944 and 1989 (or Cuba today) In fact I daresay It was readily available to anyone who had access to hard currency.

One could therefore question to what degree they were socialist.

My point was it is essentially capitalising on prostitution. This is more a right wing notion than a left wing one.

In a situation where we would be economically egalitarian, I can't imagine many people being prostitutes for a start.

rubadub wrote: »

I don't see how it is nonsense. They are working to satisfy peoples urge to eat fish, it is an unneccesary job, people could eat something else and control their urge/appetite for eating fish -just like you say people can control the urge/appetite for sex.

I still would like to know if there are any jobs you would like to see banned, like humans testing out known harmful drugs.

Again, please read the previous posts in this thread and you'll understand in earnest what I was saying. You're missing the point made by a bargepole.

Mike 1972 · 08-12-2010 9:10pm

Why do people make the ridiculous assumption that just because a high proportion of people working in the sex industry are foreign nationals it automatically means there must be something sinister behind it ?

My local Chinese take away employs mostly (shock horror) Chinese people. Should I call the cops ?

Krusader · 08-12-2010 9:14pm

Mike 1972 wrote: »

My local Chinese take away employs mostly (shock horror) Chinese people. Should I call the cops ?

Yes please do, it's most likely a Triad safehouse

JG009 · 08-12-2010 9:14pm

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Why do people make the ridiculous assumption that just because a high proportion of people working in the sex industry are foreign nationals it automatically means there must be something sinister behind it ?

My local Chinese take away employs mostly (shock horror) Chinese people. Should I call the cops ?[/QUOTE

Don't know if you meant my post, I didn't mean there was anything sinister about it because foreign girls dominate the industry just the foreign girls would be better at the job.

rubadub · 08-12-2010 10:53pm

OisinT wrote: »

PWC

/discussion

They would be on the "cheap streets".

RoverJames wrote: »

Always think it so funny when some one's Mum boasts about little Johnny gone travelling to Thailand or South America with his buddies, oh if the Mammies only knew,

And if only those same mammies knew what their female friends were up to in Jamacia -or maybe they are up to it themselves.

sandmanporto wrote: »

human nature for the older god damn man to pay for sex? i hate this reality but i cant escape that it will always be a reality that men will pay for sex!!
sick

sandmanporto wrote: »

However, men are ultimately pigs, sex mad etc.
I wont totally slate men here, women also take advantage too! In the Dam many of these girls work to get thru college!

And while painting everybody with the same brush lets not forget women are "ulitmately pigs" and sex mad and sick too. There have been several TV programs about them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_sex_tourism

The men may do it for the money, or for other unresearched reasons. Women usually give clothes, meals, cash, sex, and gifts to their male prostitutes. In some destinations, there are "going rates" for male companionship, ranging from $50 to $200.

Millicent · 08-12-2010 10:56pm

JG009 wrote: »

Don't know if you meant my post, I didn't mean there was anything sinister about it because foreign girls dominate the industry just the foreign girls would be better at the job.

Uh, why?

Dravokivich · 08-12-2010 11:05pm

JG009 wrote: »

Don't know if you meant my post, I didn't mean there was anything sinister about it because foreign girls dominate the industry just the foreign girls would be better at the job.

Love yer choice of phrasing!

JG009 · 08-12-2010 11:08pm

Millicent wrote: »

Uh, why?

Becoz of their accent, their tan, their better shape bodies, their dress sense, their perfume, the way the wear their hair and make up, their earings, and lets be honest now foreign girls win Irish girls 10 nil in bed. That's just a brief explanation I could go on.

JG009 · 08-12-2010 11:10pm

Dravokivich wrote: »

Love yer choice of phrasing!

No pun intended!

Millicent · 08-12-2010 11:11pm

JG009 wrote: »

Becoz of their accent, their tan, their better shape bodies, their dress sense, their perfume, the way the wear their hair and make up, their earings, and lets be honest now foreign girls win Irish girls 10 nil in bed. That's just a brief explanation I could go on.

Speak for yourself. I'm a great lay. Also yawn at the rest of it. Besides the earrings part. That I am oddly curious about. Some sort of fetish there? :pac:

Johro · 09-12-2010 12:03am

JG009 wrote: »

Becoz of their accent, their tan, their better shape bodies, their dress sense, their perfume, the way the wear their hair and make up, their earings, and lets be honest now foreign girls win Irish girls 10 nil in bed. That's just a brief explanation I could go on.

Please don't.
I can only take so much crap.

Prostitution in Ireland.

Comments