Secret Diary of a Dublin Call Girl

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Libertarianism is not to be equated with woolly-headed ignoring of realities. Just because someone feels something or holds an opinion does not make it true.

Indeed.

I see that the main (sole?) female dissenter from an enforced orthodoxy on this thread has been removed. The discussion is now strongly at risk of becoming a circle-jerk around a narrow consensus that there is nothing at all dubious about the DCG blog, that Ruhama do nothing but good, that all men who attend prostitutes are sexual abusers, that all women involved in sex work are being trafficked, pimped and raped, and that prostitution should be legislated against even further than it already is.

Your post last night used very emotional language like circle jerk, all men are pimps, abusers and raped. It seems you had to set out an extreme interpretation of the debate to argue by emotion and extremity. Just because you feel something doesn't make it true, indeed Cavehill, indeed!

I agree posters should try and be as objective and emotionally unattached as possible and put political or social views aside. No ideology is ever 100% right or perfect.

I don't have any problem with anyone who dislikes prostitution. It strikes me as a rather unlikeable industry from most angles. The problems I identified on this thread relate to the blanket acceptance that an anonymous blog is unalloyed truth, and certain blanket assumptions being made about the reality of prostitution that seem to me to be highly limited in scope.

There will be some blanket assumptions, its an internet debate after all, there'll be blanket assumptions from the other side too, like your post. I don't think there has been many blanket assumptions, just that many women deeply regret going into prostitution afterwards. That maybe uncomfortable for some who think women are okay with it at the time.

Its a problem for people who think prostitution is perfectly fine between consenting adults. The prostitute maybe perfectly fine with it then and the clients conscience clear, the after effects don't really matter. Blogs like this are uncomfortable because it attacks that view, for a Libertarian its difficult to accept as it contradicts a very basic belief they have.

I don't follow your logic here at all. A truly Libertarian view would permit both those who denigrate prostitution and those who support it to hold their opinions freely and act on those opinions freely.

As long as it appears free at the time. Libertarians wouldn't really care about the after effects years later, as that is for the individual to deal with. The ideal would be help for prostitutes and counseling type services, which probably involve some type of Government intervention. Libertarians run at the mention of Govt. intervention and generally dismiss it, even if it for the greater good.

Stella Marr wrote: »

I completely agree that it should not be a crime to be a prostitute. However, it is callous and misguided to say the prostitution is the choice of the prostitute. Rather it is the choice of richer, more powerful men who use her, and the pimps and madams who profit from her.

I find this very sexist; you are essentially saying female prostitutes can't make their own decisions or exercise free will. On what basis are you looking down upon these individuals because of their chosen profession? All we need is the opinion of one prostitute who says she freely chose her job for your theory to be debunked.

You don't like or can't understand prostitution, therefore anyone who engages in it must be being forced or coerced somehow.

Do you view male prostitutes with equal condescension? Are they unable to choose for themselves either?

Stella Marr wrote: »

Prostitution is NOT a victimless crime. It destroys the women involved.

I completely agree that it should not be a crime to be a prostitute. However, it is callous and misguided to say the prostitution is the choice of the prostitute. Rather it is the choice of richer, more powerful men who use her, and the pimps and madams who profit from her.

In Sweden a prostitute has the right to sue her Johns for financial damages, due to the violation of her humanity, dignity and equality.

This is a brilliant discussion of prostitution and 'choice' written by prostitution survivor FreeIrishWoman

http://survivorsconnect.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/a-personal-refutation-of-the-concept-of-choice/

Lot of women enter prostitution voluntarily just the same as lots of women pose nude for mens magazines, Ruhama don't want to acknowledge this, they want the Irish people to see all the women as victims of some pimp, trafficker, or drug addiction in order to further their own church-backed moralistic agenda.

Here's an Interesting clip on the economics of prostitution by economist Steven Levitt where he discusses one such woman.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The Libertarian red button must have went of!

Since government intervention in prostitution has historically consisted of harassing, arresting, prosecuting, and even jailing prostitutes and their clients for engaging in a consensual victimless "crime," it bemuses me why any rational individual would see government as a solution. It's quite clear that (a) prostitution is known as the "oldest profession" for a reason -- it is not going away, no matter how many laws are passed, or how draconian the punishments; (b) by attempting to legislate on prostitution, governments usually only endanger prostitutes by keeping their industry underground, under the control of pimps, racketeers, and other criminals; (c) far from alleviating the traumatic effects of prostitution on women, governments generally only add to prostitutes' problems with the threat or reality of prosecution and prison sentences, and by removing any redress for crime. (The average prostitute in the U.S. is estimated to experience around a dozen violent assaults each year, but is unlikely to report violence to police for fear of getting in trouble herself.)

The Netherlands, not perfect by any means, but what system is?

As for prostitutes fear of reporting to police, how would Libertarians deal with that?

As for providing former prostitutes with counseling to help them deal with the aftereffects, one doesn't need to embrace libertarianism to question why the hard-pressed taxpayer should pay for the aftereffects of other people's bad choices.

Choices and options are usually a 2 way street, a Prostitute needs a client, a market, a buyer for what he/she is selling. Who deals with the after effects under Libertarianism? Charities?

Certainly, some believe that people who bought overpriced houses at the peak of the boom, and who are now dealing with the aftereffects of those choices, should be bailed out by the government — just as some believe that people who made other kinds of bad decisions, such as smoking, drinking, and using drugs without any care for their health, should also be able to socialize the aftereffects onto the taxpayer in the form of government-funded medical care.

Oh people make choices everyday, some people choose Libertarianism, as its easy to have somebody to blame. You became a prostitute? Free market. How'd you become one? Drug reliance? That's the Free Market baby, nobody forced you into it?

What was that? The drugs did it? But sure you had a free choice, free will.

But you had free choice? Well I availed of the free market and bought drugs, causes no harm to anybody, a Libertarian told me, became addicted, then sold a product, sex. A Libertarian told me that's the Free Market too, all good. He agreed.

Now, I amn't his problem. Free choice and all that.

Then again, there are people who believe that the taxpayer can't bail out everybody, and that if somebody decides to become a prostitute, and winds up traumatized, she should pay for her own counseling. Trying to offload this responsibility onto the taxpayer is especially ironic considering that most prostitutes are quite happy to dodge taxes on their earnings while working.

Yeah, a drug addicted prostitute should pay for their own recovery, meanwhile the client or pimp profits! Free market Baby, I had my way, spent my hard earned money, what more do you want?

And, How exactly do they dodge taxes?