Should the purchase of sex be legal or illegal in Ireland?

esforum wrote: »

well that would be your CHOICE wouldnt it?

It certainly would not be my choice. I would do neither. But in a gun to the head either or scenario I would choose prostitution

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No. Since we're being clear - I'm not suggesting it actually stops prostitution. I'm simply saying that criminalising the buyers makes prostitution a more unattractive choice for all involved.

ok, thank you for clarifying. Took a long long time but thanks. I would actually agree with you on that score.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No, that's not what I said. I implied that generally, the only person who has free choice to engage in the activity, or walk away any time they like, is not the sex worker. It's the person who is choosing to avail of the services of a sex worker.

you didnt imply anything, you outright said it and I disagree. I guess we shall just have to stick to our own views.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You could at least try and stick to the topic?

says the man that resorts to childish insults

melissak wrote: »

It certainly would not be my choice. I would do neither. But in a gun to the head either or scenario I would choose prostitution

Olishi4

esforum wrote: »

witty if word play

Just plain wrong if serious

Well if we are going to get serious here then how many times are you going to edit that post? Thanks for the compliment though

Olishi4 wrote: »

Well if we are going to get serious here then how many times are you going to edit that post? Thanks for the compliment though

initially I assumed it was wit on your part, then I saw the thanks and I wasnt so sure.

Im still not sure

esforum wrote: »

you didnt imply anything, you outright said it and I disagree. I guess we shall just have to stick to our own views.

You disagree with the fact that gemerally, the only person who has the free choice to walk away at any time they want, is the person availing of the services of a sex worker?

How exactly, are sex workers forcing anyone, to avail of their services?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdaEePsLIc0

One eyed Jack wrote: »

How exactly, are sex workers forcing anyone, to avail of their services?

did i say that? nope. not once, its actually the direct opposite of my stance. You are confused jack

Eramen

Typical uninformed posts courtesy of AH on this thread. It's not like legal prostitution hasn't already been tried en masse in numerous other European countries. So we have a lot of evidence to go by on the issue before we attempt anything. Saying that the whole affair equates "to a buying and selling of a service" is utter nonsense and is nothing but short sighted. There is public health and social implications associated with legalisation and most are not positive. Think of Saarland in Germany:

In 2002, Germany implemented some of the most liberal prostitution laws in Europe, with the goal of improving the legal and social status of women. But since Germany isn't surrounded by a protective border fence—and given restrictive laws in neighboring countries—the laws have essentially turned Germany into a paradise for johns from Denmark, Luxembourg, and France. The regulations have also led to increases in forced prostitution, pimping, and human trafficking.

I loved the poster who believed that nuns control the government lol. The Nordic countries have some of the strictest sex and drugs laws in the world, I'm fairly certain that the nuns control them too. Irish cuckspiracy theories 101 :rolleyes:

esforum wrote: »

how is the john forcing the worker?

Can you answer the question you were asked, which was based on your opinion, instead of deflecting with another question?

esforum wrote: »

You missed the gun to my head. I hope you wouldn't in real life.

Eramen wrote: »

In 2002, Germany implemented some of the most liberal prostitution laws in Europe, with the goal of improving the legal and social status of women. But since Germany isn't surrounded by a protective border fence—and given restrictive laws in neighboring countries—the laws have essentially turned Germany into a paradise for johns from Denmark, Luxembourg, and France. The regulations have also led to increases in forced prostitution, pimping, and human trafficking.[/I]

are you quoting research? If so could you reference it please? A google search throws up a lot of random sites quoting this without sourcing

esforum wrote: »

did i say that? nope. not once, its actually the direct opposite of my stance. You are confused jack

You're right, I'm very confused with your bed hopping goalpost moving. You're making it very difficult to pin you down for a straight answer!

melissak wrote: »

You missed the gun to my head. I hope you wouldn't in real life.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Can you answer the question you were asked, which was based on your opinion, instead of deflecting with another question?

I amended my post but allow me again, quote where I once mentioned force at all? I am the one stating choice and freedom to choose, force is your baby. You are being evasive now Jack, deliberately so I would suggest. You cant back YOUR arguement up about choice and now try to turn the table.

ToddyDoody

Legal, but you have to be licensed. I'm deadly serious.

esforum wrote: »

I amended my post but allow me again, quote where I once mentioned force at all? I am the one stating choice and freedom to choose, force is your baby. You are being evasive now Jack, deliberately so I would suggest. You cant back YOUR arguement up about choice and now try to turn the table.

I'm absolutely not being evasive at all. You said initially that both parties are free to walk away any time they want. I said that generally, only one party is free to walk away any time they want. The party who is actually free to walk away any time they want, and has the full and free choice to do so, is absolutely never the sex worker. The party who has ULTIMATELY, ALL the choice, freedom to choose, whatever, is the buyer.

That is why targeting the buyer by criminalising the buyer, who is not forced or coerced to pay to avail of the services of a sex worker, makes the activity more unattractive for the buyer, and without buyers, the potential market for sex workers to earn an income in sex work declines, because there isn't any real money to be made, leading to people who might have made the decision to become sex workers, seek alternative, legitimate, employment.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'm absolutely not being evasive at all. You said initially that both parties are free to walk away any time they want. I said that generally, only one party is free to walk away any time they want. The party who is actually free to walk away any time they want, and has the full and free choice to do so, is absolutely never the sex worker. The party who has ULTIMATELY, ALL the choice, freedom to choose, whatever, is the buyer.

That is why targeting the buyer by criminalising the buyer, who is not forced or coerced to pay to avail of the services of a sex worker, makes the activity more unattractive for the buyer, and without buyers, the potential market for sex workers to earn an income in sex work declines, because there isn't any real money to be made, leading to people who might have made the decision to become sex workers, seek alternative, legitimate, employment.

This seems logical. I don't know, what about buyers who are really lonely. Sex and intimacy is a basic human need. I can't make up my mind on this

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'm absolutely not being evasive at all. You said initially that both parties are free to walk away any time they want. I said that generally, only one party is free to walk away any time they want. The party who is actually free to walk away any time they want, and has the full and free choice to do so, is absolutely never the sex worker. The party who has ULTIMATELY, ALL the choice, freedom to choose, whatever, is the buyer.

That is why targeting the buyer by criminalising the buyer, who is not forced or coerced to pay to avail of the services of a sex worker, makes the activity more unattractive for the buyer, and without buyers, the potential market for sex workers to earn an income in sex work declines, because there isn't any real money to be made, leading to people who might have made the decision to become sex workers, seek alternative, legitimate, employment.

Jack, theres two paragraphs there. In the first you say the prostitute has no real choice, in the second you state that the prostiture made a decision to become a sex worker and as a result of no income, will decide to leave prostitution.

decide which it is please. I actually agree with the second paragraph.

(also, can you explain where you got the idea that I suggested force from?)

melissak wrote: »

This seems logical. I don't know, what about buyers who are really lonely. Sex and intimacy is a basic human need. I can't make up my mind on this

For sure, it's a basic need for some humans, but that basic need they have for sex, doesn't make it a human right. They have as much choice to avail of, or to pursue other legal means to avail of sex, without promoting an industry rife with exploitation and human indignity.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

For sure, it's a basic need for some humans, but that basic need they have for sex, doesn't make it a human right. They have as much choice to avail of, or to pursue other legal means to avail of sex, without promoting an industry rife with exploitation and human indignity.

Yeah true, but what if they have no other opportunity for intimate human contact, not just sex but connection for whatever reason?

LeBash

Going by the polling here, why isn't there a debate going on in the dail to fully legalise and regulated it?

esforum wrote: »

Jack, theres two paragraphs there. In the first you say the prostitute has no real choice, in the second you state that the prostiture made a decision to become a sex worker and as a result of no income, will decide to leave prostitution.

decide which it is please. I actually agree with the second paragraph.

People will be more unlikely to become sex workers in the first place. It's an immediate deterrent, but it is part of a long term strategy. The unfortunate part about it is that these new laws being introduced will do fcuk all, without the proper support structures in place to offer viable education and employment opportunities to people who might still consider sex work a viable alternative to legitimate employment.

(also, can you explain where you got the idea that I suggested force from?)

I didn't say you suggested force. I was asking is that what you were suggesting. I take from that then that you weren't suggesting that anyone was being forced to avail of the services of sex workers. Well I'm glad we cleared that much up at least!

LeBash wrote: »

Going by the polling here, why isn't there a debate going on in the dail to fully legalise and regulated it?

Because a boards poll with 170 votes is hardly a revolution?

wakka12

Its ridiculous that its not legal. Why is stripping and modelling considered legitimate professions while this isn't , you're just using your body for the pleasure of others in return for money. Same as prostitution

LeBash wrote: »

Going by the polling here, why isn't there a debate going on in the dail to fully legalise and regulated it?

Because this is After Hours, the 'Anything Goes' forum of Boards... it's a bit like the Senad in that respect - everyone has an opinion, but their opinions don't have any real influence on public policy!

exiztone

Eramen wrote: »

I loved the poster who believed that nuns control the government lol. The Nordic countries have some of the strictest sex and drugs laws in the world, I'm fairly certain that the nuns control them too. Irish cuckspiracy theories 101 :rolleyes:

The criminalisation of sex workers has been heavily pushed by The Good Shepherd Sisters Ireland and the Order of Our Lady of Charity. This is no conspiracy, you can check the former's statement on the matter here.

It's interesting to note that these are two of the religious orders that ran the Magdalene Laundries--a "haven" for "fallen" or promiscuous women.

wakka12 wrote: »

Its ridiculous that its not legal. Why is stripping and modelling considered legitimate professions while this isn't , you're just using your body for the pleasure of others in return for money. Same as prostitution

If you consider looking at playboy the same as actual sex it is the same.

melissak wrote: »

Yeah true, but what if they have no other opportunity for intimate human contact, not just sex but connection for whatever reason?

Well like anyone else in society does, they have to learn to make opportunities for themselves, rather than exploit the lack of opportunities that forces other people into sex work.

coyle21

yes consenting adults and its their own business.

exiztone wrote: »

The criminalisation of sex workers has been heavily pushed by The Good Shepherd Sisters Ireland and the Order of Our Lady of Charity. This is no conspiracy, you can check the former's statement on the matter here.

It's interesting to note that these are two of the religious orders that ran the Magdalene Laundries--a "haven" for "fallen" or promiscuous women.

Yeah that's not really all that interesting any more tbh, particularly when this new legislation is being influenced by an EU directive for adoption across Europe of the Swedish model. Nothing to do with religion, unless you consider feminism a religion...