Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Should the purchase of sex be legal or illegal in Ireland?
Options
Comments
-
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »Then be shocked because I for one said as much more than once in the thread already.
In that I will judge my success as a parent based on by child's ability to make choices for themselves, and to live a life they are happy with.
And IF that turns out to involve a career in the sex industry somewhere, then that is perfectly ok with me.
I do not see my role as a parent to be solely to mold my children into what I want them to be. I see my role as a parent as being to help them find out who THEY want to be, and to give them the skills, knowledge, self confidence and ability to make their own choices, for their own reasons, and to find to find their own path to happiness. All while minimizing harm or suffering to others.
Well to be fair it is hard to know what some of them are saying. Because what they say sounds ominous but is unspecific. Such as when Kev said he would simply not "tolerate it" if his child went into sex work.
Now what that means or what form that intolerance will actually take, is assumption and guess work. An assumption I will not make either way, but you appear to want to. Only he can tell us how his intolerance would manifest if his child came home and declared they were now in the sex trade.
You do not know their minds any more than I do. I would not pretend to. I would merely suggest you do not either. Especially in a world where parents DO periodically reject and disown children for who or what they turn out to be.
I don't know you, but I'm sure there are legal things that a child of yours could do that is gonna annoy you. There is no point in trying to come off as somebody that is liberal to an extent that there is no boundaries just for the sake of seeming "progressive".
No. It is nothing about molding them into what I want them to be. Would you be happy if you kid was happy to drink cans and live off the dole for the rest of their days? Or to always live at your house or scrounge off you? If yes, then you are deluded.
I don't see why I would have to explain what "tolerant" means. Are you looking for me to post a list of consequences? Those don't matter. I don't have a child, so the consequences could be different, however I am not going to change my mind on this topic any time soon.
To me, sex is not something that is to be sold, from my view, that is the end of the discussion.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »they don't have any employment rights because the industry is not legislated for in this country.
Which is a shame, because they should be protected for their rights like anyone else offering a product or service. Nice of you to provide a good argument FOR legislating for it.One eyed Jack wrote: »refusing to acknowledge sex work as a legitimate form of employment.
A refusal made with no reason I am able to discern or, seemingly, you are capable of offering.One eyed Jack wrote: »Nobody is actively stopping anyone from choosing to engage in sex work.
Except those actively seeking to criminalizing the seller, the buyer, or both. They very much ARE actively attempting to stop people choosing to engage in sex work. That is what it means to make something illegal you know.One eyed Jack wrote: »They're just not facilitating their choices as there has been no compelling argument presented yet to do so.
You have presented no compelling arguments NOT to do so or to make doing so illegal. Plenty of people are presenting arguments FOR legalizing and regulating it however. It seems you see only what you want to see, and hear only what you want to hear.
They are offering a product or service. The product or service they offer is itself not something that is illegal or immoral. So what arguments should there be against facilitating it the same way as we facilitate other trade or business?
The lack of compelling arguments to discriminate against this one trade over another, is yours, not anyone elses.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »What private individuals do in each other's houses is fine, until they make it the business of the State by asking for it to be facilitated and legislated for through regulation. I can think of plenty examples where this applies, such as marriage equality for example - it was never about what two people get up to behind closed doors, it was about their union being recognised and given equal legal protection by society. Abortion is another example where it's not just a private matter for the individual involved, there are social implications to facilitating and legislating for the issue of abortion in society that need to be considered. Prostitution is no different - there are social and legal implications that need to be considered, and so far society has shown no will to want to facilitate legislating for the prostitution industry.
but then have no rule about it and forget about "recognising it" . Sex for favours is as old as human history, Prostitution is just a particular form of it.One eyed Jack wrote: »
There doesn't need to be an exceptional reason for any issue which is deemed to be harmful to society. It's not simply about what consenting adults get up to behind closed doors, when being asked to facilitate prostitution through legislation in society. The social implications have to be considered, and so far, no country has been able to demonstrate that prostitution is either beneficial to, or necessary, in a modern, progressive society.
A bit like above , just take all the relevant laws off the books as the state has no interest in why 2 people are having sex. It doesn't need to be beneficial. Its kind of a slippery slope Islamic argument, adultery? gay sex? sex outside marriage?One eyed Jack wrote: »Because the issue of prostitution has wider social implications than just those people who are engaged in the industry that want it decriminalised, legalised and regulated.
what exactly?A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
0 -
Yes all that sounds lovely however children aren't born with complete knowledge.
Given I never suggested they were, and in fact everything I just wrote indicates the exact opposite....... I am not sure what you mean with your "however" or why you bring this fact up as if it is something new to me.It's the parents job to inform them and to guide them in the right direction.
There is no "the" right direction. Their direction might differ from yours. That is the point. The role of the parent is to give them the knowledge and skills and faculties and abilities to make their own decisions, and to find out who THEY themselves are.
We as parents are there to guide them on their path, not force them down ours.what about all those unhappy people who are significantly, negatively affected by it, you know, the ones we are not pretending that you don't care about. The ones who IMO make up the majority of the industry.
I care very much for anyone who is in a job or industry they do not want to be in. I promote any and all initiatives I can in society that allow people to gain skills, re-train, change trade, or get out of where they are and into where they want to be.
I do not limit that to, or preclude it from, sex workers. It is an ideal I think we should strive towards across the board. If someone is in sex work, restaurant work, child care work, medical work, political work, or simply unemployed..... and they want to change their circumstances..... I would like to afford them EVERY opportunity to do so that we can conceivably and realistically offer them.
As for your opinion on what the majority of the industry is..... I think I will hold out for actual facts and studies over opinion on that one thanks.0 -
I don't know you, but I'm sure there are legal things that a child of yours could do that is gonna annoy you. There is no point in trying to come off as somebody that is liberal to an extent that there is no boundaries just for the sake of seeming "progressive".
I never suggested otherwise. There will of course be actions or decisions my children make that irk me or disappoint me. But so what? That is me. I can divide those feelings from my role as a parent. I see my role as a parent to give my child the faculties to make their own decisions in life and find their own path in life. Regardless of whether or not that is a path that pleases me, or would be one I would choose for them myself.
And I say that with none of the agendas you simply invented on my behalf above.No. It is nothing about molding them into what I want them to be. Would you be happy if........
Again I think the distinction you are missing is between what I think would make ME happy and what I see my role as a parent as being. And my role as a parent is not so much about what makes ME happy.I don't see why I would have to explain what "tolerant" means.
Then you will be overjoyed to find that I do not recall suggesting you "have to" and it is not something I would suggest.
What I WAS however doing and saying was that I was addressing another user who was presuming to speak for what other parents mean or do not mean........ and I am just pointing out that this is not an assumption we are warranted to make.
For example when you said you would simply not tolerate it....... I can not assume to know what you mean by that, can I? I do not know what you mean by it. Nor does the user I was replying to. Only YOU know what you meant by that.To me, sex is not something that is to be sold, from my view, that is the end of the discussion.
Then do not sell or buy it. Problem solved.
But I think there is a chasm of distinction in this world between "X is not for me" and "No one else should do X either". The former is fine. But with the latter you can expect people to at least ASK you for some basis for that position. A basis you appear unwilling, and I suspect incapable to be honest, of offering.
But alas we live in a world where a large amount of people think that THEM not wanting something means no one else should have or want it either. "If I can not have it then no one else can" used to be the main catch phrase of the lead bad guy in the Transformers when I was growing up. Pity it could not have stayed there.0 -
Advertisement
-
silverharp wrote: »but then have no rule about it and forget about "recognising it" . Sex for favours is as old as human history, Prostitution is just a particular form of it.
But if you are asking for it to be legislated for and regulated, that's hardly forgetting about it, is it?A bit like above , just take all the relevant laws off the books as the state has no interest in why 2 people are having sex. It doesn't need to be beneficial. Its kind of a slippery slope Islamic argument, adultery? gay sex? sex outside marriage?
Same as above.what exactly?
The exploitation that already exists in the industry, which would be ignored if society were simply asked to forget about it and ignore what's going on.0 -
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »Given I never suggested they were, and in fact everything I just wrote indicates the exact opposite....... I am not sure what you mean with your "however" or why you bring this fact up as if it is something new to me.
There is no "the" right direction. Their direction might differ from yours. That is the point. The role of the parent is to give them the knowledge and skills and faculties and abilities to make their own decisions, and to find out who THEY themselves are.
We as parents are there to guide them on their path, not force them down ours.
I care very much for anyone who is in a job or industry they do not want to be in. I promote any and all initiatives I can in society that allow people to gain skills, re-train, change trade, or get out of where they are and into where they want to be.
I do not limit that to, or preclude it from, sex workers. It is an ideal I think we should strive towards across the board. If someone is in sex work, restaurant work, child care work, medical work, political work, or simply unemployed..... and they want to change their circumstances..... I would like to afford them EVERY opportunity to do so that we can conceivably and realistically offer them.
As for your opinion on what the majority of the industry is..... I think I will hold out for actual facts and studies over opinion on that one thanks.
You do suggest and imply things but whenever someone confronts you with them you deny ever saying anything. You'd only accept your own exact words quoted back to you and that is not a conversation.
So a parents 12 year old comes up to them and says "I'm thinking of going into sex work as a career path when I am older". What would you say to them? Remember now, it's their path, not yours. Are you going to tell them that you are delighted that they are thinking of going down this road as long as it makes them happy? Or are you gonna provide them with factual knowledge on the negative effect it has on the majority of people working in it....oh wait no, you can't tell them that because you are still holding out for the facts and studies right?0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »But if you are asking for it to be legislated for and regulated, that's hardly forgetting about it, is it?
Nor is making it illegal and policing those laws. Either way there is some level of investment of effort, law, and policing required at some level in society. So simply not wanting to make an effort would be no excuse, let alone relevant point on the "should it be legal or illegal" discussion the thread is actually about.
The real questions to answer to at least pretend to be engaging with the topic is WHAT the actual effort is of criminalizing it and policing those laws. WHAT is the actual effort of legalizing and regulating it. And what harms and benefits does each option bring.
Then compare and contrast.
None of this appears to be what you are doing, so much as you favor simply asserting one option is more expensive, harmful, or requiring of effort than the other and then dodging any attempt to get you to substantiate those positions.One eyed Jack wrote: »The exploitation that already exists in the industry, which would be ignored if society were simply asked to forget about it and ignore what's going on.
Thankfully there are few, if any, people advocating for actually ignoring all of those issues. Those people, for example, advocating for a legal and regulated industry are doing so for reasons very much including addressing the exploitation and abuses that occur in the trade.
The distinction is those of us who are advocating for that have explained exactly how and why they feel it could address those issues. Those of your ilk wanting to make it criminal for one party or the other have not offered such arguments.0 -
You do suggest and imply things but whenever someone confronts you with them you deny ever saying anything.
The only things I deny saying are the things I never actually said. And I note that when people like yourself suggest I said them and I correct them.... they NEVER seem to go back and find and quote me saying it.
Why?
Because I never said it. That is why.You'd only accept your own exact words quoted back to you and that is not a conversation.
Putting words in my mouth I never said is not a conversation. At least not a real one. It would mean I am talking towards you, and you are talking towards an imaginary me somewhere behind me.
If you want a conversation then I am pretty sure the first step to do so is reply to the things I DID say, not the things I did not.So a parents 12 year old comes up to them and says "I'm thinking of going into sex work as a career path when I am older". What would you say to them?
What would I say to ANOTHER parents 12 year old? I would say nothing at all. It is not for me to parent the child of another.
Or do you mean what would I say to the parent? Again I am not sure why I would butt my nose in.Remember now, it's their path, not yours. Are you going to tell them that you are delighted that they are thinking of going down this road as long as it makes them happy? Or are you gonna provide them with factual knowledge on the negative effect it has on the majority of people working in it....oh wait no, you can't tell them that because you are still holding out for the facts and studies right?
I would certainly not offer something as fact that has not been established as fact no.
That aside however I do not see your choices above as being mutually exclusive. I can support a child's decision in life while ALSO ensuring they are fully aware and educated as to the risks inherent in that decision.
And I do not limit that to sex work either. If my child came to me wanting to be an artist I would support them, while also making damn sure they know just what % of artists are struggling on the bread line or unemployed.
If they wanted to be a Doctor or Vet or nurse I would support that to while making sure they know JUST how long and hard and expensive the study path is, and just how long and stressful the hours can be.
If they wanted to be a politician I would support that while also making sure they know just how reviled and mistrusted they will be by many, how they will likely be approached for bribes and black mail... and how frustrating it is to actually implement anything in that career due to the resistence and legislation and loop holes and court actions and more that will be obstacles in their way.
If they want to be a police officer or soldier I would support that while also making sure the horrors and risks they will witness first hand in their day to day line of work.
The list goes on. And on. And on. But suffice to say regardless of what career they choose to follow I see no mutual exclusion between BOTH supporting them AND ensuring they are fully informed and aware of the pros AND cons of their decision.
THAT is what good parenting is to my mind. Supporting your child on their path and in their choices while also ensuring they remain as informed as you can help them to be about those choices.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »But if you are asking for it to be legislated for and regulated, that's hardly forgetting about it, is it?.
In as much as I stepped in it was not for it not to be made illegal , any of the coercion/trafficking stuff is probably covered by normal law. so are you happy with that?One eyed Jack wrote: »The exploitation that already exists in the industry, which would be ignored if society were simply asked to forget about it and ignore what's going on.
people can be exploited for various reasons , a general exploitation law covering coercion , people trafficking , kidnapping etc. is grand surely?A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
0 -
Advertisement
-
silverharp wrote: »people can be exploited for various reasons , a general exploitation law covering coercion , people trafficking , kidnapping etc. is grand surely?
The bigger issue though is that these laws exist in places where prostitution is legal, and there are still large scale issues with coercion and trafficking within the sex trade.0 -
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »The only things I deny saying are the things I never actually said. And I note that when people like yourself suggest I said them and I correct them.... they NEVER seem to go back and find and quote me saying it.
Why?
Because I never said it. That is why.
No it's because your posts are ridiculously long with very little substance. You nit pick at parts that are irrelevant to dodge questions. For example, I gave you a scenario where a 12 year old child was thinking about it as a career and you chose to highlight that it wasn't your child instead of answering the questions i gave and realising that I created a theoretical child to be sensitive towards you and your personal life. You probably wouldn't understand what I am saying here either but I'm not waisting my time again explaining it.
Like another poster said earlier in the thread, I just can't be arsed with that kind of debating.0 -
The bigger issue though is that these laws exist in places where prostitution is legal, and there are still large scale issues with coercion and trafficking within the sex trade.
Agreed. But the question then becomes what exactly are the laws they have, and how are they implemented and enforced (if at all), and why is it going wrong.
From there one can then ask the questions on how, or if, improvements can be made.
Alas what I think we see is people who would view a general statement like yours, and simply throw their hands up and go "Therefore it will never work, so lets just make the whole enterprise illegal".
Because even then there are still open questions. Such as whether making it illegal actually DOES alleviate the issues of coercion or trafficking at all.... or does it do nothing or....... as I fear.... does it make it worse.0 -
No it's because your posts are ridiculously long with very little substance.
You ignoring the content of my post does not mean the substance is not there.You nit pick at parts that are irrelevant to dodge questions.
I have not once dodged a question, let alone on this thread. But by all means list the questions you think I dodged. If I genuinely missed it I am more than happy to answer now.For example, I gave you a scenario where a 12 year old child was thinking about it as a career and you chose to highlight that it wasn't your child
So by answering the question you actually asked you think I dodged answering the question you actually asked? Can you at least TRY to make sense here please?
You asked me what I would say if another parents child came to them and asked them about this career. And the answer is I would not say anything. It is not my place.
Just because you do not like the answer, does not mean I did not give one or I dodged the question. Do you even know what it MEANS to dodge a question? Because this ain't it.You probably wouldn't understand what I am saying here either but I'm not waisting my time again explaining it.
Alas, as I just showed, the lack of understanding here falls with you, not me.Like another poster said earlier in the thread, I just can't be arsed with that kind of debating.
Then stop doing it. Because it is not me doing it. It is you.
AGAIN you asked me what I would say to someone elses child in that scenario and the genuine answer is I wouldn't. It is not my place to say anything to anyone elses child.
But I then ALSO told you what I would say to MY child in that scenario. An answer you have seemingly been forced to outright ignore to bolster this false narrative that I dodged the question. Have some decorum please.0 -
The bigger issue though is that these laws exist in places where prostitution is legal, and there are still large scale issues with coercion and trafficking within the sex trade.
You can make that argument about any industry. At the end of the day those issues are not a product of legislation, they are a product of inadequate enforcement of the relevant legislation.
Pick any industry and there will be those who flout the law. Law enforcement will catch some, not all. If they did, sure we wouldn't need a police force etc.
As it stands, the sex trade exists, exploitation exists. Ignoring the industry won't make it vanish. Driving it underground just makes more money for people doing the exploiting and the State fails a large chunk of it's citizens. If the industry is properly regulated, taxed etc., it puts a big old spotlight on the industry and if done properly assists those involved.
SD0 -
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »Agreed. But the question then becomes what exactly are the laws they have, and how are they implemented and enforced (if at all), and why is it going wrong.
The laws are what they say on the tin. And they are implemented and enforced. What's going wrong is that from both sides of the transaction there's are issues. The prostitutes are afraid of the pimps or gangs running the establishments, and the punters generally don't care if a girl has been trafficked or coerced because as far as they're concerned they've picked a girl and they're getting to ride her.
How would you suggest that any of these issues are overcome? Honestly...nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »Alas what I think we see is people who would view a general statement like yours, and simply throw their hands up and go "Therefore it will never work, so lets just make the whole enterprise illegal".0 -
The bigger issue though is that these laws exist in places where prostitution is legal, and there are still large scale issues with coercion and trafficking within the sex trade.
sure but laws don't stop the activity happening. You can make it illegal tomorrow and it will either go underground or there will just be the old thing of paying for someone's time and whatever else is voluntary. for practical purposes it cant be enforcedA belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
0 -
No, they're a product of the nature of the industry.StudentDad wrote: »You can make that argument about any industry. At the end of the day those issues are not a product of legislation, they are a product of inadequate enforcement of the relevant legislation.
This is completely untrue. I linked an article previously which stated that legalising it introduces an avenue for criminal gangs to continue or expand their practice under the guise of a legitimate business. Many of the girls are simply held to ransom.StudentDad wrote: »As it stands, the sex trade exists, exploitation exists. Ignoring the industry won't make it vanish. Driving it underground just makes more money for people doing the exploiting and the State fails a large chunk of it's citizens.
And can increase trafficking, coercion and money laundering.StudentDad wrote: »If the industry is properly regulated, taxed etc., it puts a big old spotlight on the industry and if done properly assists those involved.0 -
No, they're a product of the nature of the industry.
This is completely untrue. I linked an article previously which stated that legalising it introduces an avenue for criminal gangs to continue or expand their practice under the guise of a legitimate business. Many of the girls are simply held to ransom.
And can increase trafficking, coercion and money laundering.
All of which are a product of inadequate enforcement of relevant legislation. There is no magic bullet that will make this industry perfect. No industry is perfect. There will always be people in any given industry who laugh at the law and find ways to avoid it. I'd rather the State legislate and do something rather than drive it further underground where the participants are left in limbo with zero options.
SD0 -
StudentDad wrote: »You can make that argument about any industry. At the end of the day those issues are not a product of legislation, they are a product of inadequate enforcement of the relevant legislation.
Pick any industry and there will be those who flout the law. Law enforcement will catch some, not all. If they did, sure we wouldn't need a police force etc.
As it stands, the sex trade exists, exploitation exists. Ignoring the industry won't make it vanish. Driving it underground just makes more money for people doing the exploiting and the State fails a large chunk of it's citizens. If the industry is properly regulated, taxed etc., it puts a big old spotlight on the industry and if done properly assists those involved.
SD
One logical error after another and too many assumptions.
You can't make 'that argument' about any industry.. How can we? Simply on the basis that crime exists in a given industry? Are you honestly saying if I pick the catering industry for example, it is comparable to the prostitution industry in regards to tax-evasion, social unrest, criminality, cost to the national budget (policing/law), drug-addiction, sexual exploitation etc? Come on..
Legalisation did not put the spotlight on the industry in Germany or Amsterdam, and in fact both nations have been winding down the prevalence of legal prostitution since the turn of the century. It costs too much to police, makes these areas a center of global trafficking, and it's a policy that has little public support.
Only 5% of prostitutes in the Netherlands are registered to pay tax. A similarly low number in Saarland. It just doesn't make financial sense if you want to thread along this road.0 -
Advertisement
-
No they're not. They're a product of the industry itself. Supply and demand. Criminal organisations will hold girls to ransom in what is perceived to be a legitimate business and men will pay to have their way with them without consideration. It's what's already happening in other countries. The laws just simply don't work. Instead they open opportunities for the underworld to thrive.StudentDad wrote: »All of which are a product of inadequate enforcement of relevant legislation.
This is a rather silly statement. We're not discussing workers rights or tax evasion. Stop trying to simplify things to this extent!StudentDad wrote: »There is no magic bullet that will make this industry perfect. No industry is perfect. There will always be people in any given industry who laugh at the law and find ways to avoid it.0 -
One logical error after another and too many assumptions.
You can't make 'that argument' about any industry.. How can we? Simply on the basis because crime exists in a given industry? Are you honestly saying if I pick the catering industry for example, it is comparable to the prostitution industry in regards to tax-evasion, social unrest, criminality, cost to the national budget (policing/law), drug-addiction, sexual exploitation etc? Come on..
Legalisation did not put the spotlight on the industry in Germany or Amsterdam, and in fact both nations have been winding down the prevalence of legal prostitution since the turn of the century. It costs too much to police, makes these areas a center of global trafficking, and it's a policy that has little public support.
Only 5% of prostitutes in the Netherlands are registered to pay tax. A similarly low number in Saarland. It just doesn't make financial sense if you want to thread along this road.
As I said, there is no magic bullet to make this industry a paragon of human behaviour. However, doing nothing isn't an option either. I would rather the State legalise, regulate and tax and enforce the legislation rather than drive it underground where there are no protections at all.
SD0 -
StudentDad wrote: »As I said, there is no magic bullet to make this industry a paragon of human behaviour. However, doing nothing isn't an option either. I would rather the State legalise, regulate and tax and enforce the legislation rather than drive it underground where there are no protections at all.
SD
I agree that something needs to be done, but strictly from a social point of view where men or women don't need to go into prostitution in the first place or where it can be minimised.
You can't give 'rights'/'protections' to prostitutes that they already have. They are in fact forgoing their rights because they are engaging in criminality, leaving themselves open to prosecution. What's next, special rights for terrorists and gang members? I'm not even joking, it's a slippery slope.
I think we should follow a tried and tested model that works while making our own beneficial adjustments to it while we go along. The EU suggests the Swedish one for a reason, where prostitution remains illegal and discouraged, but it works. It calls for stricter ramifications on the buying and selling of sex that works in sync with Sweden's generous social incentives. It has led to a decline in prostitution.
It's funny how all the 'progressives' on this thread are all gung-ho for legalisation (based on nothing) yet never brought up the need for the elimination of the causes of prostitution in the first place or giving women alternatives to walking the streets selling sex. Such ideologues will never see sense. Why the hell should we be encouraging prostitution for women? Because that's the undertone of the message legalisation sends.0 -
No they're not. They're a product of the industry itself. Supply and demand. Criminal organisations will hold girls to ransom in what is perceived to be a legitimate business and men will pay to have their way with them without consideration. It's what's already happening in other countries. The laws just simply don't work. Instead they open opportunities for the underworld to thrive.
This is a rather silly statement. We're not discussing workers rights or tax evasion. Stop trying to simplify things to this extent!
In a sense we are discussing workers rights. It seems illogical to criminalise an industry that will carry on regardless of the attitude of the State/society. At least some portion of society turns to this industry for its services, so why not legalise, regulate and tax it?
As regards the criminal elements that is a matter for law enforcement. The industry isn't going away.
SD0 -
We're not. Just give over.StudentDad wrote: »In a sense we are discussing workers rights.
No it doesn't. It seems more illogical to legalise it and open legitimate avenues for the criminals to thrive.StudentDad wrote: »It seems illogical to criminalise an industry that will carry on regardless of the attitude of the State/society.
The vast majority of the portion of the population that turn to the industry for it's services do not give a shit about the women involved and that's part of the problem. It's why the dark underbelly thrives to the extent that it does.StudentDad wrote: »At least some portion of society turns to this industry for its services, so why not legalise, regulate and tax it?
And as has been proven abroad. It's extremely expensive and almost impossible to police.StudentDad wrote: »As regards the criminal elements that is a matter for law enforcement. The industry isn't going away.0 -
I agree that something needs to be done, but strictly from a social point of view where men or women don't need to go into prostitution in the first place or where it can be minimised.
You can't give 'rights' to prostitutes that they already have. They are in fact forgoing their rights because they are engaging in criminality, leaving themselves open to prosecution. What's next, special rights for terrorists and drug lords? I'm not even joking, it's a slippery slope.
I think we should follow a tried and tested model that works while making our own beneficial adjustments to it while we go along. The EU suggests the Swedish one for a reason, where prostitution remains illegal and discouraged, but it works. It calls for stricter ramifications on the buying and selling of sex that works in sync with Sweden's generous social incentives. It has led to a decline in prostitution.
It's funny how all the 'progressives' on this thread are all gung-ho for legalisation (based on nothing) yet never brought up the need for the elimination of the causes of prostitution in the first place or giving women alternatives to walking the streets selling sex. Such ideologues will never see sense. Why the hell should we be encouraging prostitution for women? Because that's the undertone of the message legalisation sends.
Ah yes the floodgates argument. If we do this x will happen. It doesn't necessarily follow. I sure as hell won't be engaging in this industry any time soon but I don't think criminalising those who choose to do so is the way forward either.
There are wider issues at play yes and that is a much thornier issue to grapple with. Again though, punishing someone for engaging in an industry that isn't going to vanish in the morning will not solve the problem.
SD0 -
You role as parent, as the provider and carer for your child is make sure first and foremost to look after the best interests of the child, not to let the child run wild doing whatever they feel. You need to point them in the right direction to be on a good path in life. If your kid says "Daddy, I'm thinking of being a hooker, what do you think?", I somehow doubt you will tell them to go for it.nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »I never suggested otherwise. There will of course be actions or decisions my children make that irk me or disappoint me. But so what? That is me. I can divide those feelings from my role as a parent. I see my role as a parent to give my child the faculties to make their own decisions in life and find their own path in life. Regardless of whether or not that is a path that pleases me, or would be one I would choose for them myself.
And I say that with none of the agendas you simply invented on my behalf above.
Again I think the distinction you are missing is between what I think would make ME happy and what I see my role as a parent as being. And my role as a parent is not so much about what makes ME happy.
I agree that the children should find their own path in life but not as liberally as you put it. Yours is a very 1960s hippy view of raising a child.
Well then by what I mean, is that becoming a prostitute and remaining part of my future family that I hope to have are going to be incompatible with one another.Then you will be overjoyed to find that I do not recall suggesting you "have to" and it is not something I would suggest.
What I WAS however doing and saying was that I was addressing another user who was presuming to speak for what other parents mean or do not mean........ and I am just pointing out that this is not an assumption we are warranted to make.
For example when you said you would simply not tolerate it....... I can not assume to know what you mean by that, can I? I do not know what you mean by it. Nor does the user I was replying to. Only YOU know what you meant by that.Then do not sell or buy it. Problem solved.
But I think there is a chasm of distinction in this world between "X is not for me" and "No one else should do X either". The former is fine. But with the latter you can expect people to at least ASK you for some basis for that position. A basis you appear unwilling, and I suspect incapable to be honest, of offering.
But alas we live in a world where a large amount of people think that THEM not wanting something means no one else should have or want it either. "If I can not have it then no one else can" used to be the main catch phrase of the lead bad guy in the Transformers when I was growing up. Pity it could not have stayed there.
Unfortunately, the problem isn't solved. By society portraying it as a viable career choice, it places a greater burden on me as a parent. Much in the same way that MTV portrays being an idiot or slutty on TV as a respectful way to behave.
Finally, no, that is not what I meant, if you want to start a family whore house or whatever you want, then go for it, I don't really care if you're happy with it then fine, but I don't want my kids saying that this is their chosen career path because a bunch of liberals just NEED to get the message out that being a hooker is a-ok in human civilization 2016+0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »Seeing as I have a fundamental lack of understanding of the industry, the people in it, how it operates and in fact the issue of prostitution at all, why don't you clue me in then?
I'm even willing to overlook the fact that you weren't even aware that the legislation was being introduced. I'd like to understand how you see legislating for prostitution working within an Irish context and within your proposed social and legal framework. It doesn't have to be a thesis, a couple of lines will do.
I already have, multiple times. You wont even look up or accept the correct meaning of words for gods sake!
I was prefectly aware. I asked you what legislation you were talking about that would legalise or criminalise prostitution, the 2015 bill does neither nor if we want to go down this road, is a bill legislation. It may not even make it into law but I think it will. Prior to that you were talking about the Swedish model. Asking for clarification of where and what you are refering to is not ignorance, its an attempt to debate but I have learnt better. Its also interesting that the bill mainly focuses on those things you claim legal prostitution will make worse.
You realise that if the bill passes it shall be illegal to purchase sex and obtain a child for prostitution but yet prostitution of an adult shall remain legal? Good thing the dail understands the difference between voluntary and coerced.
You allow it to become a recognised industry with licensing requirements and limitations. In return tax returns are processed. Its already legal as I already pointed out multiple times, all that is now required is the removal of the 'immoral earnings' concept and voila, legality. You need not even change the rules on brothels if you did not want to however I would suggest doing so.
How do you regulate the alcohol industry? Or tobacco industry? Or pharamaceutical industry? or for a more recent one, security industry? What about the strip clubs and their licenses? How do you regulate smoking? Taxis?
Has licensing and regulating security made it better of worse do you think? Should we stop licensing pubs and taxis? NO, because licensing makes sense and makes controlling the industry while protecting the people that use and work within it easier and more effective.
when all is said and done;
If I go out tonight and go to a stripper I agree to pay that woman to take her clothes of for me
If I go to a hooker and pay her to have sex with me I am agreeing to give her money in exchange for sex.
A stripper wakes up, showers, gets dressed like any other worker, goes to work. puts in a shift and during so strips for me in return for financial reward.
A hooker, wakes up, showers, gets dressed like any other worker, goes to work. puts in a shift and during so sleeps with me in return for financial reward.
How does any of that effect you? How does any of that effect society?
It doesnt and making it illegal for both or either wont make any of it even one ounce better for the customer, the staff or society.
If you cannot grasp that something you are morally against could become a part of society in a legal manner, theres little I can do or say but its pretty simple, homosexuals did it not so long ago and the fabric of society was not torn apart.0 -
Well then by what I mean, is that becoming a prostitute and remaining part of my future family that I hope to have are going to be incompatible with one another.
Thats sad, really it is. the fact that you would disown a child for something so trivial.
Did it work well over the years in regards homosexuality?
Do you think disowning the child into an illegal activity will be for the childs benefit?0 -
Advertisement
-
No they're not. They're a product of the industry itself. Supply and demand. Criminal organisations will hold girls to ransom in what is perceived to be a legitimate business and men will pay to have their way with them without consideration. It's what's already happening in other countries. The laws just simply don't work. Instead they open opportunities for the underworld to thrive.
I must be missing something here but are you saying that making something legal makes it a bigger avenue for criminals but making it illegal will reduce criminal involvement? Because if it is I dont think you know what the word criminal means.
Traficking is a crime, licensing prostitution will not change that fact, it shall still be a crime.
The only difference will be if its fully legal:
A, Licensed brothel with 50 staff, I know where it is, walk in, demand licenses and ID from all persons present and can quickly identify issues such as an unlicensed hooker who may therefore prove to be traficked or underage or a breach of any number of current health, safety, criminal and employment law.
B, secret brothel empoying 50= automatically dodgy and will be raided.
if its all ilegal:
A, I dont know jack **** because the whole shagging lot or hidden and secret with the voluntary and trafficked girls mixed with each other and theres no legal safety for the staff.0
Advertisement