posted
Currently Prostitution is still Illegal in most of the United States. The argument against it is of course a "moral" issue.
However, recend judicial trends that lean towards a "two consenting adults = no foul" (and rightly so) seem to beg the question:
Is it, from a judicial point of view, wrong to tell two consenting adults that it is wrong to create a monetary transaction involving sex?
It would seem that the status of "prostitution" as being Illegal doesn't have any arguments against except the "moral" basis.
It also has alot of "practice" exceptions to it that cause questions to arise.
You can pay a woman or man to have sex with you, and as long as you have an oral agreement that it's for "art" (porn film, magazine, etc.) then it is completely legal to pay for sex.
However, currently it's not ok to simply pay for sex if all the contract includes is "sex" as it's agreement.
Is this a law that is soon to be reversed on the federal level as "unconstitutional"?
Thoughts?
EDIT: This is an attempt to move the topics from the heated "election" stuff to more of a "pondering" the non-elected future of laws, etc.
posted
I don't think prostitution is going to be nationally legal any time soon.
But I believe that legalization of prostitution will allow for better protection of women's labor rights in that occupation, better safety, and better awareness of unfair labor practices. I think it will decrease street prostitution and the problems associated with street prostitution (violence, STDs).
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
So if a prostitute offered videos to her clients of them having sex with her, like they do when you go skydiving, or on some amusement park rides, would the prostitution then be legal according to current law? The video could be considered art, after all. The prostitute could make even more money by having a video destruction service, since most johns probably wouldn't want a record of their having visited a prostitute floating around.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think an attempt to rule from the courts that prostitution is unconstitutional would result in more furor that the courts are "out of control" in their "legislating from the bench".
I like to think our judges are a little more politically savvy than that. If they're going to start a battle, they'll want one that was worth the effort.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would support the legalization for all of the above, plus the tax revenue it would generate.
Posts: 1021 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Same here. [edit: I mean what dabbler said...damn slow typing ] I'd love to see it legalized, I think it'd be a thousand time better for the workers, and perhaps we as a culture could develop a more mature, sex-positive attitude. Though, come to think of it, we'd probably have to develop the better outlook before prostitution could be legalized I doubt it'll happen anytime soon, though, especially considering how the election went *sighs*
posted
Yes, it should be legal. It probably will not be any time soon, unless you count buying someone free drinks.
Posts: 281 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
But by legalizing it, you have a double edged sword....
You have "sex" becomming the domain of the government to "rule" over again. It becomes subject to "laws" etc.
It would re-define rape for one thing in prostitution situations.
It would also beg the question of "what is acceptable sexual relations" contractually.
How to sue for "unsatisfactory" performance.
Breach of contract, etc.
I'm not saying that it shouldn't be illegal, but I watched a little of that "The Madam's Family" about the New Orleans Brothel Family, and started wondering.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's pretty well regulated in Nevada (where it is legal, in small towns). You have to be a registered prostitute (license), work in a brothel, and get tested regularly. They require condoms, and the rooms are audio monitored. I believe there hasn't been a single case of HIV from a registered prostitute in Nevada since they started about twenty years ago. If a prostitute is found to have HIV, she's barred for life.
The big downside is that the brothels have tight rein on the prostitutes currently, though certainly not as bad as the illegal free market version elsewhere.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't think of any legitimate and constitutional reason to keep prostitution illegal, myself.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is interesting, because the last time I was involved in this discussion topic on hatrack, I was in the distinct minority. As in a minority of like, two people.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
New Zealand legalised prostitution last year, in very controversial circumstances. This is how it happened: Rather than being directed to vote on party lines, the issue was made a conscience vote. Huge lobbying/public debate/etc. The vote was split evenly, with NZ's lone Muslim MP, whose constituency (Muslims) wanted him to vote no, deciding to abstain(!), meaning that rather than a 60-60 split, which would have defeated the bill, it passed by one vote. There was a real uproar, and now there is a nationwide petition to get the whole thing put on the ballot at the next national elections (Oct '05). The problems are about state-sanctioned exploitation of women; prostitution being seen as a legitimate career path (legitimisation ALWAYS follows legalisation/decriminalisation); city councils' ablities to control siting of brothels; under-age girls (the law says 18 plus)still working; general societal revulsion at something which, no matter how it's dressed up, is about exploiting women in a fundamental and abhorrent way.
Posts: 867 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Legal working age is 16 where I live. 15 for part timers. That means if it's legalized 15 and 16 year olds could be prostituting.
Also if condoms are required, but they FAIL, what obligation does the "male" have?
Also, how do you BAN people who have AIDS from a profession? That's discrimination. What other professions should that ban apply to. I'm against that type of discrimination.
It does make for an interesting "what if" (which is why I posted it. A nice break from the "election" posts. At least for me.)
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I'm much more likely to be against illegalization and for regulation on a lot of issues. I don't like that prostitution happens--but it does and making it illegal has done nothing to change that. So, making it legal and regulating it would only do good. I hardly think that young girls would be more likely to enter into the profession, if they feel that they have any other choice.
I feel the same way about abortion. I don't like that it happens--but it does and having it illegal way back when did nothing but cause more problems. I am in favor of regulating abortion--there should definitely be limits.
I also feel the same way about marijuana. Except I don't mind that people smoke it. People do smoke it, and have continued to smoke it for decades (longer?)--and only problems result from having it be illegal. I am in favor of legalizing and regulating marijuana. There should definitely be limits--after all, dealers don't card their customers, but stores could.
And I kind of feel the same way about all drugs. I don't like that they're out there, but they are and the drug war has caused more problems than it has solved. I am not sure I'm in favor of making them all legal, but perhaps decriminalization and regulation would be good.
Basically, I'm in favor of people being able to make their own decisions regarding their bodies--and have access to the same sort of protections the rest of us enjoy in our lives and in our jobs.
During the Civil War great armies of hundreds of thousands of lonely young men tramped around the country. Great armies of widowed and starving women followed them, seeking to earn enough money to survive.
In Memphis, where the Union Army was staging for its dreaded march to Atlanta, the rate of VD amongst soldiers was threatening to lay up more soldiers than the Confederate Army of Virginia.
The first attempt to solve this dilemma was to round up all the prostitutes and ship them out of town. This proved difficult since more arrived each day.
One new steam-boat owner had his boat commandered by the army. They filled it to the walls with women of negotiable virtue and told the owner to take them away.
What followed was a couple of months of this boat traveling up and down the Mississippi and Ohio rivers. Every town they came to, they met an angry town of people demanding the women stay on the boat, and every night, large numbers of the townsfolk snuck on board and took advantage of the offered wares.
Finally the boat returned to Memphis where the women were allowed to leave. The boat was so ill-used by the inhabitants that it was junked.
The second solution to the problem was a strict legalization and medical examination of the women involved.
Tests were done. Women who carried VD were put to work in the army hospitals or washing rooms, but in ways so they could not spread those diseases. Approved women did thier thing. The soldiers were happy. VD Rate plummeted and the army marched happilly to Atlanta.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's what I was gonna say...they can put age limits on certain jobs, such as having to be 21 to work in a bar. Surely they'd put an 18-or-over clause into legalizing prostitution, as they already do with exotic dancing and other adult entertainment.
posted
You would have to justify an "age limit" on keeping 15 and 16 year olds out of working there in that industry. Morals would be about the only argument to keep them from entering it and therefore a hard sell IMHO.
EDIT: Then again Pornography has age limits as well, but they aren't "hard" laws either (look at Movies that are unrated or "R" rated, etc.)
posted
This is where the law fails and public pressure, public fashion, is powerful.
You can try to outlaw cigarettes, but as long as people thought it was cool and nice, it flourished. Now that it is unpopular it can fade away.
Alcohol drinking was always popular. When it was illegal, it was still running rampant. However, when MADD and other groups started a campaign to make driving drunk not only more illegal, but also morally and publically an improper thing to do, Drunk Driving accidents plummeted.
Drugs are outlawed, but popular. They will continue to be used as long as they appear to be something fashionable. When we instill a public attitude that they are not fashionable, at any level of society, then their use will decline.
The same goes for abortion. If more effort was made to show how unfashionable having an abortion is, and how heroic abstinence, and if that fails, surrendering a child to adoption or devoting your life to being a parent is, then the abortion rates will decline much more than anything a law or two can do.
Homosexuality becomes more fashionable. Those opposed move to make it illegal, but that won't work. It can either be accepted or hidden, and there are too many people who are willing to accept it.
Finally we get to prostitutes. Prostitution is illegal because it is out of fashion. Few people want to use the services of a lady of the evening, and even fewer want to admit that they do. If that changes, and a bunch of people think paying for cheap sex is a good thing, then it might loose that illegality. (though, the first responce of those against prostitution would do is to try and temper that pro-pro attitude by making it even more illegal--as they have done with Drugs and Homosexuality)
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about making it legal to sell sex, thereby avoiding criminalizing already marginalized groups, but making it illegal to buy sex? This is the case in several European countries.
posted
You might want to be defining your terms : There's legalisation, and then there's legalisation. Just off the top of my head, in Norway it is legal to buy and sell sex, but illegal to run a brothel or be a pimp. In Sweden you are permitted to sell, but not buy - the latter is fairly new, introduced by the Social Democrats (I think) a few years ago. In Germany there are state-run brothels, and the prostitutes have a union. Even in the US, of course, there are degrees of being illegal. I suspect the ban is more strictly enforced in Kansas than in California.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's attempted, but it's very hard to regulate. There's not alot of "verification" you can do with the "John's". There's also alot of "illegal" prostitution outside of the regulated.
I remembered seeing a special quite a while ago on it and it's a very, very hard business to regulate "tax" wise because it is so varied. There's not standard "rate" for sex. There's no standard for "tips", etc. and it's only legal outside of "city limits" whatever that means so it's very hard to police and track.
I'd be interested to know what the percentage is of money made off of fines vs. money made off of taxes for illegal vs. legal.
It really would only take one hard fought legal challenge for the law to go to the supreme court and set a precedence making it legal IMHO.
Um, what? Last I checked police 'round here were still arresting johns all the time.
Edit: Though IIRC there are plenty of "escort" services, whereby the john pays the escort for her time and whatever happens happens between two consenting adults, it's some kind of legal loophole or something.
posted
I've met girls who wanted to be sailors, scientists, mothers, and doctors. I've yet to meet a 9 year-old who wants to be a prostitute in America. I imagine if you look at our prositutes, you'll find a higher incidence of drug and mental health issues. Maybe I'm wrong, but doesn't seem to be something you do because you want to do, it's something you do because you can't do anything else.
I can be convinced otherwise, but I think it's a subtle form of economic slavery. Strippers, on the other hand...
posted
Here in Berkeley, we considered a measure that would have made prostitution a low police priority and sent a message to the state that prostitution should be legal. It was defeated by about 2/3 of the vote. Berkeley is probably one of the most liberal places that I know. Socialists publish and hock their newspapers, and the city even had a socialist mayor once. Since this city is so liberal and the measure was so well-defeated, I think that the chances of prostitution becoming decriminalized any time soon are low.
I think that a person has the right to choose for themselves a dangerous job and to pursue what they think is in their own best interest. Prostitutes really do have a choice. They can pursue low-wage jobs, try to go to school to gain job skills, or rely on the kindness of friends, family, and strangers.
posted
I think that most people (mostly women) who turn to prostitution aren't in a situation where they can choose to work at another job. It will always be a measure of extreme choises. Should their lives be made even more difficult?
Posts: 99 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, it's certainly true today that prostitutes are nearly always women with very few other options. But if it was legalised, might that not remove some of the stigma, and perhaps make it a bit more attractive? (I'm not, at the moment, arguing whether this would be good or bad, just trying to extrapolate what might happen.) Just removing the risk of being arrested would surely lower the barrier to entry.
Now, there are a lot of different sexualities out there. Just think of BDSM, to take the more socially acceptable and visible end of the range. Surely there must be a lot of people who fantasise about having sex with a total stranger, and getting paid for it? If you lowered the barriers, you might see people hitting the streets just for one night, to see what it's like.
Of course, this applies to the other end too : If it's even partly socially accepted to be a john (and this is by no means impossible, think of Victorian Britain) then we should see less of the violence, not the mention guilt and shame.
Take this trend far enough, and it might become the usual thing for men (and perhaps even women?) to get their sexual initiation from prostitutes. Which is not necessarily totally stupid : If it's not someone very important to you, it should be easier to ask embarrassing questions, and less tension should lead to a better time. Then, when it is someone important, you know the basics.
Just speculating. Unfortunately, I think this is more likely to happen in reverse : First the guilt about sex comes off, then we have enlightened laws. Not the other way around.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you think that legalising prostitution will make it less stigmatising? Really? After thousands of years? Who would want it? Or are you afraid that legalisation will get us more prostitutes?
I just think it might relieve the situation for those already involved.
Posts: 99 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
] I'd love to see it legalized, I think it'd be a thousand time better for the workers, and perhaps we as a culture could develop a more mature, sex-positive attitude. Though, come to think of it, we'd probably have to develop the better outlook before prostitution could be legalized ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I doubt it'll happen anytime soon, though, especially considering how the election went *sighs*
