posted
Whether an actor is an actor or not does not depend on whether that actor auditioned or not. Just because a prostitute is one doesn't mean she isn't looking for work a lot of the time. It's not like she just pops out on the street and there's a line of 20 men waiting for her. If it were that easy and successful, there would be a lot more competition out there.
There are lots of acting jobs out there that pay crap that some actors have to take before they get to be considered for the "good" roles. Consider the "Off off Broadway" stuff that some actors do. The higher echelon actors do not have to audition and regularly choose their scripts and projects.
Posts: 1423 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Edit: "infinite" is hyperbole, just think "huge" and "lots of room to grow."
That isn't the first time you've described it that way, is it, Counselor?
*grin
So why not make specialized training a prerequisite of government-sponsored [prostitution]? Kind of how we don't consider snake-oil-sellers to qualify as physicians, even if there is quite a demand for those services. (Witness late-night infomercials and the majority of health-related websites.)
It would make sense to me, if prostitution were legalized, to require licensing, following a code of ethics, etc., similar to mental health services or other jobs involving being privy to human intimacies.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Whether an actor is an actor or not does not depend on whether that actor auditioned or not. Just because a prostitute is one doesn't mean she isn't looking for work a lot of the time. It's not like she just pops out on the street and there's a line of 20 men waiting for her. If it were that easy and successful, there would be a lot more competition out there. There are lots of acting jobs out there that pay crap that some actors have to take before they get to be considered for the "good" roles. Consider the "Off off Broadway" stuff that some actors do. The higher echelon actors do not have to audition and regularly choose their scripts and projects.
Of course. But this brings up a very good point: an out of work actor looking for at least some types of benefits will have to take non-acting jobs that are available to keep those benefits. Prostitution has a much lower barrier to entry than acting.
quote:So why not make specialized training a prerequisite of government-sponsored prosecuton?
Just what are you implying here?
quote:Kind of how we don't consider snake-oil-sellers to qualify as physicians, even if there is quite a demand for those services. (Witness late-night infomercials and the majority of health-related websites.)
It would make sense to me, if prostitution were legalized, to require licensing, following a code of ethics, etc., similar to mental health services or other jobs involving being privy to human intimacies.
Because if you do that, then legalizing prostitution will do absolutely nothing to ease the vulnerability women forced into street prostitution now. It's not a reason to keep prostitution illegal, per se, but it is a reason why one of the proclaimed benefits of legalization won't materialize.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Kind of how we don't consider snake-oil-sellers to qualify as physicians, even if there is quite a demand for those services. (Witness late-night infomercials and the majority of health-related websites.)
It would make sense to me, if prostitution were legalized, to require licensing, following a code of ethics, etc., similar to mental health services or other jobs involving being privy to human intimacies.
Because if you do that, then legalizing prostitution will do absolutely nothing to ease the vulnerability women forced into street prostitution now. It's not a reason to keep prostitution illegal, per se, but it is a reason why one of the proclaimed benefits of legalization won't materialize.
I'm not sure I'll follow you down that bend in the path. I need a little more persuasion.
Are we working under the assumption that getting rid of street prostitution is the only benefit to legalizing prostitution?
(Not trying to set you up -- just feeling out the bounds of this particular envelope. I'm willing to work within that assumption if you like, by the way.)
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
And just for clarity's sake, I'm going to be away from online stuff for a little bit, definitely for tomorrow. Maybe longer. (muddling through my complicated lfe *grin)
So I might have to pick this up again a bit later. I didn't want to give the impression that I'd gotten mad -- on the contrary, I'm stretching my brain a bit here, and it's a good challenge. Fascinating stuff.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Are we working under the assumption that getting rid of street prostitution is the only benefit to legalizing prostitution?
No. This is a very targeted conclusion:
1.) One of the claimed benefits of legalized prostitution is protecting women from victimization.
2.) If legalized prostitution does not allow for extensive 10-50 dollar trade, then it will not encompass most of the women victimized by it.
Your suggestion very likely would end up removing 10-50 dollar trade from the legal realm. Therefore, this claimed benefit wouldn't materialize under your suggested plan. That's the extent of that portion of my claim.
The other claim, which we were discussing before the possibility of excluding cheap trade came up, is that I don't want people to be able to say, "They can just go work at McStreetHo's" when speaking of welfare recipients. Licensing, as you suggested, would likely remove this element (although it would not relieve ongoing pressure to lower licensing requirements). But doing so would lead to the loss of most of the claimed anti-victimization benefit.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah. I was not working from premise #1, as I don't think legalizing prostitution would necessarily do this. (I think addressing poverty issues from other perspectives would be the most effective route, but that's another thread.)
I can see your point, and I happily trip along behind you.
I do wonder, though, if hourly trade at the same rates as professional (real) massage therapy -- i.e., the upper end of your range -- might not still have a secure role.
---------
[Edited because my keyboard has, um, issues.]
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think a lot of the victimization of prostitutes now results directly from the fact that prostitution is illegal.
What about rape? Seriously, how much harder does it have to be for a prostitute to file charges against a man who raped her, considering her illegal occupation?
quote:I do wonder, though, if hourly trade at the same rates as professional (real) massage therapy -- i.e., the upper end of your range -- might not still have a secure role.
It's a little delicate to discuss here, but there are certain acts that have less health risk and where hygiene is more easily maintained. But if attached to a (real) massage parlor, then other licensing would be necessary.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think a lot of the victimization of prostitutes now results directly from the fact that prostitution is illegal. What about rape? Seriously, how much harder does it have to be for a prostitute to file charges against a man who raped her, considering her illegal occupation?
Yeah, I get that. My point is that it's hard to imagine a licensing scheme that will infiltrate down to the street level. And without that, the most-victimized prostitutes will still be illegal.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I do wonder, though, if hourly trade at the same rates as professional (real) massage therapy -- i.e., the upper end of your range -- might not still have a secure role.
It's a little delicate to discuss here, but there are certain acts that have less health risk and where hygiene is more easily maintained. But if attached to a (real) massage parlor, then other licensing would be necessary.
I can see some fascinating discussion points here, but I agree that this forum is not the most appropriate site for piecing through the delicate parts. I'll search through Mike's forum's old posts for a similar topic, and if I can't find one, I'll start a new thread over there.
Thanks! I am honestly thrilled at having new issues to consider with reference to this topic. Great discussion.
quote:Yeah, I get that. My point is that it's hard to imagine a licensing scheme that will infiltrate down to the street level.
I didn't actually test this, but I was advised in Amsterdam that er...encounters with the less desirable contractors could be had in the $15-30 range.
Posts: 148 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Just because abuses can occur doesn't mean we shouldn't have judges, doctors and zookeepers.
My point is that regulation and legalization will not necessarily lead to a reduction in STDs as claimed. The incetives spoken of already exist.
quote:But maybe those are unfair parallels. What about massage parlors? Massage therapists might give a "happy ending" for an additional fee. Any of the acts that might occur under the euphemism "happy ending" could also be performed by a prostitute and without a condom. Should we make massage parlors illegal?
You're acting as if I said the condom thing was a reason to keep it illegal. I never said that. I said it would likely keep one of the advantages of legalization from being realized.
Please, if you want to disagree with my conclusions, make sure they are my conclusions.
Your point that regulation and legalization will not necessarily lead to a decrease in STDs is based on speculation, especially when it speculates about future illegal activity regarding condoms and prostitutes in an atmosphere that is mandating condom use and punishes contraction of STDs, enforced by regular screenings. I would suggest that mandating condom use and punishing contraction of STDs by prostitutes, enforced by regular screenings of prostitutes may not cut down on the total number of STDs among the general populace, which is affected by more than just prostitution, but it will certainly cut down on the number of STDs in legal brothels, if not eliminate them entirely, IMO. This would give prostitutes in legal brothels a distinctly higher health advantage over those who are not. I have already reposted a link about the lack of STDs in legal brothels in Nevada. Do you have evidence on your side?
By putting your post speculating about lack of condom use by legal prostitutes for an extra fee in this thread titled "Should prostitution be legal?" you indeed seemed to imply, IMO, that there would still be a major risk of STDs at legal brothels, thus providing an argument for prostitution not being legal.
I never said that you had a conclusion, or that I disagreed with it. I disagreed with your reasoning about condom use by legal prostitutes in your hypothetical future situation, because it was based on speculation. In my argument, I was trying to counter your implication, whether you intended it or not, that prostitution should not be legalized because it wouldn't make sex with prostitutes that much safer, for johns or prostitutes.
Please do not make assumptions about how I seem to be "acting" in a certain post. I was not acting as if you said something you did not. I was acting as if there was an implication from what you said, intended or not, that could be taken to support not legalizing prostitution. Nato's post after mine might be an indication that he also got that implication from your post.
Posts: 1423 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:By putting your post speculating about lack of condom use by legal prostitutes for an extra fee in this thread titled "Should prostitution be legal?" you indeed seemed to imply, IMO, that there would still be a major risk of STDs at legal brothels, thus providing an argument for prostitution not being legal.
Let me see if I get this straight. I speculated (as we all have in this thread about something) that a problem that exists now would also exist if we made prostitution legal. And somehow you think this implied that something that happens under both systems is a reason not to make prostitution legal.
That doesn't even make sense. At most I could be saying that the possibility of lowered STDs isn't a reason a to make prostitution legal.
You didn't say, "your post seems to imply X, and here's why X isn't a valid reason..." You said, "I don't like the line of reasoning you used here, Dag."
I was pointing out, and I will again because it seems necessary, that the line of reasoning you didn't like isn't present in my posts.
That's true, human beings are "rented" all the time. Their services, not their physical bodies. There is a difference, and it's not just because it's sex, either.
I have some of the same problems with the direct buying and selling of organs, too. It reduces the humans involved to the status of animals, in my opinion, while opening the door for a host of abuses such as the ones Dagonee have mentioned.
Erosmniac,
What, evidence that a majority of prostitutes are unhappy? Well since crippling drug-addiction, abusive pimps, poor living conditions and not to mention frequently traumatic childhoods are commonplace amongst prostitutes, I'd say the evidence is self-evident.
I'm not sure what romantic or idealistic view you have of prostitutes as they exist in America today.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
You're right, making it illegal does make it illegal for everyone to do. Furthermore you're also right that I am opposed to it first and foremost because I find it reprehensible. My other, more rational reasons come later.
But your point that for some reason "people don't like it" isn't sufficient reason to criminalize a type of behavior if that is the point you were making is pretty absurd. "People don't like it" is, ultimately, the basis for every single law against something on the books. The other, more rational reasons come later.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's true, human beings are "rented" all the time. Their services, not their physical bodies. There is a difference, and it's not just because it's sex, either.
I don't see how sex isn't a service, as well. And besides that, I don't really see the difference between acquiring a service for a time and acquiring a physical body for a time. Either way, there is a human being involved, and one is using that human being's skills to accomplish some end in exchange for payment.
We already sell the implication or promise of sex all the time.
posted
Anything could be defined as a either a good or a service if you broaden the definition sufficiently. The difference is that when you acquire a service for a time period, "acquiring" the use of his or her (usually her) body on the basis of her body alone. Oh, and that human being's "skills".
Are we presuming that most people who currently solicit prostitutes do so on the basis of the hooker's perceived "skills"? It's impossible to prove one way or another, really, but frankly I doubt it. Good-looking prostitutes cost more. Ugly ones cost less. Whether or not they're "skilled" at putting themselves on the block.
Furthermore, that we already sell the implication of sex is by no means a persuasive argument that we should legalize prostitution. That reasoning can be applied to all sorts of things. We already have the promise of democracy in America, so go direct democracy, right now. We already permit the sale of handguns in America, so why not automatic assault rifles? We already permit smoking and drinking, so why not go all the way and permit any currently controlled substance?
We already have servants, so why not permit indentured servitude? And if we had legalized prostitution, why not permit people to buy prostitutes for long-term periods?
It would get there, eventually. If it's legal to hire a prostitute, why shouldn't it be legal to hire a long-term sex-toy? If it's legal to do that, why shouldn't it be legal-if you're going to pay your little sex-toy that is also a human being-to require it to meet ever more exacting standards of behavior?
I don't like prostitution because it encourages the buyer to view the seller as a sex-object. Yes, I know people view other people as sex-objects all the time. But with prostitution, it's true.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:We already have servants, so why not permit indentured servitude? And if we had legalized prostitution, why not permit people to buy prostitutes for long-term periods?
It would get there, eventually. If it's legal to hire a prostitute, why shouldn't it be legal to hire a long-term sex-toy? If it's legal to do that, why shouldn't it be legal-if you're going to pay your little sex-toy that is also a human being-to require it to meet ever more exacting standards of behavior?
I don't like prostitution because it encourages the buyer to view the seller as a sex-object. Yes, I know people view other people as sex-objects all the time. But with prostitution, it's true.
First of all, I fail to see how your, "It would get there eventually" is any more persuasive than my, "We basically already do it anyway."
And I don't think it's any more true in prostitution than it is in exotic dancing or advertising or any other number of fields.
On top of that, I'm sure there are TONS of people who get jobs now based at least partly (and sometimes more than partly) on their physical appearance.
But we don't basically do it already. It is not currently legal to rent a person's body openly for a specific "service" for a specific sum of money. The difference between owning a sex-toy (slave) for a set period of time and buying a prostitue for a night is the difference between "rent" and "rent to own".
You haven't answered my question: if prostitution were legal, why shouldn't it be illegal to buy a prostitute for a long period of time? You're operating on the basic premise that if the individual involved is not coerced in any way, it should be permissible. Well, if a woman-and in America, for the time being at least, it would be mostly women-decided that, "Hey, being a living, breathing blow-up doll for this guy for a month sounds fine to me if the price is right!" you're saying that too should be legal?
I know it happens in a de facto kind of way already. And frankly I think that's reprehensible, too, human beings relying solely on their animal side just to survive-forced or not. But short of banning premarital sex altogether I see no way to prevent that, and I wouldn't even if there were some effective way.
My "It would get there eventually" argument is more persuasive than the "We basically do it already" argument because, in fact, it would get there eventually-because buying a prostitute is basically identical to buying a living, breathing sex-toy for a week or a month, except that it's a much smaller duration. The "we basically do it already" argument is ineffective because we as a society-all societies-draw arbitrary lines all the time, and the fact that a line is arbitrary is not, in and of itself, effective unless you can counter all other arguments as well.
In advertising, sex is used to sell the fantasy in people's minds, "Hey, if I buy product X or service Y, spokesmodel Candy or Lance or cute-guy-next-door will have sex with me!" And anyway, when you've paid your money, in the end you've still bought something-cologne, a car, a haircut, whatever. You haven't actually bought the guarantee of the fantasy.
"Exotic dancing"-that more pleasant term for stripping-is similar, but obviously much closer to prostitution than mere advertising. It sells the fantasy of sex with this particular person gyrating naked or nearly so right in front of you.
I'm not a fan of endorsing that profession, either, but the difference lies between selling the fantasy of an act and selling the act itself.
Obviously there are many people who get jobs based on appearance. I think that appearance plays a factor in every job, indeed in every single interhuman relationship of any type. Even in the relationship one has with one's self-no pun intended-because how we look factors strongly into our self-esteem.
I see few ways to stop that other than some methods which are already done: attempts to prohibit discrimination on the basis of appearance or background by leaving those sections of application forms blank.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Their services, not their physical bodies. There is a difference, and it's not just because it's sex, either.
Different how? I use my physical body to do my current job. Just not the same parts.
And I don't see a problem with any of the long or short term contracts you mentioned as long as he or she is making the choice and can opt out as with any contract. The reason I am not a slave is that I can quit my job. I am not property; I can choose to leave. There is no reason a legal prostitute couldn't do the same.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: To my best recollection, heroin and cocaine, especially crack, are highly physically addictive, (nicotine) are linked with secondary crimes, (booze) and in the case of coke, can make people violently...violent (booze) .
My comments are in bold.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is not currently legal to rent a person's body openly for a specific "service" for a specific sum of money.
Oh, I don't know. That seems like a pretty good description of modeling to me. Earlier you talk about prostitution as a job in which appearance trumps skill; insofar as this is true for prostitution I'd say that it's also true for modeling, wouldn't you?
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is not currently legal to rent a person's body openly for a specific "service" for a specific sum of money.
Oh, I don't know. That seems like a pretty good description of modeling to me. Earlier you talk about prostitution as a job in which appearance trumps skill; insofar as this is true for prostitution I'd say that it's also true for modeling, wouldn't you?
That reminds me of the woman that offered the use of her body for advertising to the highest bidder. I think it's sad that people view such things as their bodies as commodities. Much like the idea of using the moon as advertising space.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I use my physical body to do my current job.
With prostitution, your body is the job. As with any job, you use parts of your body. Thus everything is equivalent to prostitution?
In the abstract, I suppose that follows. In the world we live in? It does not.
quote:There is no reason a legal prostitute couldn't do the same.
I don't oppose buying and selling the bodies of human beings only in involuntary cases. I oppose it because I believe it cheapens humanity and degrades the individuals involved in it. I realize that's not a persuasive argument to everyone, but I have to ask: who doesn't think prostitution cheapens and degrades the people involved in it?
Should prostitution become legal, safe, and "clean" so to speak without all of its current associations with violence, poverty, ignorance, and drug addiction, would you approve of, say, your loved ones becoming prostitutes? Maybe you disagree that it cheapens the people involved, I don't know. Obviously my arguments are not going to persuade you and others, who hold the word voluntary above all other things. I hold that word above almost all other things.
If someone could convince me that prostitution does not cheapen the people involved-in our society, for a bonus-I think I would be persuaded to view legalized prostitution as a good thing.
This is not a religious argument to me. I do not oppose legalized prostitution for religious reasons. Since before I ever became religious, I have felt much the same way.
----
Noemon,
Appearance is definitely far and away the primary factor in modeling. This is another occupation which in large part sells fantasies. Wear these clothes and you'll look more like this sex deity. Or in the case of viewers who physically desire the model, the fantasy is I imagine often, "Maybe that model will have sex with me."
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Prostitution should not be made legal because it is the result of the actions of societies less moral members. Making it legal might help to protect those individuals but at the same time it condones an anti-social activity. For the same reason harmful drugs should not be made illegal.
Alcohol and tobacco already are legal, and may never be done away with considering their affect on the economy, but that doesn't make them a good thing either. They may be acceptable social behavious but that doesn't stop them from being major contributors to the distruction of any society in which they're legalised.
quote:Appearance is definitely far and away the primary factor in modeling. This is another occupation which in large part sells fantasies. Wear these clothes and you'll look more like this sex deity. Or in the case of viewers who physically desire the model, the fantasy is I imagine often, "Maybe that model will have sex with me."
Not true. Models are those on whom the clothes will look best. The clothes make the girls look more elegant stylish, not the other way around. The models are chosen from those who already have a large degree of these qualities, so as to suit the clothes. The clothes are elegant, stylish, tasteful etc. and therefore the models must be chosen to suit the clothing they're modelling in. Simple as that.
"Or in the case of viewers who physically desire the model, the fantasy is I imagine often, "Maybe that model will have sex with me."
Are you asserting that if a man will think that if he wears a female models clothes she will be more inclined to have sex with him? Maybe that model will have sex with the viewer if what?
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
cheiros: so what should be done if most of society starts thinking your religion is immoral/anti-social?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
First they'd have to prove it was anti-social. If they justly manage that then I propose an extinction! Or just to take away their regognition as a group, and protected rights, under the law (except of course the right to organise or whatever it's called on the US Bill of Rights). But then, there is no world society so you could only disband a religion, just as with prostitution, God forbid it ever become legalised, one nation at a time.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the women on whom clothes will look best are generally better-looking women. I think in a competition between two models, the model on whom the clothes will look the best will frequently be the better-looking model. I think your objection on that issue is pretty silly.
On the issue of fantasies, I don't know what. It would vary from individual to individual, obviously. Or it could just be, "Maybe that model will have sex with me," period as the basis for the fantasy.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: As with any job, you use parts of your body. Thus everything is equivalent to prostitution?
Not exactly. I'm saying that prostitution is equivalent to everything else. Or at least that you haven't shown me any reason that it isn't.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ahh, but it's very easy for society to deem the people who look good in the fashion styles that society find fashion to be good looking. You have to keep in mind that models are dolled up, and the clothes the model wears help eccentuate their attractiveness. Different cultures' (and past cultures') fashions are different, and if they looked at our fashion they might find it repulsive or otherwise untasteful (extremely conservative cultures certainly find it immoral, and therefore unstylish). It's just a matter of whether you choose to believe fashion styles are chosen to suit the attractive people, or the attractive people are seen as so because the fashions of the time/place look good on those people. I believe the latter.
Fashion is dictated by culture. Attractiveness is dictated by fashion. Not the other way around.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: As with any job, you use parts of your body. Thus everything is equivalent to prostitution?
Not exactly. I'm saying that prostitution is equivalent to everything else. Or at least that you haven't shown me any reason that it isn't.
Prostitution isn't equivalent to everything else because it's a byproduct of a degrading society, and encouraging it doesn't help the society improve itself. It works the same as, IMO, starvation in some parts of Africa is the result of lack of control, freedom, and organisation over their own food supplies and agriculture, not "poverty".
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Prostitution isn't equivalent to everything else because it's a byproduct of a degrading society, and encouraging it doesn't help the society improve itself. It works the same as, IMO, starvation in some parts of Africa is the result of lack of control, freedom, and organisation over their own food supplies and agriculture, not "poverty".
However, prostitution fulfills a desire, starvation does not.
I'm not sure how you would show that prostitution is a byproduct of a degrading society. Although, you could argue that it might have a negative impact on society.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Prostitution is different because of the way people in the USA-and across the world-view sex, kmboots. Even in societies which historically have had more open and tolerant views of prostitution, it is viewed as fundamnentally different from other occupations.
People view sex differently than other physical activities. Whether it's as a sacred practice between a man and woman joined by God, or it's a pleasurable delight that everyone should revel in with whomever they please, they view it differently.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes, it's quite possible that this misery is due entirely to the fact that the "oldest profession" is currently "mismanaged". But it seems to me that the far more reasonable alternative to "legalize and regulate" would be first to take proactive efforts to reduce the need and desire and misery in prostitution currently, so we'll have more data to go on.
I'm curious what you would suggest.
Posts: 148 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, you're telling me what is, but not why it is or why that makes sense.
quote: Whether it's as a sacred practice...or it's a pleasurable delight that everyone should revel in with whomever they please, they view it differently.
The same could have been said at one time about athletics. Or theatre.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you asking me to explain why human beings view sex as different from other physical activities?
I cannot possibly answer that question. There are countless perspectives as to what sex is, and thus why it is different.
-----
Sean,
Well for one thing society could go a long way to preventing women from "selling their butts for crack" just by better education about and treatment for drugs. Furthermore better education that actually works towards gainful employment of some type or another would work to increase the options people have about how to make a living-thus decreasing, just on the basis of math, the probability that a person will become a prostitute.
Furthermore, my question about prostitution degrading human beings has not been answered. Sean and kmbboots (sorry, I've been leaving the second 'b' out, no disrespect intended): How would you feel if your daughter or son decided to pursue a career in prostitution? Even if it was safe, clean, legal, and profitable? Also, would you encourage them to pursue such a career?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Not true. Models are those on whom the clothes will look best. The clothes make the girls look more elegant stylish, not the other way around. The models are chosen from those who already have a large degree of these qualities, so as to suit the clothes. The clothes are elegant, stylish, tasteful etc. and therefore the models must be chosen to suit the clothing they're modelling in. Simple as that.
I...there are so many things I could say.
Prostitutes are, in theory, chosen to suit the tastes of the people who hire them.
Also...the clothes are elegant, stylish, and tasteful? What about Fredrick's of Hollywood? Their products are arguably less tasteful. What about...I don't know. Fetish models? There are any number of sorts of modeling that many may not find tasteful or elegant.
posted
"Also...the clothes are elegant, stylish, and tasteful? What about Fredrick's of Hollywood? Their products are arguably less tasteful. What about...I don't know. Fetish models? There are any number of sorts of modeling that many may not find tasteful or elegant."
You can lump them in the same category, but they're by no means anything alike. Mainstream modelling is relevant and respectable. Hollywood (not really mainstream IMO) and fetish modelling are just part of the "Underworld". I don't know what Fredrick's are, sorry.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:cheiros: I await an elucidation of how someone proves something antisocial.
A majority of the non-perpetrators of the "something" in question finding it offensive. Surely you must find something in your own culture (America?) offensive, and have a majority of the non-perpetrators of that "something" agree with you.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think of sex as sacramental and powerful and a gift. I also think of music (for example) that way. When I sing, it is empty unless I put my soul into it and unless I have a real connection to my audience and to what I am singing. I have to believe it.
Sometimes I get paid to sing. Sometimes I sing for just the joy of it, for myself. Sometimes I sing for someone else as a "gift". Sometimes I just fake it when I'm not really in the right mood.
Some musicians do start to see making music as drudgery. Sometimes that happens even when you are doing even something you love. I hate to see this happening, but I am hardly going say that musicians shouldn't be able to make their living that way.
Anything meaingful you do can be drudgery or it can be a sacrament. Depends on whether or not you approach it with joy. That would be my answer to someone I loved if they (in a world where it was safe, legal, and respected) wanted to go into any profession.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cheiros do ender: "Also...the clothes are elegant, stylish, and tasteful? What about Fredrick's of Hollywood? Their products are arguably less tasteful. What about...I don't know. Fetish models? There are any number of sorts of modeling that many may not find tasteful or elegant."
You can lump them in the same category, but they're by no means anything alike. Mainstream modelling is relevant and respectable. Hollywood (not really mainstream IMO) and fetish modelling are just part of the "Underworld". I don't know what Fredrick's are, sorry.
Fredrick's of Hollywood is a racy lingerie shop. Think Victoria's Secret, but like, not even pretending to be tasteful.
Also, they're not part of any "underworld." They're very prevalent.
Mainstream modeling means what, exactly? Runway? Runway's got a set of issues all its own.
posted
And as for not encouraging one's children to encourage prostitution, I wouldn't encourage any child I had to persue a career in ditch digging. Should we make ditch digging illegal, too?
posted
cheiros: I'm pretty certain I could find a majority of non-practitioners of several religious practices who find those religion practices offensive, including certain of the LDS church (particularly if I got to phrase the question). Similarly, I bet I could find that the majority of people consider certain words offensive. The list goes on.
Shall we ban all these?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Depends on whether or not you approach it with joy. That would be my answer to someone I loved if they (in a world whare it was safe, legal, and respected)wanted to go into any profession.
Clever. So...you would encourage and support your child's decision to become a prostitute if prostitution were safe, legal, and respected...but, wait, it's not respected. Almost throughout the world, and in America in particular, prostitution certainly isn't respected.
You haven't answered my question. Whether or not something is sacramental and meaningful has little to do-nothing, I would argue, when you're using words like "meaningful" and "sacramental"-with whether or not it's respected.
So, in the real world, the world we're living in, would you encourage your son or daughter (and in the world we're living in, most likely daughter based simply on gender discrimination and hypocrisy) to become a prostitute if they "approached it with joy"? You persist in framing the discussion in utterly abstract terms, ignoring the way most human beings-especially in America-view sex.
You wouldn't say to them, "Maybe there is some other profession you could pursue from which you'd get even more joy?"
Anything human beings do can be joyful, if the human being tries hard to take joy in it. Joy is a state of mind.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
