Why not legalize prostitution?

Originally Posted by Sassafrass

And look. No matter how hard people try to repress the sex industry, it will always, always, always exist. Best to treat it like every other goddamn commodity than to pretend it doesn't exist and try to repress it away.

The oldest profession™

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

because the workers get so many diseases and problems from prostitution. its a very risky buisness and isnt healthy.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by lightsandmusic

because the workers get so many diseases and problems from prostitution. its a very risky buisness and isnt healthy.

You are easily the dumbest person in this thread. And that's saying something.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by lightsandmusic

because the workers get so many diseases and problems from prostitution. its a very risky buisness and isnt healthy.

So you could say it is... the deadliest catch?

Coming this Fall to Discovery After Hours

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Sex out of marriage isn't frowned upon as much as it used to be. However I still think alot of people would have problems with legalizing prosititution. Alot of unwelcome additions come with prostitution, one of the big ones being drugs. If it was legalized would that change? Maybe. Right now though it would just devalue whatever region it happened in.

Recently a "Spa" near where I live was shut down because it was a front for a brothel. When I read about it, I just shrugged and went huh, thats interesting. The other people in my community treated it much much worse though. The way they described it, you'd think that in the middle of the spa a gateway to hell had been opened. I'll never have a problem with it, but a good majority will.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Garret

It also lowers rape crimes as well.

That's a silly thing to say, rape is generally a matter of dominance rather than just a need for sex. Hence straight male rapists often rape other guys.

weird system...

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Starf**kers Inc

That's a silly thing to say, rape is generally a matter of dominance rather than just a need for sex. Hence straight male rapists often rape other guys.

weird system...

Statistically true. So not really silly. Silly is thinking anyone will take you seriously in an actual topic with a name like that.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by EpicNotion

Sex out of marriage isn't frowned upon as much as it used to be. However I still think alot of people would have problems with legalizing prosititution. Alot of unwelcome additions come with prostitution, one of the big ones being drugs. If it was legalized would that change? Maybe. Right now though it would just devalue whatever region it happened in.

Recently a "Spa" near where I live was shut down because it was a front for a brothel. When I read about it, I just shrugged and went huh, thats interesting. The other people in my community treated it much much worse though. The way they described it, you'd think that in the middle of the spa a gateway to hell had been opened. I'll never have a problem with it, but a good majority will.

It is obvious from recent developments that we cannot go any further without making one thing extremely clear: that the concept of equality, whether of sexes or races or individuals, or even of animals, plants, or inanimate objects, is absurd. It would in fact be impossible to even find two equal electrons or quarks, if electrons or quarks actually existed (which they don't), let alone anything more complex. The only domain in which the concept of equality is not absurd is in pure logic (including mathematics), but in the real world there is simply no such thing. There has never been, and there never will be.

Now of course this simple, self-evident truth is obviously beyond the comprehension of 99.99999999999999999% of contemporary mankind, as is every other simple, self-evident truth. That, however, is not my problem -- it is theirs. And since many of the things discussed on this site already, and that will be discussed in the very near future, presuppose human beings intelligent enough to grasp these simple truths, I am obliged to simply immediately ban whoever seems to be incapable of grasping them. Because the funny thing is that, though these truths are simple and self-evident, they seem to be immeasurably harder (if not outright impossible) for people to comprehend than many truths that are far more complex and obscure. But these are the effects of prejudice, bigotry, superstition and stupidity inherited by 2,500 years of the Socratico-Judaeo-Christian metaphysic, and its attendant herd/slave morality, and it is simply beyond my powers to cure people of this disease (that, only these books can do, and then only for a very small number of people). All I want to do is analyze games as deeply as possible, and to do that I have to take for granted all the simple little truths that philosophy has to give us -- one of which being that nothing is equal to anything else.

To give a concrete example of where this simple truth has been recently used, and to great effect, consider my Cocksucking Videogameland article. In the last two paragraphs I explain why women are in general inferior to men as regards the analysis and evaluation of virtual worlds. The reason is psychological and proceeds from a biological difference -- a biological inequality in other words. Therefore whoever believes that men and women are equal, or should be equal, or should be treated and regarded as equal even when they clearly are not (i.e. always), would simply be incapable of coming up with this idea, or grasping it once it had been explained to him -- let alone accepting it and drawing all the various and very important consequences that follow from it.

But we must draw these consequences! This is philosophy -- drawing the ultimate consequences out of every deduction -- not stopping and turning our backs on them because we prefer to live within the safe and narrow horizons of a happy-pretend land in which everything is equal to everything else and every person loves every other person and we all go to Heaven when we die, amen.

Originally Posted by Nietzsche

How much truth can a spirit bear, how much truth can a spirit dare? ... that became for me more and more the real measure of value.

Originally Posted by Nietzsche

The first thing in which I "test the reins" of a person is whether he has in him a feeling for distance, whether he sees everywhere rank, order between man and man, whether he distinguishes: one is thereby a gentleman.

So, to all current and prospective users of this forum who espouse the religion of Equality -- at the very least stay away from "theory" threads. You can still be a religious nut and post in individual news or games threads -- it doesn't take much intelligence for those. But please leave my serious threads alone. If you want to find other religious nuts to discuss your beliefs, why, the internet is full of them -- click on a random page and you are there.

PS. The above also applies for all the other modern religions: the religion of Freedom, Justice, Human Rights, Cockroach Rights, Chicken Rights, etc. I am afraid that philosophy and religions are diametrically opposed, so if you have even the slightest religious inclination in you -- just stay the hell away from my goddamn theory threads. In other words: The theory threads are only for 100% declared atheists and immoralists -- everyone else is anyway already perfectly served by all kinds of bibles.

And since everyone already knows what "atheist" means, here is a helpful link that explains what an "immoralist" is:

NIGGERS

FELIPE NO

Jesus, just read through some of that thread, and I don't think I've ever seen a more self-important person on the internet.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Schopenhauer: "It is not only in the activity of his highest powers that the genius surpasses ordinary people. A man who is unusually well-knit, supple and agile, will perform all his movements with exceptional ease, even with comfort, because he takes a direct pleasure in an activity for which he is particularly well-equipped, and therefore often exercises it without any object. Further, if he is an acrobat or a dancer, not only does he take leaps which other people cannot execute, but he also betrays rare elasticity and agility in those easier steps which others can also perform, and even in ordinary walking. In the same way a man of superior mind will not only produce thoughts and works which could never have come from another; it will not be here alone that he will show his greatness; but as knowledge and thought form a mode of activity natural and easy to him, he will also delight himself in them at all times, and so apprehend small matters which are within the range of other minds, more easily, quickly and correctly than they."


Therefore my writings, if I am indeed a genius, will always be "works of genius" regardless of the subject matter. A genius, by Schopenhauer's definition as well as by anyone else's, is not capable of NOT producing works of genius, just as a cow is not capable of not producing works of cows, and so on. A genius is a genius and a cow is a cow from birth to death -- and that's the end of that.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist%27s_shit
"Artist's shit" (Italian: "Merda d'artista") is a work of art by the Italian artist Piero Manzoni. The work is a tin can in an edition of 90 labeled in Italian, English, French and German with the description '"Artist's Shit", contents 30gr net freshly preserved, produced and tinned in May 1961.' They were intended to be sold for their weight in gold, the price fluctuating according to the market.

Maybe Piero Manzoni's shit is worth its weight in gold, nowadays even more. For all I care it is worthless.

The acrobat may have a peculiar grace to his everyday walk, but that doesn't mean that acrobats have not stubbed their toes or slipped on ice. I don't trust the genius to be paying close attention to every thread of his existence, or to be versed in all things he discusses. Everything the genius does is in fact "the work of a genius," but not an ingenious work.

As far as prostitution: maybe it is not the place of government to tell who anyone can fuck and for what reasons. But it is the place of government to maintain public schools, balance the economy, and make sure people have decent job opportunities. If it were doing those things then perhaps prostitution wouldn't even be a reasonable choice.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

What if you like having sex?

Hell, weren't those Washington DC call girls something like $10k+ a night? I think all of them had at least a college education (or more), and certainly could have gotten a job elsewhere if they had wanted.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

We all know that 1) people who like being prostitutes and 2) make over 10k a night are few and far between. For the great majority, it is exploitative and degradating work that they couldn't help but resort to.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

You must know a lot of prostitutes.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Wow. There's been a lot of good arguments (but also a lot of bad ones) lately on this subject.

People like me need to realize that there are indeed women who willingly become prostitutes and enjoy it. However, nothing written here has convinced me that this industry can exist in a way that doesn't take advantage of women. Even our legalized areas such as Denmark and Las Vegas are plagued with mistreatment and exploitation of sex workers. In a perfect* world perhaps women would be free to go in and out of this line of work in a way that never infringes on their human rights. But that certainly isn't the reality of the industry in today's world.

But for people who condemn prostitution on moral grounds, the failings of legalized prostitution are just a secondary point. I do believe that society's approach to sex is much more liberal now than sixty years ago. Perhaps this isn't as obvious in the polarized political climate of the United States. But even if the bible-thumpers suddenly all disappeared, I doubt very much that prostitution would suddenly become legal here or in other parts of the world. There is a fundamental moral abhorrence carried by a gigantic chunk of the world's population regardless of their religious or political leanings.

Now this says nothing about whether or not that moral abhorrence is grounds enough to outlaw prostitution. I don't like it, but does that give me the right to tell strangers that money in exchange for sex is illegal? Framing the question like that; most people will say "no". You need to approach from a different angle...

Put succinctly, lots of people dislike prostitution. They don't want their loved ones involved so they extend (force?) this view onto the people they care about: family, friends, community, an entire city, etc, etc, etc.

Since prostitution is largely illegal, it is not a heated debate in U.S. politics and consequently you don't see a lot of self-righteous jerks like me throwing their weight around. Legislators don't need to openly take a stance against prostitution since (well maybe not in this forum) the majority of people are fine with the way things are. If they aren't, they just move to or away from Nevada as necessary. Alternatively, they can write something constructive (or nasty and juvenile) on a web forum.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by killerpineapple

But even if the bible-thumpers suddenly all disappeared, I doubt very much that prostitution would suddenly become legal here or in other parts of the world. There is a fundamental moral abhorrence carried by a gigantic chunk of the world's population regardless of their religious or political leanings.

Is that a fact, now?

FELIPE NO

I don't think anyone who dislikes prostitution automatically has a "hang-up" about sex. Most people today don't adhere to the conservative stance on "no sex before marriage" but that doesn't automatically mean they are okay with prostitution. From personal and media observations it seems that most people in general do not approve of prostitution and that includes people who aren't tied down sexually by traditional conservative values. I'm willing to listen to evidence to the contrary. The overwhelming amount of laws in most countries that prohibit prostitution seems to indicate, at least for the time being, that the vast majority of people in the world disapprove of it. However, because of the way society is constantly veering towards a more liberal approach to sex, I wouldn't be surprised at all to one day see prostitution becoming legalized in more places.

How ya doing, buddy?

Quote:

Put succinctly, lots of people dislike prostitution. They don't want their loved ones involved so they extend (force?) this view onto the people they care about: family, friends, community, an entire city, etc, etc, etc.

I wouldn't want my kid to work in porn, but I certainly don't mind other people's kids doing it.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by killerpineapple

People like me need to realize that there are indeed women who willingly become prostitutes and enjoy it. However, nothing written here has convinced me that this industry can exist in a way that doesn't take advantage of women. Even our legalized areas such as Denmark and Las Vegas are plagued with mistreatment and exploitation of sex workers. In a perfect* world perhaps women would be free to go in and out of this line of work in a way that never infringes on their human rights. But that certainly isn't the reality of the industry in today's world.

About a page back I made a few posts about my experiences working at Wal-mart. Go back and read those over before you say that the sex industry is the only industry that takes advantage of its workers. Don't be like that Eshebaun fuck that completely ignored my posts and further tried to prove his point just like you're trying to now.

On top of that:

Quote:

Put succinctly, lots of people dislike prostitution. They don't want their loved ones involved so they extend (force?) this view onto the people they care about: family, friends, community, an entire city, etc, etc, etc.

I'll put it plain and simple. I wouldn't want my loved ones working for any company, or industry, that would put them into a depressed state of mind, or feel physically exhausted in a non-healthy way. That being said, I'd never want my children working at Wal-mart.

The point is, EVERYONE is different. Some people enjoy working for companies just like Wal-mart, and there are others that enjoy spreading their legs/getting their freak on to make a living. The question is, why would society want to keep those people on the streets where they would be in danger, instead in a safe work environment?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Quote:

Why is prostitution illegal? On what grounds should it be illegal? It is nothing more than moral legislation unless you can prove to me otherwise.

I agree, it is moral legislation. It is possible to argue on non-moral grounds like mistreatment of sex workers and corruption in the industry. You can also argue (as some have done in this thread long ago) that all laws stem from a moral foundation.

I for one am glad for some (not all) of the laws that I perceive as moral legislation. Like laws that prohibit discrimination, ponzi schemes, animal abuse, child labor, polygamy, use of certain narcotics, etc.

Quote:

I wouldn't want my kid to work in porn, but I certainly don't mind other people's kids doing it.

I feel like this is the most common attitude towards prostitution as well.

Quote:

Go back and read those over before you say that the sex industry is the only industry that takes advantage of its workers.

Did I really say something like that? If so, my apologies. It might surprise you but I don't approve of taking advantage of anyone. Your analogy works on some levels, but prostitution is a radically different industry. I've never said to a friend, "Let's go to Vegas or Amsterdam so I can buy a couch for fifty bucks." I've never heard a girl say, "I wish they'd change the laws here so I can work at a cash register or be a store manager". I must also confess, Grail, that I find some of your arguments confusing. You take great care to illustrate how a legalized industry can still abuse its workers. Then you seem to propose that legalizing prostitution will invariably make it safer. Maybe in a perfect world, but even places where it is legal, prostitutes can and do endure mistreatment on a scale not applicable to even the least fortunate Wal-mart employee. From my research this may not be an inherent fault with the sex industry, but rather that it has a tendency to attract the wrong sort of people. People who corrupt the industry to a point that it becomes as bad as places where it is illegal.

Am I correct Grail, in saying that you wouldn't want your loved ones being prostitutes or wal-mart employees for the exact same reason? Like you, I wouldn't want my kids working in either business. But my reasons for not being a prostitute are different than my reasons for not working at wal-mart.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by killerpineapple

Your analogy works on some levels, but prostitution is a radically different industry. I've never said to a friend, "Let's go to Vegas or Amsterdam so I can buy a couch for fifty bucks." I've never heard a girl say, "I wish they'd change the laws here so I can work at a cash register or be a store manager".

I can see where you are coming from on this, but in the long run, prostitution is just like every other single job you see in this country. You use your body and your mind to make money. You are providing a service in which you use any given amount of your five senses to paying customers. How you do it makes no difference at all.

Couches are readily made available to stores all across the country, that's why you never have to go anywhere outside of your town unless you REALLY want a specific couch. Same thing with a strip club, do you ever hear someone say that they need to go states away to see women dance naked? No, you don't.

As for the other analogy, I've never wished for laws to be changed either, but I HAVE wished that there were more colleges nearby that I could train in video game design, BUT, unfortunately there are just more OPPORTUNITIES to be a cashier and manager in my town as it is.

Quote:

I must also confess, Grail, that I find some of your arguments confusing. You take great care to illustrate how a legalized industry can still abuse its workers. Then you seem to propose that legalizing prostitution will invariably make it safer. Maybe in a perfect world, but even places where it is legal, prostitutes can and do endure mistreatment on a scale not applicable to even the least fortunate Wal-mart employee.

I'm not too entirely sure what your work history is, but if you are involved in any company where heavy lifting, or mental stress MIGHT be a factor that could hinder your performance, the entire first day of your new job is spent getting information shoved down your throat on 'how to be safe in the work place' and constant help lines to deal with your stress. The only problem is, while these programs are actually beneficial, if you ever EVER have to resort to using them, you usually end up fucking yourself in the end, depending on how, and I'll get to this in a second, corrupt your company is.

Quote:

From my research this may not be an inherent fault with the sex industry, but rather that it has a tendency to attract the wrong sort of people. People who corrupt the industry to a point that it becomes as bad as places where it is illegal.

For the most part, people with any position of 'power' so to speak can easily be corrupted. I've had GREAT bosses before, and I've had bosses that can only be described as satanic in every way. What you are trying to say is that the 'wrong kind of people' don't fit into your moral code. The fact of the matter is, legalizing prostitution would make it safer, if even if it was for the simple fact that BOTH PARTIES would be consenting to the act. Sure, said prostitute may have to spread her legs for not the most attractive guy, but at least she knows she's doing it to get paid, and not that she'll end up getting pimp smacked if she doesn't bring her pimp enough money for the night.

Quote:

Am I correct Grail, in saying that you wouldn't want your loved ones being prostitutes or wal-mart employees for the exact same reason? Like you, I wouldn't want my kids working in either business. But my reasons for not being a prostitute are different than my reasons for not working at wal-mart.

I'm saying I wouldn't want my loved ones being forced to do back breaking or dangerous work for shitty pay, and even shittier treatment. If my daughter decides that, as an adult, she wants to get paid for spreading her legs for men night after night, I can't do a thing about it. That's her decision and the best thing I can hope for is that at that time, she is in a safe, stable environment in which she can work her craft.

Wouldn't you?

Most amazing jew boots

Sorry, I really have to disagree that prostitution is like every other single job you see in this country. I actually find it to be extraordinarily different for a variety of reasons. I do see your point, I just don't agree with it.

And yes, government regulation would set up the framework for a safer working environment for prostitutes. Unfortunately, even in places where it is legal, people continue to break the law and sex workers are still being mistreated. This is the major reason why half the red-light district in Amsterdam was being shut down. (I haven't followed that story in months, anyone up to date?) No matter how bad it gets at wal-mart, people aren't going to force you to work without pay. You won't get threatened of physically abused if you choose not to comply. I don't think we should be so quick to legalize prostitution until the places that allow it have fully sorted out their problems with it. (Actually, I don't think we should legalize it ever)

I have to agree with YouMad again, at least for the most part. The only way I see prostitution infringing on the rights of uninvolved people is the shame it brings on family and friends. It also spreads some disease, there's no denying that...but I haven't seen any statistics on that. I can stand behind the "burden to society" platform, but I'm fully aware that it is not a conclusive argument nor is not a universal belief.

Well, I'm also against the recreational use of certain narcotics even though it only affects the user. You may argue that an addict with a costly and reprehensible drug problem can be a burden on a family and a community, but you can make the same argument about a prostitute or their clients. Likewise, Ponzi schemes only affect those looking to invest money. Nobody is forced to invest. But I still feel it is morally wrong to deceive people that way. Should it be illegal to lie or deceive? or is it just immoral? Hmm, both probably.

Should it be illegal to have sex for money? Or is it just immoral? We all have our answers to both questions, but the arguments from both sides are strong enough that neither side will earn a clear victory. At least we know what the other side is thinking.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by killerpineapple

And yes, government regulation would set up the framework for a safer working environment for prostitutes. Unfortunately, even in places where it is legal, people continue to break the law and sex workers are still being mistreated. This is the major reason why half the red-light district in Amsterdam was being shut down. (I haven't followed that story in months, anyone up to date?)

Despite the fact I see that this entire area was your 'final thought' so I don't expect a response, I do hope you realize what you just said above. The Red-Light district, for what I'm to understand, has been around for YEAAAARS and for the most part, due to it's legality has never stirred much controversy other than 'zomg it's prostitution.' But look at what you just said...people are being mistreated, and when the law is broken (when abuse/whatever is brought up) places get shut down...JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER JOB/EMPLOYER IN AMERICA.

Quote:

No matter how bad it gets at wal-mart, people aren't going to force you to work without pay. You won't get threatened of physically abused if you choose not to comply. I don't think we should be so quick to legalize prostitution until the places that allow it have fully sorted out their problems with it. (Actually, I don't think we should legalize it ever)

Um...Okay...do you realize that this ENTIRE time we are not talking about legalizing prostitution so that all the pimps in the crib mahn (drop it like its hawt) can have a free ticket to bitch slap their women if they don't bring in enough dough? We are NOT talking about the places right now having a free ride. We are talking about making it legal so that RULES AND REGULATIONS can be instilled for entrepreneurs that WISH to open up brothels/enact in business run prostitution can do so, but have to follow a specific guideline, and rules that apply to human services. Which I will outline in the next part right here:

Quote:

The only way I see prostitution infringing on the rights of uninvolved people is the shame it brings on family and friends. It also spreads some disease, there's no denying that...but I haven't seen any statistics on that.

As much as I want to sling insults for this first sentence here, I won't. I just hope you realize how ridiculous that first sentence of yours is, and apologize for it later. Just as Wal-mart can not be held responsible for any 'stigmas' viewed on the people who shop there (generally poor, dirty, nasty people only shop at wal-mart etc. etc.) prostitutes and businesses like that can not be held responsible for any 'shame' that a family feels if their daughter works there.

As for diseases...this just goes to show you that you have never, EVER worked in a place that you are prone to get injured or have the possibility for blood transfusions to take place. If prostitution had OSHA on their side, holy shit...STD's from prostitution would probably see a huge decline...and that is for the simple fact that guidelines and steps WOULD BE (not could be) WOULD BE enforced to minimize the transfer of STDs. This could come in the form of every paying customer needing to produce a clean bill of health (STD free) to always using a condom no matter what the sexual act involved is.

Quote:

Likewise, Ponzi schemes only affect those looking to invest money. Nobody is forced to invest. But I still feel it is morally wrong to deceive people that way. Should it be illegal to lie or deceive? or is it just immoral? Hmm, both probably.

The last time I checked, you invested money to make money. The risk is that your investment may not fall through/the people you invest in may not succeed. I believe what you are talking about are when people intentionally steal the money that were invested in them, thus they WILLINGLY took money that wasn't theirs, and that is breaking the law. Nobody is going to force you to go see a prostitute, and unless said prostitute only becomes a prostitute to try and seduce ONE MAN THAT SHE MET ON A BUS ONE DAY into leaving his wife, that is the only situation that I can see a prostitute wanting to deceive, and if it came to that point, there is something wrong with the woman, and not the industry.

Quote:

Should it be illegal to have sex for money? Or is it just immoral? We all have our answers to both questions, but the arguments from both sides are strong enough that neither side will earn a clear victory. At least we know what the other side is thinking.

And unfortunately the other side is thinking that despite the fact that if prostitution was legalized, for the most part, that profession would become a safer place, they would still find it 'evil and morally wrong' just due to mostly religious beliefs nowadays (hell back in Greek times it was all the rage, and not frowned on at all), they would rather keep their morality in check and judge people rather than wanting people in a safe, secure location to do what they want to do.

As RR posted above, he'd not want his daughter in prostitution, but woudln't mind if his neighbor daughter did...I'm sure that if said daughter was in that business, he'd still want her to work in a safe environment.

Take a look at it this way Killer...World of Warcraft has caused deaths in the world...a video game has caused deaths. Mainly in Korea, but does that mean that we should ban it? Make it illegal?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Quote:

And unfortunately the other side is thinking that despite the fact that if prostitution was legalized, for the most part, that profession would become a safer place, they would still find it 'evil and morally wrong' just due to mostly religious beliefs nowadays (hell back in Greek times it was all the rage, and not frowned on at all), they would rather keep their morality in check and judge people rather than wanting people in a safe, secure location to do what they want to do.

See, you part from the assumption that people want to be prostitutes. That may or may not be the case. Why do you think that it is?

The point is, I don't think you have any data to back up that claim, but here is some to back up mine: In the paper "Prostitution in Nevada," Richard Symanski writes about the brothels and prostitutes in a state with legalized prostitution. The rules in Nevada are extremely stringent and concerned with health codes. Symanski found that most of the current prostitutes were previously streetwalkers, waitress, call-girls, or university students. Why do you think that women in respectable, well-paying jobs aren't in that list? The main reason these prostitutes give for entering the profession is "quick financial gain." He does write, however, that normalizing prostitution does away with many of the present health problems associated with the profession. Here is a link to the article:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2562357

I understand that becoming a prostitute is a way to gain power for a lot of women down in their luck, but isn't it a bit ironic that it involves using a patriarchal system that has put them in that position in the first place? That is, males have exploited women for a long time. How can women get out of that position? Why, exacerbate the problem! Make yourself an object! Work within the power structure that men have cemented for you. Maybe some women DO want to be prostitutes, but I would contend it is because of their politico/economic place in society. I find that system in itself criminal. So, to meet you halfway, I have absolutely no problem with women wanting to be prostitutes and doing it legally, for whatever reason it is they cite. But I do wish that instead of making it easier for girls to become prostitutes, we were working on giving every person a dignified and prosperous place in our society.

Second, I am not entirely sure that religious beliefs are really what is driving opposition to prostitution, at least not unilaterally. I, for one, am simply concerned with people being exploited. I agree with you, working for large retailers sucks (I used to work at Best Buy, and I am never going back). But on the other hand, I feel like prostitution opens up a much bigger can of worms. Yes, people sell their bodies for manual labor in the construction industry, but that rarely involves an intimate, powerful practice. Sex is serious business ().

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Tamburlaine

I understand that becoming a prostitute is a way to gain power for a lot of women down in their luck, but isn't it a bit ironic that it involves using a patriarchal system that has put them in that position in the first place? That is, males have exploited women for a long time. How can women get out of that position? Why, exacerbate the problem! Make yourself an object! Work within the power structure that men have cemented for you.

Wow. This is an extremely ignorant thing to say! I wonder if you think America (or at least the liberal parts) isn't racist anymore.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?