Poll: Prostitution
- Thread starter Typhusoid
- Start date
Customers medical records are almost certainly irrelevant because a person could get tested, catch a disease before their results return and thus start spreading whatever they have caught.
But if a guy is stupid enough to take his chances and she is stupid enough to agree for more money then I have no sympathy but It shouldnt really be a legal issue. If a girl tested positive for something she should be disqualified from working but that is where it would go under ground again.
Even if it were legal I would still favour these laws because whether the guy knows or not he is still raping her (sorry officer I didnt see the child I reversed over so its ok!).
These slavers only make money because of the lack of an alternative and the impunity of customers so by hitting from both ends of the spectrum they will stop making money and stop victimising these women.
But if a guy is stupid enough to take his chances and she is stupid enough to agree for more money then I have no sympathy but It shouldnt really be a legal issue. If a girl tested positive for something she should be disqualified from working but that is where it would go under ground again.
Even if it were legal I would still favour these laws because whether the guy knows or not he is still raping her (sorry officer I didnt see the child I reversed over so its ok!).
These slavers only make money because of the lack of an alternative and the impunity of customers so by hitting from both ends of the spectrum they will stop making money and stop victimising these women.
People are going to do it whether its legal or not
and at least if its legalized we can get rid of pimps (i know im sorry) and have checkups required for hookers so
its safer for everybody
and at least if its legalized we can get rid of pimps (i know im sorry) and have checkups required for hookers so
its safer for everybody
I'm not sure if STD checks are mandatory here (don't think so), but condoms are. I don't think it's that well-regulated here though, it's legal but I don't think the state accomodates said prostitutes much in the way of health insurance or stuff like that. People have these crazy ideas about The Netherlands as if we're all pro-drugs or whatever, but the truth is that a lot of dutch people are trying to put a stop to all that. The country is split up on a lot of subjects.PedroSteckecilo said:
Also, I have to ask, what's with the "me" at the end of Amsterdam?
Regulate it, give the girls (or boys) health benefits, have ample security and require condoms for all customers, then tax the hell out of it. Then it's not only safe for everyone, it's a good source of income for the community. People are always going to pay for sex, that's just a fact of life. Seems far wiser to me to accept that fact and try to make it as safe and profitable as possible.
I appear to be part of the minority that doesn't believe prositution should be legal, in absolute terms. This is a somewhat sensitive issue, as I find it hard to stomach that so many women still (perhaps I'm misspeaking to say 'still'; women are far from equal) willingly sell sex as a service, even in light of perhaps not having more lucrative options. However, I also sympathize with the extent to which the illegality of prostitution places the women involved in a vulnerable position, and so I here I am: wanting to have my cake and eat it too.
What I think is probably best, then, is to do things the way they do in Rhode Island: for the operations of brothels (which are highly exploitative) and street solicitation (which often involves women putting themselves in dangerous situations) to be illegal, while advertised prositution services ('escorts') are permitted. Additionally, I believe 'escort services', which often leech off their employees, should be illegal. There are two positive implications of this approach: 1) that the legality of women working off the street in the sex trade could be contingent upon them receiving STD checks, etc., and that 2) the 'middlemen' who seek to line their pockets off prosititution - pimps, managers of escort agencies, etc. - would hopefully be cut out of the equation.
What I think is probably best, then, is to do things the way they do in Rhode Island: for the operations of brothels (which are highly exploitative) and street solicitation (which often involves women putting themselves in dangerous situations) to be illegal, while advertised prositution services ('escorts') are permitted. Additionally, I believe 'escort services', which often leech off their employees, should be illegal. There are two positive implications of this approach: 1) that the legality of women working off the street in the sex trade could be contingent upon them receiving STD checks, etc., and that 2) the 'middlemen' who seek to line their pockets off prosititution - pimps, managers of escort agencies, etc. - would hopefully be cut out of the equation.
in most places prostitution is legal, what is illegal is living off the proceeds, soliciting for the purposes of and one other that is escaping me
i think it should be made legal, that way it can be regulated and taxed and mean more money for the gov
i think it should be made legal, that way it can be regulated and taxed and mean more money for the gov
This exactly. I believe it should be legal as it is one of the oldest professions in the world, and this is one of the only ways to stem problems caused by illegal sex trafficking and women being forced into prostitution, by regulating it.Susan Arendt said:
