Law Against Promotion Of Prostitution Is Fitting Of A Dictatorship

PACO.ESPADA

I wish to raise an issue, which many people do not like to discuss or talk about. It's the world's oldest legal occupation, that of the prostitute, male and female alike. I thought about placing this topic in the social category but then again this argument is against the law, which prohibits the promotion of prostitution so I believe it deserves its place in the political section.

Prostitution is a 100% legal activity in the Republic of Ireland, each individual is allowed to sell their bodies for cash or trade their bodies in exchange for other goods and services. This is the law.

The law, however, uses the term "proximity" to ban what we all know to mean, "Pimping". Now, leading on from that we saw that the government outlawed the "promotion" of prostitution, in short means that you are allowed to prostitute yourself but you are not allowed to advertise said activity in any Irish Media. So if you want to prostitute yourself in today's dictatorship and make money doing it then you have two choices:

(1) - You walk the streets, which is neither legal no ilegal but not tolerated.
(2) - You pay ridiculous amounts of money to the people who run websites that you can find using the term "Escorts in Ireland" on Google or Yahoo.

Now the first option is a bit dangerous and not well seen by society. The second option basically means that you can make a good living but your living depends on a third party because without the internet you would have a hard time prostituting yourself in Ireland.

My opinion and conclusion is that the government banning of advertising prostitution is actually a huge mistake and it has not in anyway helped to fight against the "Pimps"

What the government need to do is Legalize the promotion of Prostitution and make and modernise the prostitution legeslation letting it function like a business which must pay tax and where its workers have rights and freedom.

Legalizing the promotion of prostitution would infact counter pimping because every decent prostitute would be able to publish their services in daily newspapers, rent an apartment and not have to depend on the current day stuation anymore.

I believe the government made a mistake because almost every other European Government have started in a manner that agrees with my opinion, even the United Kingdom, if I am not mistaken, Ireland is the ONLY country in Europe, which has outlawed the promotion of prostitution.

In España, where I come from, the government makes huge amounts of money as the advertisement of "Prostitution" is 100% legal and thousands of ads are published everyday in newspapers equivelant to the "Independent" and "Times" for example. The government makes huge money, the newspapers make huge money, the prostitutes can work withou the need for pimps, everybody is happy, rape almost does not exist.

Folks, I think we are going backwards instead of fowards with some laws these days, in fact I am quite sure that the governement rightly screwed it up. Who was the minister responsible for this ridiculous, dictator type law?

Would anyone like to comment, agree or disagree with with what I speak about?

The Corinthian

Regardless of the moral merits or demerits of prostitution or the sex industry in general, it’s not going to happen soon in Ireland. The primary reason for this is that Ireland is, like it or not, culturally Anglo-Saxon in the same way that most other Anglophone nations, such as Canada, the USA or Australia are.

One of the hallmarks of Anglo-Saxon culture is that it finds the topic of sex deeply uncomfortable, more so than in most other European cultures – even those that are predominantly Roman Catholic - and historically tended to adopt a Victorian value system that suppressed even acknowledgement of sex taking place in the first place.

And as with any Victorian value system, Ireland has adopted a ‘blind eye’ approach to the sex industry - for example, explicit pornography remains technically illegal but sex shops that sell it are tolerated. What we are left with is an uneasy compromise between the reality of demand for sex and the puritanical aspirations of a Victorian abhorrence for it.

Neither side is happy with this compromise and both recognise it for the hypocrisy that it is, but given that both demands and aspirations continue to exist, often within the same individuals, this is unlikely to change quickly.

InFront

Just in terms of you saying rape virtually does not exist in Spain, according to this,

the crimes registered by the CNP (Cuerpo Nacional de Policía, National police) represent only a fraction of the entire Spanish crime picture, ... there are two further police organisations (Guardia Civil and Policías Autonómicas), which are not obliged to report offences within their jurisdiction to the CNP.... CNP data only covers the reported crimes from provincial capitals and cities with at least 20,000 inhabitants. When working with Spanish data these shortcomings should always be kept in mind.

And according to this rape is under-reported in Spain. So I'm not sure that you can say anything about the potential merits of legalisatrion using the rape argument.

Apart from making life easier for the prostitute, what significant benefit would there be to society?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

healthier, better looking prostitutes?

walrusgumble

with fixed or competive prices?
where customer is king/quenn?

SeanW

I agree with the OP. I think that things like soft drugs like cannibis, and prostitution, in and of themselves, aren't fundamentally evil as long as capable adults are making decisions for themselves by consent and not hurting anyone else or violating anyone elses rights.

The problem is that because these trades are illegal, they flourish in the underworld and are controlled by thieving leeching scumbags, like pimps, pushers, gangs etc. I say bring this stuff out in the open where it can be legal and regulated.

InFront

SeanW wrote:

things like soft drugs like cannibis, and prostitution, in and of themselves, aren't fundamentally evil

Would you let your sister or daughter do it?
If not, surely you must see evil in it?

AbusesToilets

I don't think that the issue has to do with letting somebody do anything,if it's a personal choice then it's their life.The main problem with prostitution is the large numbers of people forced into,either at the coercion of gangs or to support other habits like drugs etc.The government would be doing a much greater service to prostitutes by making a effort to address these issues and the social situations which give rise to them.Putting in place structures for prostitutes to practice their trade legally and safely could form part of that.

SeanW

InFront wrote:

Would you let your sister or daughter do it?
If not, surely you must see evil in it?

I have neither, but if I were raising a daughter, drugs and prostitution would be one of a number of things I would not let her - or a son for that matter - get involved in. That list would also include getting drunk on alcahol and smoking tobacco, underage sex etc. However that doesn't mean any of these should be illegal - except for under-18s.

I'm not sure what you mean about

let your sister ... do it

this, however. I doubt I'd be able to stop her.

Dave!

InFront wrote:

Would you let your sister or daughter do it?
If not, surely you must see evil in it?

That's a very silly argument. If I had a daughter I wouldn't be too happy about her going sky-diving or bungee jumping either; it doesn't mean a thing.

walrusgumble

any been to Amsterdam and checked things out? yet how here and then say so and so is evil, maybe a bit of a hypocrite. (i am not attacking in fronts post here, just in case)

drink use to be seen as an evil by some members of the church, yet even though my parents would have gone mental if they knew i was drinking since 13ish, would they have been able to stop me? i have been drinking and smoking since 12-13 yr but i have not turned out to be a bad person or a failure, ok it will feck up my health in the long run, but hey thats my problem,

it is not for anyone to say something is evil, its about what the person does or becomes. people of all walks of life have different opinions of what is good for someone or what is not.

i agree with the op on this

The Corinthian

InFront wrote:

Would you let your sister or daughter do it?
If not, surely you must see evil in it?

Evil? This is a term that it generally bandied about by people who need to be told what it is – typically by a religion. Of course prostitution may still be undesirable in Society, but that’s something that should be open to debate rather than using an intellectually lazy label like ‘evil’.

Much of this way of thinking comes from the Abrahamic concept that sex is evil, or at least not terribly good, to begin with. While it began with Judaism, both Christianity and Islam have both inherited this attitude, which has resulted in a culture of hypocrisy where the same individuals who will preach of the evils of promiscuity will often be the one’s who frequent prostitutes in the first place.

As has been pointed out there are plenty of things that parents would not allow of their children, but ultimately when they are old enough to understand and make their own choices, we can no longer make them for them. Certainly there is an impact that their choices will have on their family, but that is not the same thing as calling something evil.

InFront

SeanW wrote:

if I were raising a daughter, drugs and prostitution would be one of a number of things I would not let her - or a son for that matter - get involved in. That list would also include getting drunk on alcahol and smoking tobacco, underage sex etc. However that doesn't mean any of these should be illegal

Firstly, lets not try and dismiss prostitution as though it were in the same bracket as smoking a cigarette.
Of all of the things you associate with prostitution in the above post (with the possible exception of drugs, depending on the extent) I think prostitution of their children would be every good parents greatest nightmare. There is nothing commendable about it.

There is almost undeniably a culture out there that considers the legalisation of prostitution and says "yeah lets be liberal, lets introduce radical attitudes towards sex, it brings us so far away from the idea of religious Ireland, lets just go for it".
That is a terrible reason for legalising anything. Lets look at prostitution and consider what benefits society would actually draw, if anything, from its legalisation, and then evaluate the merit of this.

The exerpts below are from one of the best and most comprehensive analyses I have seen for explaining - or demystifying - the realities behind legalisation of prostitution. It can be found here and its key messages are here:

DECRIMINALISATION OF BUSINESSMEN SELLING WOMEN

People often don’t realize that decriminalization means decriminalization of the whole sex industry, not just the women in it. And they haven’t thought through the consequences of legalizing pimps as legitimate sex entrepreneurs or third party businessmen

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN TRAFFICKING

80% of women in the brothels of the Netherlands were trafficked from other countries (Budapest Group, 1999)(1). In 1994, the International Organization of Migration (IOM) stated that in the Netherlands alone, “nearly 70 % of trafficked women were from CEEC [Central and Eastern European Countries]” (IOM, 1995, p. 4).
...It is almost impossible for poor women to facilitate their own migration, underwrite the costs of travel and travel documents, and set themselves up in “business” without intervention...
Netherlands is targeting poor women for the international sex trade to remedy the inadequacies of the free market of “sexual services.” Prostitution is thus normalized as an “option for the poor.”

EFFECTIVENESS OF LEGALISATION FOR STREET PROSTITUTION

One goal of legalized prostitution was to move prostituted women indoors into brothels and clubs where they would be allegedly less vulnerable than in street prostitution. However, many women are in street prostitution because they want to avoid being controlled and exploited by pimps (transformed in legalized systems into sex businessmen). Other women do not want to register or submit to health checks, as required by law in some countries where prostitution is legalized (Schelzig, 2002).

UNDERGROUND ACTIVITY HASN'T CHANGED

In the Netherlands, women in prostitution point out that legalization or decriminalization of the sex industry does not erase the stigma of prostitution. Because they must register and lose their anonymity, women are more vulnerable to being stigmatized as “whores,” and this identity follows them everyplace. Thus, the majority of women in prostitution still operate illegally and underground. (Daley, 2001, p. A1).

LOSS OF CONTROL

On the street, very few women will do anal sex and few do sex without a condom. But in the saunas, the owners, who obviously don’t want their punters going away disappointed, decide what the women will do, and very often that is anal sex and sex – oral and vaginal – without a condom” (Martin, 2002, p. A5).

BAD MESSAGE

When legal barriers disappear, so too do the social and ethical barriers to treating women as sexual merchandise. Legalization of prostitution sends the message to new generations of men and boys that women are sexual commodities and that prostitution is harmless fun (Leidholdt, 2000).

NOT A PROFESSION

In a 5-country study on sex trafficking, most of the trafficked and prostituted women interviewed in the Philippines, Venezuela and the United States (3) strongly stated their opinion that prostitution should not be legalized and considered legitimate work, warning that legalization would create more risks and harm for women from already violent customer and pimps (Raymond et al, 2002). One woman said, “No way. It’s not a profession. It is humiliating, and violence from the men’s side.” Not one woman we interviewed wanted her children, family or friends to have to earn money by entering the sex industry. Another woman stated: “Prostitution stripped me of my life, my health, everything” (Raymond et al., 2002).

GOVERNMENT POINT OF VIEW

If women in prostitution are counted as workers, then governments can abdicate responsibility for making decent and sustainable employment available to these women.

THE SWEDISH MODEL

Sweden has drafted legislation recognizing that without male demand, there would be no female supply. Thinking outside the repressive box of legalization, Sweden has acknowledged that prostitution is a form of male violence against women and children, and the purchase of sexual services is criminalized. The inseparability of prostitution and trafficking is recognized by the Swedish law.
. The very existence of the law, and the fact that people know it will be enforced, they say, serve as an aid to young women who are vulnerable to pimps and procurers (Ekberg, 2001).
Street prostitution has declined in the three years since the law was passed. The number of prostituted women has decreased by 50%, and 70-80% of the buyers have left public places. Furthermore, a police representative maintained that there is no indication that prostitution has gone underground, or that prostitution in sex clubs, escort agencies and brothels has increased (Björling, 2001).

InFront

The Corinthian wrote:

Evil? This is a term that it generally bandied about by people who need to be told what it is – typically by a religion. Of course prostitution may still be undesirable in Society, but that’s something that should be open to debate rather than using an intellectually lazy label like ‘evil’.

Before you start hyperventilating, I was responding to a poster who used that word, something along the lines of "it is not evil"

the same individuals who will preach of the evils of promiscuity will often be the one’s who frequent prostitutes in the first place.

Do you have a reason to suggest so, or evidence to back this up? Or is it just something that you think sounds appealing for your argument?

Dontico

i would promote the idea of prositution if someone invented an easy to use "check if the have diseases" machine.

i'm currently against prositution cause of disease control. at the moment i think the prositutes should be blamed and the customer. however, i consider the pimp to be mostly responsible.

The Corinthian

InFront wrote:

Before you start hyperventilating, I was responding to a poster who used that word, something along the lines of "it is not evil"

To which you dogmatically responded that it was.

Do you have a reason to suggest so, or evidence to back this up? Or is it just something that you think sounds appealing for your argument?

Without searching for comparative statistics for half an hour, here's one example which is hardly isolated:
http://debrahaffner.blogspot.com/2006/06/rush-limbaughs-hypocrisy.html

InFront

The Corinthian wrote:

To which you dogmatically responded that it was.

Actually, I responded with a question for him.

That link seems a bit out of place. It is not evidence of religious people often being the people frequenting prostitutes, as you suggested. It's not really evidence of anything.

I don't understand why you seem to want to bring religion into this, it's about prostitution in law.

Fratton Fred

AbusesToilets wrote:

I don't think that the issue has to do with letting somebody do anything,if it's a personal choice then it's their life.The main problem with prostitution is the large numbers of people forced into,either at the coercion of gangs or to support other habits like drugs etc.The government would be doing a much greater service to prostitutes by making a effort to address these issues and the social situations which give rise to them.Putting in place structures for prostitutes to practice their trade legally and safely could form part of that.

my view entirely. decriminalise it, regulate it and remove the scum that go with it. it's been around for a few thousand years now, so I guess prostitution is here to stay. What is a relatively recent thing are the gangs and kartels that control it. That is what should be tackled, but unfortunatly there is not a politician in the world who would stand up for a prostitute, far too damaging.

InFront

Fratton Fred wrote:

my view entirely. decriminalise it, regulate it and remove the scum that go with it.

You mean put them in gainful employment, doing the exact same thing as ever but with legal protection?

it's been around for a few thousand years now, so I guess prostitution is here to stay.

So was slavery

walrusgumble

ya need to get laid man, ya take things way too serious, chill out like

if it was legalised, they could establish unions to help eachother out

SeanW

InFront wrote:

You mean put them in gainful employment, doing the exact same thing as ever but with legal protection?

Remember the Prohibition of Alcahol in the American 1930s?

It went with a huge surge in crime. Why? Because an entire industry, the alcohol industry was closed down and forced undergound, taken out of the hands of honest businesspeople and put into those of the gangsters and thieves. People like Al Capone made a killing smuggling, selling and dealing illicit bootleg booze.

I hate cigarettes but if we banned those tomorrow, the country would become totally lawless as an industry again goes underground and goes into the hands of gangsters and scumbags.

I believe it's the same thing with prostitution, the only reason the pimps and gang bosses are so powerful in the trade is because the trade is proscribed.

The Corinthian

InFront wrote:

Actually, I responded with a question for him.

Actually you declared, in your response, that it was evil – making a moral standpoint – then proceeded to deny that you had made any such standpoint to me, claiming that it was the original poster who was the only one to have used the word thusly.

That link seems a bit out of place. It is not evidence of religious people often being the people frequenting prostitutes, as you suggested. It's not really evidence of anything.

It is an example, and thus evidence, that such hypocrisy does indeed take place.

I don't understand why you seem to want to bring religion into this, it's about prostitution in law.

So if it was legalised you would magically think it no longer evil? Please.

I bring religion into it because it is a Society’s religious origins, no matter how secular it claims to be, that shape that law and those attitudes. Polygamy is illegal in Christian countries because of this, just as alcohol is illegal in some Islamic countries for the same reasons.

Religion is typically the original basis for morality and, by extension, law and so it is fair to examine its attitudes towards prostitution, as this is ultimately the basis of our attitudes, social and legal towards it.

Tea drinker

SeanW wrote:

....aren't fundamentally evil as long as capable adults are making decisions for themselves by consent and not hurting anyone else or violating anyone elses rights.

And if they are harming themselves that's ok?
I don't think mentally or physically it is a healthy profession.
I think there are very few societies where prostitution is celebrated. Choosing a profession like this (say, in Ireland where there are a good number of jobs) may indicate a problem with the individual.

As far as having sex freely available reducing rape, don't all pschologists say rape is something about domination / humiliation?

oscarBravo

walrusgumble wrote:

ya need to get laid man, ya take things way too serious, chill out like

Less of that, thanks.

The Corinthian

I’d like to preface this response with the point that I don’t necessarily support the legalisation of prostitution, however I do believe that it is important to be objective when discussing it.

Tea drinker wrote:

And if they are harming themselves that's ok?
I don't think mentally or physically it is a healthy profession.

It’s arguable that it is, however it would hardly be the only profession that is without risk. Of the more obvious and extreme examples you have the military or formula one driving, but even the more mainstream occupations out there come with various affects upon health, working in environments such as nightclubs and bars, night shift or health care workers – even office professionals who may be in jobs that engender long working hours and high stress are not without very real health risks.

What affects this risk is typically regulation – after all, it’s historically not so long ago that the life expectancy of a factory or mine worker was not all that greater than a prostitute. In the case of a courtesan, much, much shorter.

I think there are very few societies where prostitution is celebrated.

Indeed, and there are still few Societies where homosexuality is celebrated either. That this has changed in the West is a pretty recent affair, before which you could have said exactly the same thing of it. Attitudes change; so simply saying that something is evil, because people say so is a meaningless argument for this reason.

Choosing a profession like this (say, in Ireland where there are a good number of jobs) may indicate a problem with the individual.

Given the present conditions in prostitution, I would tend to agree, but that does not mean that it is a given or that with decent or even improved working conditions that it would apply as much.

People choose their occupations for a myriad of reasons. Sometimes it’s based upon the hours they will work, sometimes upon money, sometimes on conditions and sometimes upon their qualifications. If a woman (or man) has a choice of a low paid office job or prostitution that would pay them several times the amount for fewer hours, some would chose the latter.

Many women in the US work in lap dancing clubs because they are single mothers or need to pay college tuition fees and do so because they do not have the time to work full time and even if they did they would get a fraction of the income.

Of course, in an environment where prostitution, or frankly anything to do with sex, is both criminalised and stigmatised, then I would agree that those involved would tend to have problems, but then that points more to the conditions of the occupation rather than the occupation itself.

As far as having sex freely available reducing rape, don't all pschologists say rape is something about domination / humiliation?

Actually most psychologists have theorised that most rape is in (large) part about the domination and degradation of the victim. This does not imply that this is always the case or even the only determinant. As such you cannot rule out the affects of either promiscuity or prostitution on even a minority of potential rapists and by extension rape levels in general.

As purely opinion, I would also suspect that on a weekend night it is probably more likely for a lone male to be attacked than a lone female be raped or assaulted in any way and that this has a lot to do with both the high levels of promiscuity and alcohol consumption in Ireland.

InFront

SeanW wrote:

Remember the Prohibition of Alcahol in the American 1930s?

No...:) Look the thing about prohibition of alcohol is that it is so different to prostitution. You say that pimps are powerful because their activity is underground, I don't agree. They will retain their power whether their trade is legal or illegal. The research on the last page shows this, have you anything to prove otherwise?

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Actually you declared, in your response, that it was evil

Do you think I can't see what I typed? In response to a poster who said there was nothing fundamentally evil in prostitution I said:

Would you let your sister or daughter do it?
If not, surely you must see evil in it?

That is not a declaration that prostitution is evil. It is a question about the posters position on it.

Originally posted by The Corinthian
It is an example, and thus evidence, that such hypocrisy does indeed take place.

Right, but your suggestion was that "individuals who will preach of the evils of promiscuity will often be the one’s who frequent prostitutes in the first place". My question is why you say it is often the case?

I find it strange that you suggest religion is the original basis of morality, I am sure many atheists would disagree. Nevertheless, religion is no longer always the basis for morality, and this remains a debate about public policy on prostitution in a secular state.
I wouldn't bring up my personal religious beliefs in Haram onto this politics forum to go on about why I think alcohol should be banned, so I don't see why you should be bringing up religious beliefs to attempt to detract from a valid opinion. Or do you think that this is a case of atheism vs religion?

You are the only person bringing up religion in this thread, you seem fixated on the idea that disagreement with legalisation suggests that one must be religious.

I've said why I don't think prostitution should be legalised, and linked to evidence (which has mainly to do with women's welfare and social problems, and nothing to do with religion) that would seem to support that.

John R

InFront wrote:

No...:) Look the thing about prohibition of alcohol is that it is so different to prostitution. You say that pimps are powerful because their activity is underground, I don't agree. They will retain their power whether their trade is legal or illegal. The research on the last page shows this, have you anything to prove otherwise?

Alcohol prohibition had a number of similarities to our current prostitution arrangements in the main the fact that it was riddled with very unpleasant gangs who operated completely outside the law and committed countless serious crimes on those involved in their business and outside to ensure their profits and to evade the law.

The passages that you quoted from is from a website primarily concerned with the illegal trafficking of women (often against their will) for prostitution. In the last 10 years this criminal activity has become so widespread that it now is a major part of the sex industry in most European countries. It is a shameful indictement on all of the EU that mass kidnapping, imprisonment, rape and murder of women from foreign countries is all but tolerated by law enforcement and governments.

The arguement that somehow legalising prostitution promotes this is faulty however. Although prostitution may have been legalised the illegal status of the women because of immigration legislation is one of the main reasons that the gangs are able to control them.

The solutions to this disgusting activity is down to proper policing of the main crimes involved; the trafficking and slavery. In the main the gangs responsible have chosen this over drug/gun smuggling because it is much less likely that they will be caught and punished for it. It is also necessary for the widespread corruption in governments and law enforcement in the origin countries to be dealt with.


If regular consentual prostitution is legalised then no doubt there will be many "legal pimps" making big money out of the industry but how exactly would this be any different to any other industry? Are the bosses of big corporations such as McDonalds not making vast sums of money on the backs of poor minimum wage employees?

InFront wrote:

I find it strange that you suggest religion is the original basis of morality, I am sure many atheists would disagree. Nevertheless, religion is no longer always the basis for morality, and this remains a debate about public policy on prostitution in a secular state.
I wouldn't bring up my personal religious beliefs in Haram onto this politics forum to go on about why I think alcohol should be banned, so I don't see why you should be bringing up religious beliefs to attempt to detract from a valid opinion. Or do you think that this is a case of atheism vs religion?

Until very recently religious doctorine has been at the heart of laws of practically all civilisations across the world.It is only in the recent past that secularism has begun to edge religion out in the making of laws. Even still much of our perceived morality is steeped in the values set out by the dominant religions in our country. Remember it is not so long ago that condoms were all but banned in Ireland and what about divorce? The illegality of divorce was based 100% on catholic religious doctorine.

To say that our views on the morality of sex is simply nonsense. Even though religious observance has waned considerably our society is still heavily influenced by the value judgements instilled from centuries of following the particular religions.

InFront wrote:

I've said why I don't think prostitution should be legalised, and linked to evidence (which has mainly to do with women's welfare and social problems, and nothing to do with religion) that would seem to support that.

The fact is that those problems are there anyway, while legalising alone will not make them dissappear it will at least remove one huge barrier towards de-stigmatising prostitution.

The question really should be why should it be illegal. Why should it be the business of the state to dictate what anyone should or should not be allowed do with their own body?

InFront

John R wrote:

Alcohol prohibition had a number of similarities to our current prostitution arrangements in the main the fact that it was riddled with very unpleasant gangs who operated completely outside the law and committed countless serious crimes on those involved in their business and outside to ensure their profits and to evade the law.

Riddled with unpleasant gangs - how will legalisation change that?
The fact that they operate outside the law is one point above that I do not understand. Should we decriminalise all of those who operate outside the law? Would dealing in selling women's bodies be more acceptable if it were legal? The research fails to support evidence for postive effects.

Originally posted by John R
The passages that you quoted from is from a website primarily concerned with the illegal trafficking of women (often against their will) for prostitution.

Not exactly, the research was gathered and collected by them from sources who had investigated the effects of decriminalising prostitution.
CATW (Coalition against the Trafficking of Women) did not have a say in the conducting the research themselves, they just use the conclusions of these studies to support their case, and do so quite well.

Originally posted by John R
The arguement that somehow legalising prostitution promotes this (trafficking) is faulty however. Although prostitution may have been legalised the illegal status of the women because of immigration legislation is one of the main reasons that the gangs are able to control them.

Can you post evidence? Arguing those studies with an opinion alone isn't going to do much to discredit them.
The point is that women do not have to be illegal immigrants, we are often talking about women from Eastern European Countries here. It is the poor who are attracted into prostitution from states of lower economic wealth and low standards of living.
And can you support why legalisation of prostitution would put an end to illegal immigrants working in that sector? You could have an illegal immigrant working in a shop or on a building site or in an office in this country, you could certainly have them working in brothels.

originally posted by John R
The solutions to this disgusting activity is down to proper policing of the main crimes involved; the trafficking and slavery. In the main the gangs responsible have chosen this over drug/gun smuggling because it is much less likely that they will be caught and punished for it

I don't know what you';re trying to say here... you think legalisation would clean up or kill the industry? or that these gangs are not involved in other criminal activity? Again, I really think we should be talking in terms of evidence as opposed to hypothesis.

Originally posted by John R
If regular consentual prostitution is legalised then no doubt there will be many "legal pimps" making big money out of the industry but how exactly would this be any different to any other industry?

Because prostitution is not like going for a McDonalds after a rugby game or going for a few drinks after work. It involves trafficking of women and the abuse of the most vulnerable women in our society, who would themselves not benefit from serving in legal brothels under the business owner, with the power to hire and fire as he chooses depending on what the prostitute is willing to do.
He is the only person who would benefit from legalisation, he doesn't have to watch his back from the police.
How many women are currently in the women's prisons with prostitution convictions?

Originally posted by John R
Until very recently religious doctorine has been at the heart of laws of practically all civilisations across the world.It is only in the recent past that secularism has begun to edge religion out in the making of laws.

Exactly, lets focus on that aspect of it. If you don't want religion to be making your laws, why bring it up?

Originally posted by John R
The question really should be why should it be illegal.

For one thing, society has nothing to gain from making it legal. Maybe read the ten reasons for criminalisation put forward by CATW and prove them wrong with evidence?

Originally posted by John R
Why should it be the business of the state to dictate what anyone should or should not be allowed do with their own body?

I presume you're in favour of legalising cocaine?

Zombrex

SeanW wrote:

Remember the Prohibition of Alcahol in the American 1930s?

It went with a huge surge in crime. Why? Because an entire industry, the alcohol industry was closed down and forced undergound, taken out of the hands of honest businesspeople and put into those of the gangsters and thieves.

The problem with legalisation is that it tends to simply hide the problem, not solve it.

It can certainly get rid of associated crime, such as Prohibition era Mafia. But it doesn't actually tackle the issue at the heart of it, which as the abuse of alcohol by the American public. That happened before Prohibition, it happened during Prohibition, and it happened after Prohibition.

Likewise with prostitution I'm not sure there is much evidence that legalising it will do anything except hide the problems.

Having said that legalisation along with strict codes of regulation can help some what. The contrast between the largely unregulated Californian porn industry where they have a HIV outbreak every few years to the highly regulated legal prostitutes in Vegas where there has never been a recorded case of HIV is a good support for the idea that legalisation alone doesn't improve matters.

Dontico

by the way OP, its not a dictatorship if we have an elected government via democratcy. make a "we love prositutes" party then you can change the law if get in.

metrovelvet

John R wrote:

The question really should be why should it be illegal. Why should it be the business of the state to dictate what anyone should or should not be allowed do with their own body?

The state has made it its business to do so, and we elect them to keep doing it.

The US, for example, legally requires everyone to be immunised, or you will be kicked out of school, and if you dont show up for school, well - your parents get in big big trouble. Refusing these injections is against the law.

For the west, school is when it really starts, (although now there are creches to have us all insitutionalised at 5 months old), when we are told when to sit, when to stand, when to sleep, when to eat, stop fidgeting, sit this way, dont sit that way, etc etc, get down of that chair, get out from under that table like a good girl or boy, be quiet, dont raise your voice, etc. And up until very recently most disciplining in school was done though the body.And school is regulated by whom?

Socialised healthcare - a total instrument of the state. The government hands down edicts to GPs and hospitals, who then carry those out on the ill or the healthy who dont want to get ill. And in the case of this country, its an extremely obese woman who will soon need fire department assistance to get outside her door, who is running the panto.

And of course there's marriage, a state sanctioning of the ability to police another's body, even in their absence, with tax benefits and societal status to boot.

Euthnasia laws are yet another example, just as abortion is of more of this demand to run the law around the body.

Why should the government regulate our bodies? Because we have asked them too, just as we have asked them to criminalize the buying and selling or renting,leasing or whatever you want to call it, of pussy.