Interesting article in todays Guardian (sex legislation)

[Fruitloop]

edited: bit of a pointless post, to be honest.

 

[Fruitloop]

One thing that occurs to me in quite a lot of contexts and I think is relevant in this one, is that when politicians talk about business and crime they approach them as if they are diametrically opposed – that ‘creative’ industry, work, consumption etc are the exact opposite of ‘destructive’ crime and the proscribed consumptions that are viewed as typifying moral decay – drug use, prostitution, dog-fighting, whatever. In fact the case is that these activities resemble each other more than they resemble anything else that exists in society, and the only genuine difference is whether they are authorised and sanctioned by the ruling class. To illustrate the point; it is almost impossible to think of an activity which in its criminal form is viewed as some kind of bane on society that doesn’t also exist in an officially allowed form – prostitution in the Spearmint Rhino, drug use in the alcohol industry, illegal gambling in the casino or bookies etc etc.

A society that has this kind of fundamental contradiction when it comes to issues of personal morality, i.e. one that has to create and extend more and more of these kinds of desires in order to reproduce itself is inevitably going to have to resort to ever-more authoritarian measures if it’s to maintain these wholly artificial barriers between activities that are fundamentally similar but officially distinct. This process is unlikely to fully succeed while the needs that drive both the legitimate and illegitimate activities are being ramped up into a higher gear with every year that passes, but they will continue to require ever more repressive legislation and enforcement, and thus they will continue to serve both the profitability and the monopoly of force that the ruling classes require.

 

[detective-boy]

Because I think that kerbcrawlers are repugnant scum who contribute directly to the suffering and misery that desperate women are forced into.

I'm sure there are a lot of sex workers who would take issue with your description of them as "desperate women" being "forced" into something. There are certainly a lot of casual gay male sex workers who would ...

 

[detective-boy]

To illustrate the point; it is almost impossible to think of an activity which in its criminal form is viewed as some kind of bane on society that doesn’t also exist in an officially allowed form – prostitution in the Spearmint Rhino, drug use in the alcohol industry, illegal gambling in the casino or bookies etc etc.

Ah yes ... but my vices are simply relaxation, enjoyment of the fruits of my hard work - yours are immoral. And my drugs of choice are simple enjoyment of a few harmless substances to help me relax after a hard day - yours are damaging and dangerous. Please try and keep up ...

 

[Fruitloop]

Indeed!

 

[JoePolitix]

I'm sure there are a lot of sex workers who would take issue with your description of them as "desperate women" being "forced" into something. There are certainly a lot of casual gay male sex workers who would ...

I'm sure your right that alot of gay men would object to being called "desperate women" but I was obviously talking about street prostitutes, hence the reference to kerbcrawlers.

 

[JoePolitix]

The Scottish Socialist Party debated this very issue at their conference last year:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nUPjVjMCTXM
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=N2FWbpF_J4U
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qsR3VKqxIlk

 

[ymu]

One thing that occurs to me in quite a lot of contexts and I think is relevant in this one, is that when politicians talk about business and crime they approach them as if they are diametrically opposed – that ‘creative’ industry, work, consumption etc are the exact opposite of ‘destructive’ crime and the proscribed consumptions that are viewed as typifying moral decay – drug use, prostitution, dog-fighting, whatever. In fact the case is that these activities resemble each other more than they resemble anything else that exists in society, and the only genuine difference is whether they are authorised and sanctioned by the ruling class. To illustrate the point; it is almost impossible to think of an activity which in its criminal form is viewed as some kind of bane on society that doesn’t also exist in an officially allowed form – prostitution in the Spearmint Rhino, drug use in the alcohol industry, illegal gambling in the casino or bookies etc etc.

A society that has this kind of fundamental contradiction when it comes to issues of personal morality, i.e. one that has to create and extend more and more of these kinds of desires in order to reproduce itself is inevitably going to have to resort to ever-more authoritarian measures if it’s to maintain these wholly artificial barriers between activities that are fundamentally similar but officially distinct. This process is unlikely to fully succeed while the needs that drive both the legitimate and illegitimate activities are being ramped up into a higher gear with every year that passes, but they will continue to require ever more repressive legislation and enforcement, and thus they will continue to serve both the profitability and the monopoly of force that the ruling classes require.

Superbly put.

I'd venture to add that guns/blades/etc are simply the street equivalent of corporate Mergers & Acquisitions.

 

[Gmart]

Ah yes ... but my vices are simply relaxation, enjoyment of the fruits of my hard work - yours are immoral. And my drugs of choice are simple enjoyment of a few harmless substances to help me relax after a hard day - yours are damaging and dangerous. Please try and keep up ...

You might feel that your drugs are not damaging or dangerous, but i'm prepared to bet that there are anonymous groups dealing with their excess.

One has to be pro-choice. People don't like being told what to do, and freedom is an important idea to remember.

 

[detective-boy]

I'm sure your right that alot of gay men would object to being called "desperate women" but I was obviously talking about street prostitutes, hence the reference to kerbcrawlers.

Well, I was rather intending that the male equivalent phrase would be applied ... but point taken - the street walking bit does tend to be more through desperation in my experience.

* Shudders at recollection of working round King's Cross in late 80s *

 

[detective-boy]

You might feel that your drugs are not damaging or dangerous, but i'm prepared to bet that there are anonymous groups dealing with their excess.

One has to be pro-choice. People don't like being told what to do, and freedom is an important idea to remember.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/irony ... you lot are so literal in here ...

 

[Haller]

If we are serious about moving forward to a more decent society where sex just simply isn't for sale...

It's mever going to happen.

And I'm not convinced that there's anything particularly indecent about paying for sex.

 

[XR75]

I agree, but this is not a new law d-b. You either posted in haste, or you mean it is better to criminalise the women and not the men (or strictly speaking, the purchaser not the supplier, given the demand-driven market).

More people would be "criminalised", this is true. But that's not actually an argument for the status quo. In a patriarchal society, with crappy patriarchal attitudes, they are likely to be treated a fuck of a lot better than the average street girl, probably ending up with proportionately fewer prosecutions, far lower sentences and non-custodial options more likely to be exercised.

Could even be a nice little money-spinner - these fuckers can actually afford to pay the fines!

That's rather sexist.

 

[Gmart]

The point isn't whether the industry should be illegal, but should the workers have the same rights as any other worker. And if not, why not?