The Sex Industry and the Government

[Gmart]

A Feminist Question?

There seem to be two major opinions on the sex industry at the moment and I would like to find out what people think.

On one side, a womens body is her own and what she does with it is no one's business but hers. The same goes for the porn industry. So long as the choice has been made by the individual without coersion, then no crime. People have the right to do what they wish and others don't have the right to tell them what to do even if they disagree with it. This is the straightforward pro-choice option.

On the other, some feel that there should be no sex trade at all and that the whole trade should be banned completely by whatever method the government can come up with. The whole industry is demonstrative of a disease in society which needs to be stamped out for the good of all. People need to be encouraged down the proper road by using the Police to tell them what to do! Freedom comes with the responsibility to do what is right. The sex industry is a demonstration of the continuing subjugation of women by men and just because they don't know they are being subjugated, is not a good reason to allow them to do it to themselves (or to those around them...Remember the children!!!!!)

What do people think? What about the people involved? What rights should they expect?

I hope that we can all agree that Adult education should be well funded enough to allow those who want to to work their way out of the poverty trap, but what about those who seem happy being in this profession?

Here are some statements from the prostitutes themselves to help.

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

Paying people to perform sex acts is sexual abuse.

As with all other forms of sexual abuse the perpetrators should be targetted, both legally and educationally, with a view to eradication, while acknowledging that the attitudes which lead to sexual abuse are endemic in our society and eradication is not a realistic prospect in the short term. As such councilling for women in prostitution and targetted support to help them exit is essential.

Dunno where that fits into your poll options...

 

[lostexpectation]

so is it a type of self-abuse for women?

so is the government not going to budge one bit on decriminlaising it?

I wonder if there any cities conducting pilot progrmas of a type, I presume certain cities turn a blind eye to it to varying degrees and at different times but I wonder if any city has taken upon itself to move towards legalisation.

 

[ViolentPanda]

so is it a type of self-abuse for women?

so is the government not going to budge one bit on decriminlaising it?

I wonder if there any cities conducting pilot progrmas of a type, I presume certain cities turn a blind eye to it to varying degrees and at different times but I wonder if any city has taken upon itself to move towards legalisation.

You might want to have a look on Google for literature about the (late, lamented) "tolerance zone" in Leith.

 

[detective-boy]

...(or to those around them...Remember the children!!!!!)

Pro-choice. 100%.

I would like to hope that we could move to a situation where people didn;t feel the need to but, so long as they do, it must be an option for them. I know many young gay men for whom "rent" has provided the means to get out of temporary financial difficulties (mostly brought on by hedonism!).

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

so is it a type of self-abuse for women?

No more self-abuse than women who decide, for whatever reason, to continue to live in violent relationships. The abuse is perpetrated by someone external however the women accept the abuse as they feel their options to escape from it are limited.

I wonder if there any cities conducting pilot progrmas of a type, I presume certain cities turn a blind eye to it to varying degrees and at different times but I wonder if any city has taken upon itself to move towards legalisation.

The SSP has produced a short pamphlet which looks at the experience of legalisation and decriminalisation both here and internationally as well as the Swedish approach of criminalising those who pay women to perform sex acts.

http://www.scottishsocialistparty.org/pdfs/pamphlet1_1_final.pdf

 

[zion]

I think that my views on this have changed over time.

On the one hand, the always powerful libertarian argument suggests that all sex workers can do what they like with their bodies. But the libertarian argument only really works if one sanitizes the sex industry and creates a hypothetical case where a single john and an adult, unionized sex worker who freely loves their work have a clean, safe-sex transaction that carries no emotional weight for either party. I could be wrong, but I think that this kind of sanitized case is rare and unrepresentative of the sex trade that currently exists, and also unrepresentative of how human beings think about and deal with sex as a whole.

In reality, many women, girls and boys are forced into the sex trade. Many johns are cheating on their partners, creating endless potential for hurt, betrayal, disease, broken families and broken lives. Where sex for pay is freely available, it devalues the kind of sex that is not for pay. For all these reasons, I would support efforts to create a system where vulnerable people would not have to sell their bodies to get by, and continue to ban prostitution.

 

[shagnasty]

as been proved with these five young girls who were murdered it would safer to run it in controlled manner the girls take a big risk getting into a strangers car

 

[Haller]

Paying people to perform sex acts is sexual abuse.

What constitutes a 'sex act' for you in this context?

Does it cover, say, the work of a dominatrix? Of a stripper? Of someone appearing in a porn movie? Of someone writing porn?

Seems a bit vague, even for a sweeping generalization.

 

[dylanredefined]

Its not like anyone is on the streets through choice .Mostly drugs or poverty (of other choices as well as simply being skint).I dont know how maybe reducing the number of men looking for it would reduce the number of girls though how would you do that i dont know?

 

[Gmart]

There are lots of questions which may need to be addressed, but before we do, we need to ensure the safety of the population, which is the PRIME directive of any government. Thus we need to legalise brothels so that women are safe, and THEN we can ask the moral questions WHEN they are safe.

 

[Baboonking]

Sweden seems to have gone for the option of decriminalising sex workers, and simultaneously criminalising their clients and anyone who work profits from others sex work (brothel owners etc). Does anyone know if this has worked, has prostitution been eradicated or has it just driven the industry underground, or made it even more dangerous for sex workers?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think that my views on this have changed over time.

On the one hand, the always powerful libertarian argument suggests that all sex workers can do what they like with their bodies. But the libertarian argument only really works if one sanitizes the sex industry and creates a hypothetical case where a single john and an adult, unionized sex worker who freely loves their work have a clean, safe-sex transaction that carries no emotional weight for either party. I could be wrong, but I think that this kind of sanitized case is rare and unrepresentative of the sex trade that currently exists, and also unrepresentative of how human beings think about and deal with sex as a whole.

In reality, many women, girls and boys are forced into the sex trade. Many johns are cheating on their partners, creating endless potential for hurt, betrayal, disease, broken families and broken lives. Where sex for pay is freely available, it devalues the kind of sex that is not for pay. For all these reasons, I would support efforts to create a system where vulnerable people would not have to sell their bodies to get by, and continue to ban prostitution.

A fair enough argument of its' sort.

How would you go about banning prostitution, though (bearing in mind that it isn't, as you appear to assume, currently banned in the UK)?

And by ban I don't mean "drive it further underground, where no assistance can be given to sex workers", I mean "ban as in effectively ending the sex trade".

 

[ViolentPanda]

There are lots of questions which may need to be addressed, but before we do, we need to ensure the safety of the population, which is the PRIME directive of any government. Thus we need to legalise brothels so that women are safe, and THEN we can ask the moral questions WHEN they are safe.

Hear bloody hear.

 

[Gmart]

Sweden seems to have gone for the option of decriminalising sex workers, and simultaneously criminalising their clients and anyone who work profits from others sex work (brothel owners etc). Does anyone know if this has worked, has prostitution been eradicated or has it just driven the industry underground, or made it even more dangerous for sex workers?

From what i've found out it has caused a huge official reduction and driven it completely underground, though the increase in funds for Adult Education have apparently helped.

We went through the Swedish example on another thread about prostitutes (there are a few). However there are others who would argue that it proves that this disease can be eradicated etc.

See here

 

[zion]

ViolentPanda,

I sort of assume, unless told otherwise, that the laws are much as they were back when I lived in England (1977-1999). I'm surprised that they've legalized prostitution! and I find it hard to see how society would be better off for doing so!

 

[Gmart]

ViolentPanda,

I sort of assume, unless told otherwise, that the laws are much as they were back when I lived in England (1977-1999). I'm surprised that they've legalized prostitution! and I find it hard to see how society would be better off for doing so!

I'm surprised you find it difficult to see how it might improve society. Then at least the workers would be allowed proper protection from people who would like to do them harm. Also they could organise together in coops if needs be.

It's a bit like the drugs trade, the supply is not of a definite quality in the black market, and so there are many deaths from those who accidentally take too much due to this. Thus the trade should be taken out of the black market to ensure asap on the basis of safety of the population, THEN counselling/moralising etc.

 

[ViolentPanda]

ViolentPanda,

I sort of assume, unless told otherwise, that the laws are much as they were back when I lived in England (1977-1999). I'm surprised that they've legalized prostitution! and I find it hard to see how society would be better off for doing so!

Oh dear.

Prostitution is NOT illegal.

Only the act of soliciting for custom is, and that is exactly the same law that was in place for the 22 years these shores were blessed with your presence.

Back of the classroom please, and put the pointy hat on!!

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm surprised you find it difficult to see how it might improve society. Then at least the workers would be allowed proper protection from people who would like to do them harm. Also they could organise together in coops if needs be.

It's a bit like the drugs trade, the supply is not of a definite quality in the black market, and so there are many deaths from those who accidentally take too much due to this. Thus the trade should be taken out of the black market to ensure asap on the basis of safety of the population, THEN counselling/moralising etc.

I think perhaps that many of those exhibiting moralistic tendencies and promoting moral arguments actually view prostitutes as residing outside of "civilised" society. If a person takes that view then, ipso facto they are stating that prositutes reside outside of society per se.
I've certainly seen arguments along the line of "prostitution should be banned in a civilised society" being expressed on the issue.

I'd much prefer to leave the moral arguments until a time when prostitutes are secured against unnecessary danger and disease.

 

[zion]

Good point. Imagine me at the back of the class.

 

[XR75]

Paying people to perform sex acts is sexual abuse.

As with all other forms of sexual abuse the perpetrators should be targetted, both legally and educationally, with a view to eradication, while acknowledging that the attitudes which lead to sexual abuse are endemic in our society and eradication is not a realistic prospect in the short term. As such councilling for women in prostitution and targetted support to help them exit is essential.

Dunno where that fits into your poll options...

Someone sounds like a misandrist.

 

[untethered]

we need to ensure the safety of the population, which is the PRIME directive of any government.

Yes, but it's the safety of the population as a whole (ie. the society) not the safety of any specific individual, especially where that individual is engaging in voluntary behaviour that is socially corrosive.

 

[untethered]

How would you go about banning prostitution, though (bearing in mind that it isn't, as you appear to assume, currently banned in the UK)?

And by ban I don't mean "drive it further underground, where no assistance can be given to sex workers", I mean "ban as in effectively ending the sex trade".

How about just banning buying sex and enforcing that ban as far as possible? Under such a regime, it'd be legal to run a 300-room brothel opposite New Scotland Yard, but the fact that any customers visiting would be liable to be arrested and convicted with sufficiently severe penalties would kill a huge slice of the trade.

Edit: typo.

 

[fela fan]

Attitudes towards sex and bodies need investigating. Rather than trying to say what should or should not be, better first to actually find out what IS. Why demand exists, why supply exists, the role of society in creating or lessening such demands. Why it's mostly men who pay for sex.

I read once that it's a battle for good men to take care of the sheep in them while giving just enough to the wolf to keep it at arm's length. I understood this to be the battle between physical urges in males and mental understandings, largely shaped by upbringing and society.

The former can be put down to the uncivilised animal in men, while the latter can be put down to the advantages of being human. We are, often not for the good, both animal and human.

For me personally i thought paying for sex was not right, and that men were somehow odd if they did so. Then i left england and found out how things work differently elsewhere. I now make distinctions between having sex and making love. The former is with working girls, while the latter is more than just the act, it enjoins parts of our soul and heart and mind.

Difficult subject. But banning things usually makes things worse for the very people that were being sought to protect.

 

[Gmart]

Yes, but it's the safety of the population as a whole (ie. the society) not the safety of any specific individual, especially where that individual is engaging in voluntary behaviour that is socially corrosive.

Socially corrosive?? In what way is this private act between consenting adults causing a problem? Society will be fine, and it is made up of INDIVIDUALS who deserve the same protection as anyone else. What makes you think that it is down to the government to moralise? That is a personal issue much akin to religion.

If there was a victim, then i would be happier with a ban, but actually this whole situation reeks of middle England wishing that the world was different, and not caring about their fellow human beings whilst they judge them as inferior and therefore not worthy of human rights.

 

[TAE]

No more self-abuse than women who decide, for whatever reason, to continue to live in violent relationships. The abuse is perpetrated by someone external however the women accept the abuse as they feel their options to escape from it are limited.

I would suggest we should help the women to leave all such abusive situations.

 

[ViolentPanda]

How about just banning buying sex and enforcing that ban as far as possible? Under such a regime, it'd be legal to run a 300-room brothel opposite New Scotland Yard, but the fact that any customers visiting would be liable to be arrested and convicted with sufficiently severe penalties would kill a huge slice of the trade.

Edit: typo.

The problem with your idea (as with all ideas advocating the "banning" of the selling or buying of sexual services) is that a ban is logistically impossible to effect fully, would be improbably difficult to police even in an attenuated form, and would merely relocate the issue rather than "dealing with it".

 

[untethered]

The problem with your idea (as with all ideas advocating the "banning" of the selling or buying of sexual services) is that a ban is logistically impossible to effect fully, would be improbably difficult to police even in an attenuated form, and would merely relocate the issue rather than "dealing with it".

Nothing can be implemented "fully". A ban on speeding doesn't eliminate speeding. A ban on murder doesn't eliminate murder. But it does dissuade many people from doing these things, or doing them as much as they might do otherwise.

I'd imagine most clients of prostitutes are not entirely reckless people with nothing to lose. They have jobs, families and a reputation. A ban would discourage many of these people from using prostitutes most of the time. It would diminish the industry significantly. If that's what you're trying to achieve, that would be a success.

A key point here is the loss of reputation. Using prostitutes is broadly socially unacceptable. (By which I mean, very few people that do it would admit to it.) Contrast this, for example, with the use of drugs, particularly "soft" drugs. An arrest or conviction for possession of cannabis wouldn't hurt many people's reputation significantly, if at all. In many cases, it would enhance it. Not so prostitution. I believe the threat of exposure were it to be criminalised would be a sufficient deterrent for many.

 

[nick1181]

Legalise it.

This debate raged here in New Zealand with the traditional ugliness coming from the puritan camp (because that's what it always boils down to). It was legalised - same as it is in Victoria Australia... the world didn't end.

This isn't about morality (in fact morality can fuck off), it's about what's effective - reducing the danger and the damage that can and does happen to people. Criminalisation of either prostitutes or customers automatically forces prostitution into the domain of organised crime.

Targeting customers is a kneejerk reaction from people who haven't thought things through. Targeting customers forces prostitutes into locations that are inevitably less safe.

 

[zion]

Nick,

I generally support harm reduction approaches. But I've not seen anyone advocating a harm reduction approach on prostitution who tries to analyze the harm to people's existing relationships (especially married people with kids) if prostitution becomes legally available without fear of prosecution for soliciting.

It's not particularly Puritan to suggest that it might not be wise to set up society so that it is easy and legal to do something that destabilizes families, increases the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases, and promotes violence against women.