The Sex Industry and the Government

[Jessiedog]

Prostitution is quite like the drugs issue, it should be completely legalised so it can be regulated, with taxes paying for better education and health of the workers. Brothels are probably the safest way to achieve this, opening the way towards a super brothel as part of the Super Casino complex to be built in Manchester, which would definitely make it a fun place to go.

Any form of prohibition simply forces it underground into the hands of gangsters who are less likely to be so scrupulous or sympathetic to the needs of the men and women involved.

Any form of debate over the rights, wrongs, morals or 'damage' to the workers is simply irrelevant to the policy debate, and is part of the 'Daily Mail' knee jerk populist argument that if it is morally wrong it should not be legal.

Actually all we need to look at is the effectiveness of current policy, accept that it is impossible to irradiate, and in my view it is actually morally wrong to judge those involved in the profession. What gives any person selling any services for a profit the rights to judge others morality?

Word.



Woof

 

[Jessiedog]

What is it with this subject, that people can't see beyond a simpleminded binary view?

Can't say for sure.

But perhaps it's largely due to the fact that the majority of sex-workers that they've met - and heard about - are those who have been actively seeking help due to suffering from a multitude of inter-related problems that have resulted in repetitive, "chaotic" behaviour?

(And perhaps this self-selecting, "chaotic" sample, is not representative of the vast majority of sex workers - quietly going about their business behind closed doors?)

And perhaps, given this limited interaction, they just can't see beyond the militant and/or moralistic agenda that actually drives much of the "research" into this area? It's no better than the whole Daily Mailesque, reefer-madness, killer-skunk syndrome that seems so prevalent in today's media.


And perhaps, unfortunately, they just can't see that it's a lot more complicated than that?


And perhaps, therefore, it might be time to take a deep breath, a large step back from it all and try to capture something of a broader perspective?




Woof

 

[Pigeon]

And yours?

Friends?



Woof

One, yes. She was raising money for a crack habit and pimped by her (also carck head) boyfriend.

laughs about it now, mind. Sez it was like working in a sweetshop.

 

[Pigeon]

Nevertheless, people are trafficked into the food business - it's called working in (often Chinese) restaurant kitchens, or waiting tables, or picking cockles.


I guess ultimately that it all boils down to the problems of surviving within the constraints, ambiguities and contradiictions of a mercenary, capitalistic society.




Woof

No, not exactly. People are more accurately smuggled into the food industry, and while that might seem a pedantic distinction it's an important one: people are aware of the nature of the work they'e getting involved in and enter into a consensual business relationship.

There are overlaps and people are frequently ripped off, abused and misled about wages and working conditions but it's still quite distinct from the trafficking phenomenon, in which women and children are bought and sold as commodities against their will.

 

[Jessiedog]

One, yes. She was raising money for a crack habit and pimped by her (also carck head) boyfriend.

Only one?

It's sad that she was livng such a chaotic lifestyle. Hope things have improved.



Woof

 

[Jessiedog]

No, not exactly. People are more accurately smuggled into the food industry, and while that might seem a pedantic distinction it's an important one: people are aware of the nature of the work they'e getting involved in and enter into a consensual business relationship.

No, I'm talking about people trafficking.

It is far from consensual. People are tricked and lied to, coerced, abused, preyed upon due to their "illegal" status, their passports confiscated, forced into work that is very different than that which was agreed (sound familiar?) and forced to work long, hard hours for a pittance (well below minimum wage) in dangerous, unsanitary conditions, locked up at night sleeping 10 to a room, their "wages" unpaid for month after month after month as they repay their debt to the snakehead.

Regardless as to whether people are forced to have sex for money or forced to pick cockles until they drown - it's people trafficking, plain and simple.

There are overlaps and people are frequently ripped off, abused and misled about wages and working conditions but it's still quite distinct from the trafficking phenomenon, in which women and children are bought and sold as commodities against their will.

Agreed.

That would not be trafficking but rather, a rip-off, since they knew what they were getting into.

Happens to prostitutes too. They sign up with an "organised" tour because the organisation can easily arrange for visas, accomodation, etc, etc. Turns out that the "service fees" for these arrangements are much higher than the prostitutes believed and the accomodations far less celubrious and the clientel they are to serve rather less, ummmm, "upmarket" than they understood.

Bad business practice? Yes. Trafficking? No.

Woof

 

[Julie]

What do people think?

Prostitution is legal in Australia; hence, the women are afforded some protections.

I support this legislation.

 

[brasicritique]

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.

 

[urbanrevolt]

An article which argues for decriminalisation is here http://permanentrevolution.net/?view=entry&entry=1254
This is written by someone who has worked with quite a few sex workers and campaigned on this issue.

 

[Blagsta]

It's interesting, if you look at statements by the international collective of prostitutes, they acknowledge that it is poverty, low wages and other problems that drive a lot of women into prostitution.

 

[phildwyer]

Prostitution is quite like the drugs issue, it should be completely legalised so it can be regulated, with taxes paying for better education and health of the workers. Brothels are probably the safest way to achieve this, opening the way towards a super brothel as part of the Super Casino complex to be built in Manchester, which would definitely make it a fun place to go.

Yes. Tolerance zones are the answer, for both prostitution and drugs.

 

[Meltingpot]

Tolerance zones

I agree in theory that these are the answer, the trouble is that no one with a family wants one near them.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

It's interesting, if you look at statements by the international collective of prostitutes, they acknowledge that it is poverty, low wages and other problems that drive a lot of women into prostitution.

Those factors drive a lot of people into undesirable situations or employment.

 

[Jessiedog]

It's interesting, if you look at statements by the international collective of prostitutes, they acknowledge that it is poverty, low wages and other problems that drive a lot of women into prostitution.

Yeah.

And they even drive some desperate people into digging holes in the road all day in the middle of winter in freezing sleet, and others into spending all day cleaning shitty, stinking toilets.

Poor bastards!



Woof

 

[Blagsta]

 

[Pigeon]

Those factors drive a lot of people into undesirable situations or employment.

That's alright, then.

 

[roryer]

Yes. Tolerance zones are the answer, for both prostitution and drugs.

I would argue that with drugs and prostitution the aim of governement policy is two-fold, protect the health of those involved, and remove the business from the hands of criminals.

Decrimalisation where the police ignore the problem is therefore pointless, as the crooks remain in control.

Tolerance zones would also not necessarily eliminate the black market, although most of the girls would work within them, would they be afforded the same protection as someone running a business selling tea?

 

[urbanrevolt]

Decriminalisation does not mean the crooks stay in control at all!
If it's not a crime the workers can organise and regulate the work- abolsihing the violent control of pimps and the force and coerciion.

The Interantional Union of Sex Workers use this term, I beleive, to distinguish between this and licensed regualtion which leaves a lot of the sex industry illegal and thus still in the hands of criminal gangs.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

That's alright, then.

No, but it's a reality, and it also points out that prostitution is not in a category by itself.

 

[Gmart]

Quite a decisive vote here, I wonder if the same arguments would apply to the Abortion debate which also has a moral argument, and safety issues? See here

 

[Blagsta]

They're not remotely similar.

 

[Gmart]

Differences please.

 

[Gmart]

Both a moral judgement made by the individual concerned.

Both have more risk introduced if it is made illegal.

 

[Blagsta]

Both a moral judgement made by the individual concerned.

Both have more risk introduced if it is made illegal.

So drug use is similar then? or gambling? What about boxing matches?

 

[Gmart]

So drug use is similar then? or gambling? What about boxing matches?

Absolutely, I even did a thread which was ignored in general about it. Here it is!!

 

[Blagsta]

Absolutely, I even did a thread which was ignored in general about it. Here it is!!

You really think these things are similar? Beyond the surface of the legal/illegal question?

 

[Blagsta]

Quite a decisive vote here, I wonder if the same arguments would apply to the Abortion debate which also has a moral argument, and safety issues? See here

Aaaaah, I get you. You're arguing that the harm reduction and legality arguments are similar. In that case I would agree with you. However, there is much more beyond that, which isn't similar.