Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LOL...yeah, of course i understand the 'technical' differences.
But at the end of the day, what difference does it make if a woman takes money or gives it away for free? None of us are affected by the transaction either way.
You didn't post anything i could argue with here.
LOL..now you sound naive. C'mon...everybody is looking for SOMETHING out of these relationships even if it's simply companionship or financial security. This is America. Nothing is free.
There you go again. Man it's so deeply ingrained you can't even see it.
Firstly, I'm not providing a service, and as I don't ever do it professionally, or as a batering tool, there's no context in which it is possible to "give it away for free". Secondly, it's not something I give to you that you can "have", it's something I share with you because it's mutually beneficial to both of us. Thirdly, it's not a transaction, it's an experience.
Sex isn't something women have that they "give" to men. It's something they do with men. As equals.
Well they'd like to, anyway. I see that with some people here that ain't going to be possible.
I wonder what would happen to marriages overall. Just think about having as many as restaurants as brothels in your city. All free competition all legal and all controlled by department of health in your city.
So no HIV worries at all. Any women can start their own business and prices are set freely.
Would this cause a moral societal collapse?
There would probably be a lot less sexual frustration and prostitution would be safer for everyone involved. Not to mention it would make the government money rather then cost it.
Take certain Nevada counties. Brothels are allowed, but there are very strict health and labor law requirements. Really legalizing and regulating stuff like prostitution, gambling, and marijuana is basically a win for everyone except criminals and the enforcement/corrections industrial complex.
What would happen if prostitution was legalized? Another group of self-employed people will complain about Obamacare's high costs and high deductibles.
Knock off the hijack!
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogead
You're certainly correct that it was never explicitly stated that the legalized prostitution being discussed would be limited to consenting adults. However, given that much of the world (including both of the nations that border the US) allows for legal prostitution in one form or another, and none of them allow for the legal participation of minors or trafficked individuals, it is an overtly rational inference to make.
I haven't noticed anyone suggesting that legalizing prostitution in The US would eliminate the use of underage or trafficked prostitutes, not do I think anyone here is naive enough to think that it could. The structure of legalized prostitution isn't the same in any two countries. Some allow for in call prostitution, others allow out call. Some countries have expressly legalized it (provided a structure for its operation), while others have merely decriminalized it (removed all criminal penalties from participating). Some countries do a very good job of managing legalized prostitution--in my opinion Switzerland and New Zealand are among the best--others have put little real effort into overseeing prostitution.
I think any legalization in The US needs to occur in conjunction with decriminalization. Decriminalization is needed on purely libertarian grounds--it simply isn't the role of the government to dictate the terms of its citizens' sex lives. Legalization is needed to address the legitimate concerns of sex worker safety, public health, sexual trafficking, and underage prostitution. These are all problems which exist right now with illegal prostitution. Legalization will not make them go away, but when done properly, it can mitigate the instances of those negatives.
Decriminalizing doesn't mean that the government cannot forbid street prostitution or profiting by a third-party (pimping). It's understood that some prostitutes and some customers will continue to engage in prostitution in an unstructured, freelance environment via in call and out call service. However, a legalized structure which incentivizes participation can keep those numbers relatively low.
As I would envision legalized prostitution:
Prostitution would only be overtly legal in licensed brothels which are properly zoned.
The role of the government should be limited to licensing, zoning, compliance checks, and tax collection.
Those wanting to operate brothels would need to undergo a thorough background check and purchase a yearly license (probably costing tens of thousands of dollars). They would need to provide a structure that meets safety and fire codes. They would be responsible for the security of workers and customers alike. They would be taxed on both property and profits. A portion of those taxes would be dedicated to the investigation and interdiction of underage and forced prostitution. Brothel operators would profit by charging prostitutes an agreed upon rent for a room, charging customers an entrance fee, and providing ancillary services (restaurant, bar, etc.). They would be responsible for assuring that all workers and customers are properly licensed. Use of an unlicensed consenting adult sex worker or admittance of an unlicensed customer would incur an extremely large fine. Knowingly using an underage or trafficked sex worker would be grounds for immediate revocation of their license, as well as criminal penalties. They would have no participation whatsoever in the relationship between a sex worker and a customer.
Prostitutes would need to purchase a yearly license, with the requirement of weekly STD testing. A positive test result or failure to be tested would mean an immediate suspension of their license until a negative test result could be provided. Prostitutes would contract with the brothel operator for space in the brothel. The prostitute and the customer would mutually agree upon the specific activities involved and the pricing. Prostitutes could refuse service to anyone for any reason. All rooms would be equipped with an intercom and a panic button. Prostitutes would be taxed at a flat rate based upon the number of hours for which they've contracted a room.
Customers would need to purchase a monthly license, with the requirement of an STD test within the seven days prior to that month. STD tests would be administered by a state facility, and charged at cost.
Under this type of structure, all of the parties involved share some of the cost and some of the responsibilities. It certainly wouldn't be perfect, but it would alleviate many prostitution-related issues, while protecting the basic right of individuals to engage in such business transactions.
Have you been reading this thread? Germany continues to have the same old, same old problems even though it has legalized prostitution.
Your "vision" actually includes a huge role for the government, with this weekly STD testing, monthly licenses, yada, yada.
I get it, you don't believe that consenting adults should have a right to participate in prostitution without facing arrest.
That's your right; but it has nothing to do with Germany, or human trafficking, or underage prostitution, or yada yada.
Glad you can read my mind so well. Hint: You're wrong. Decades ago, prostitution was among a group of "crimes" that "progressive" criminal justice people called "victimless crimes". (I can't remember all of them now.) However, it turned out that in many cases of prostitution, the victim was/is the prostitute, not the customer.
There would probably be a lot less sexual frustration and prostitution would be safer for everyone involved. Not to mention it would make the government money rather then cost it.
Take certain Nevada counties. Brothels are allowed, but there are very strict health and labor law requirements. Really legalizing and regulating stuff like prostitution, gambling, and marijuana is basically a win for everyone except criminals and the enforcement/corrections industrial complex.
The problem with the legalized system in Nevada is that the massive level of regulation drives the price up dramatically. This means that, unless a potential customer is wealthy or has access to a corporate expense account, they are more likely to pursue illegal prostitution in the cities of Las Vegas and Reno--all of which largely defeats the purpose of legalizing prostitution to begin with.
^^First of all, I'm not sure it's so unheard of to find underage strippers in strip clubs.
It is possible but vanishingly rare. We had a strip club in Seattle called 'Ricks' that the city fathers wanted to close. They spent thousands of dollars investigating it, running stings, raids etc. They brought in the feds to help with the witchhunt. Eventually it was shut down. Seattle News and Events | It's a Hard Job
Total number of minor strippers found: 0.00. The club owner had $10,000 in cash in his bathrobe when arrested at his home. He was running out of places to stash his cash. Again, what strip club owner is going to jeopardize that kind of cash flow by having a minor in employ? Vanishingly rare.
The difference is that the majority of people, not just women, are looking for a mate when they go out.
They aren't looking for gifts or money. Yes I there are some women that do it for that I suppose. But I wouldn't say that's the norm.
You just said it, its not the norm but some women do do it. Some women are golddiggers.
Same as prostitution.
Some men also just want sex not a relationship. Is that wrong? I'm not saying I am like that but there are men out there that don't want to get married or go on a string of dates.
There are women out there who give into these needs. Just cut to the chase and make it legal.
Who is to say the nature of some women wanting a relationship trumps the nature of some men who just want sex?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
Do you really think that women who are doctors, lawyers, investment bankers are sleeping with men for money, or a hot dinner? They're sleeping with men because they like sex, and because it's part of the mating ritual. Because they're human, and humans like sex. Yes even women. Without an ulterior motive.
You said it. Some people just want sex. Might aswell get paid to do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
To suggest that every woman who allows a man to buy her dinner on a date is the same as a prostitute who's only criteria for hooking up with you is that you have the required funds is absurd.
Tell that to the women who will only date men with a certain income.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
Is that what you all thought if your wives and girlfriends when you started dating them? Because I'm pretty sure the majority of you in this thread who take this stance that all casual dates (which is at least all first dates until you get to know a person) are women looking to get paid in exchange for sex didn't wait until marriage until you got laid. What does that make you then?
A man can choose when to date for a relationship and also choose to find just sex.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
BTW I have no issues with prostitiution as long as it's consensual. But I fail to see the correlation between women wlooking for a mate and hookers. They are not at all the same thing. Most women have these things called jobs that pay the bills. They don't need you for that, thanks anyway.
Even if a woman has a job doesn't mean she wont get things on the side. Why do people who have jobs pay the lottery? Who wouldn't want get a buy one get one free deal?
Why not save money?
Theres all kinds of reasons why one with a job would invest in an easier life.
You just said it, its not the norm but some women do do it. Some women are golddiggers.
Same as prostitution.
Yeah, that's not what you said. Yes I agree that some women, and men for that matter, go out with people for money. Which is akin to prostitution. But you completely failed to make that distinction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvocatusCenturion
It sounds funny but why not? Men already are paying for prostitution during casual dates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvocatusCenturion
Some men also just want sex not a relationship. Is that wrong? I'm not saying I am like that but there are men out there that don't want to get married or go on a string of dates.
There are women out there who give into these needs. Just cut to the chase and make it legal.
Exactly, so what about that makes a woman a prostitute?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvocatusCenturion
Who is to say the nature of some women wanting a relationship trumps the nature of some men who just want sex?
Then get a hooker. Or find a woman that also just wants sex. But don't equate dating with prostitution. It's unbelievably insulting to say that women you date are akin to prostitutes because you buy them dinner. It's the social norm to do so, although if I were dating still I wouldn't allow it. Wouldn't want to send the message I'm a hooker, after all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvocatusCenturion
You said it. Some people just want sex. Might aswell get paid to do it.
Might as well get paid to do it? Why? Do you get paid to do it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvocatusCenturion
Tell that to the women who will only date men with a certain income.
I don't know any if those, so can't do that, sorry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvocatusCenturion
A man can choose when to date for a relationship and also choose to find just sex.
Even if a woman has a job doesn't mean she wont get things on the side. Why do people who have jobs pay the lottery? Who wouldn't want get a buy one get one free deal?
Why not save money?
Theres all kinds of reasons why one with a job would invest in an easier life.
Yes, but they don't routinely go out and get paid for sex to do it.
why would having sex for fun is not illegal but doing the same thing for money is?
From the morality standpoint there Is no difference
it is funny, how can doing the same thing be called immoral or inhumane or against god's teaching s when the only difference is money
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
