Decriminalizing prostition

[EVD]

do you think we should decriminalize prostitution because it will reduce crime rate ?

what is your opinion?

[grynner]

c&p,

n all but two U.S. states, the buying and selling of sexual services is illegal and usually classified as a misdemeanor. Regulated brothels are legal in several counties of Nevada.
In Rhode Island, the act of sex for money is not illegal, but street solicitation and operating a brothel are.

In Canada, prostitution itself is legal, but most other activities around it are not. It is illegal to live "off the avails" of prostitution (this law is intended to outlaw pimping) and it is illegal (for both parties) to negotiate a sex-for-money deal in a public place (which includes bars).

It does not bother or rather matter to me one way or the other,yet on behalf of the guys that can not get a pretty face in a bed, (hey... what am I saying, they do get a trophy in the bed;money as always does talk).

[grynner]

Should prostitution be legal? ever since the chinese declared ‘to get rich is to be glorious,’ women without connections, brain power or money have been using the only asset available to them for quick money. Equipped with a room, a bed, a supply of condoms, a red light—and voila—instant brothel. . . . These girls can make much more money at $30 a customer, than $4 per day in the factories. As is (the case) in almost every underdeveloped country!” according to the international sex and red-light guide. Sold for $30, the guide “instructs” men on where to find cheap sex around the world. This is a business venture, according to the authors, where the only principle is getting the most for your money. “if one so chooses to use her body in this manner, in lieu of social slavery at the hands of poverty employers, and men are willing to pay them more than slave labour wages, so be it. If it is not your body and not your life, it is also not your business. Until [someone] can correct the whole world’s economic condition, as well as the overpopulation problem, someone has to pay the bills.” but who? the poorest, the most vulnerable? there is no denying that the sex industry has taken on international dimensions, recognized as an economic motor for many countries, particularly in asia. The irony is that prostitution is not entirely legal. Would legalization reduce some of the inequalities and abuse suffered by the women involved? or by legitimizing prostitution, would we reverse decades of work to promote human rights and improve the status of women? an acrimonious debate on the surface this looks like a rehashing of a timeless debate. But it isn’t. The question is no longer about morality—is prostitution a vice and are those involved evil or somehow lacking in judgment? we now ask: is prostitution a form of exploitation to be abolished or an occupation to be regulated? this has proven to be one of the most divisive issues among women’s groups around the world. There are basically two camps—those seeking to eradicate prostitution, like the non-governmental coalition against trafficking in women and prostitutes’ rights groups, primarily based in the netherlands, the united states and england, who view the women involved as “sex workers”. There is considerable acrimony between the two. For example, the coalition maintains that these groups generally represent the interests of the “pimps and procurers”. In rebuttal, the rights’ groups maintain that the abolitionists are locked away in the ivory towers of academic feminism, cut off from the day-to-day realities facing prostitutes. The dividing line between the two camps lies in distinctions between so-called “free” and “forced” prostitution. Abolitionists generally maintain that the vast majority of women are forced into prostitution, while the sex workers insist that this is not necessarily the case. But as both point out, for different reasons, these distinctions oversimplify the issues. The 12-year-old nepalese girl sold to an aids-infested brothel in india clearly never consented to this form of slavery. The drug-addict in new york who must fulfil a quota of clients to get a fix from her pimp is not free to make decisions concerning her body. But what of the ukrainian woman who looses her job and decides to go to germany to work as a maid but ends up in a brothel? for the coalition, “the distinctions between free and forced prostitution obscure the powerful structural socio-economic conditions—like poverty, marginalization, lack of opportunities and prior sexual abuse—that often drive women and children straight into prostitution situations,” says aurora javate de dios of the coalition’s asia-pacific branch. “economic crisis, natural disasters, political unrest and conflict situations make women and children more vulnerable and easy prey to sex traffickers and recruiters. We see this everywhere, especially in developing countries of the south.” for javate de dios, laws aimed at distinguishing between free and forced prostitution will never recognize the complex dynamics involved. The most they can possibly do is to identify the most extreme forms of coercion, while ignoring the impact of poverty and implicitly legitimizing patriarchal relationships. The line between free and forced prostitution also wears thin on the opposite side of the spectrum, according to lin chew, a former spokesperson for the foundation against trafficking in women, a non-governmental organization based in the netherlands. “when does anyone make free decisions, especially in the labour market? a man who works in a chemical factory, whose wages will never get him over the poverty line—did he choose this way of life? and what about the woman whose background never afforded her the chance to develop any skills? why should this question of free choice only apply to prostitution?” there is, however, one point on which the two camps agree: decriminalization. It’s time to repeal laws used to punish prostitutes in seeking to protect public decency and order. Beyond this, the two camps diverge. For abolitionist groups like the coalition, women are victims, but anyone who profits from their exploitation deserves punishment. For the prostitutes’ rights groups, however, you cannot help sex workers by forcing their employers underground. But you can try to level the playing field—that is ensure that these workers are protected from occupational hazards and receive fair treatment. This is probably the latest chapter in the debate: the role of the state. Here we find two camps within the prostitutes’ rights groups. One branch pushes for complete decriminalization, that is no regulation of the industry, while another supports legalization. “legalized” prostitution refers to a wide range of situations. It can simply mean that prostitution is not against the law. More often the case, though, legalization is synonymous for regulation, with laws enforced by police. Licenses can be issued, for example, with mandatory health-checks. Zoning laws may set up “eros centres” removed from residential areas. If brothels are illegal, it might be an offence for two prostitutes to work out of the same house. Anti-pimping laws may oblige a prostitute’s lover to prove that he or she is financially independent. Standards can also be set for the working space, assuring for example, sufficient lighting, quality mattresses, fire precautions and air supply. Laws can assure that a woman is not obligated to drink alcohol with a client. While appropriate tax brackets can be set up for earnings and rights to health insurance and retirement ensured. In theory, these regulations are intended to protect prostitutes. But some do just the opposite, according to sex worker groups like the us-based coyote, which calls for complete decriminalization of prostitution. Government-run brothels “would be the prostitute’s worst nightmare,” according to a coyote position paper. “i can think of nothing worse than having to work for a bureaucrat—especially in the sex industry—where there is already a long and well documented history of abuse by the police. . . . Perhaps brothels are an ideal situation for the male clients—a man gets to go to a place where all the women are lined up waiting to be chosen—but it is an extremely uncomfortable, degrading situation for women. . . .” as for licenses, they “do nothing to ensure the safety of either the customer or the prostitute. That is not to say that women shouldn’t have frequent medical checks—they should,” according to coyote, in reference to complaints that women are treated like cattle by health inspectors in poorly equipped facilities. “just as a restaurant will lose its reputation if the food isn’t fresh and its customers become ill, so will the free market regulate the health standards of working women.” for the coalition against trafficking in women, the debate over the role of the state is simply a way of stonewalling the real issues. The term “sex worker” doesn’t dignify the woman involved, it dignifies the pimps, procurers and traffickers. “what prostituted women must endure in their ‘employment’ is what in other contexts would be the accepted definition of sexual harassment and sexual abuse in the workplace,” according to janice raymond, of the coalition. “does the fact that a fee is paid transform this abuse into a ‘job’ known as ‘commercial sex work’?” courses in sex work raymond points to courses, available for a fee in the netherlands, on how to do sex work, covering everything from role-playing sessions in bars to and information on tax breaks. “what young girl would you encourage to become ‘skilled’ in this trade? why is so much attention paid to promoting the ‘trade’ and nothing done to help women get out of it? because its easier to believe that prostitution is a choice for these women. . . . If the issue of choice must be raised, let it be raised in the context of the men who buy the sex of prostitution. Why do men choose to buy the bodies of millions of women and children, call it sex, and seemingly get tremendous pleasure literally over their bought bodies?”

[grynner]

Prostitution and the law

According to the 1949 UN Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others, which has been ratified by 72 states: “prostitution and the accompanying evil of the traffic in persons . . . are incompatible with the dignity and worth of the human
person. . . .” Parties agree to punish anyone who:
• “procures, entices or leads away, for purposes of prostitution, another person, even with the consent of that person”;
• “exploits the prostitution of another person, even with the consent of that person”;
• “keeps or manages, or knowingly finances or takes part in the financing of a brothel”;
• “knowingly lets or rents a building . . . for the purposes of prostitution”.
In practice, governments have developed three basic legal fameworks concerning prostitution:
• Prohibition. The act of accepting payment for sex and sometimes paying for sex is illegal and punished. This is the situation, for example, in the Gulf States and in most of the United States.
• Criminalization. The law forbids certain activities related to payment for sex rather than paid sex itself. These activities include soliciting for clients, advertising, living off the earnings of prostitutes, recruiting prostitutes or helping them to circulate from one country to another. This is the most common legal framework for commercial sex throughout Western Europe, India, Southeast Asia, Canada, Australia and the Pacific and most of Latin America.
• Regulation refers to exceptions to criminal law made for those parts of the sex industry which comply with certain conditions. In the case of female sex workers, such systems are often linked to mandatory health checks.

Some examples:
In Brazil, prostitution is not illegal but it is illegal to operate a brothel, to rent premises to prostitutes, exploit children or live off the earnings of a prostitute.
In Canada, the law does not prohibit the act of prostitution but criminalizes a wide range of related activities like soliciting, living off the earnings of prostitution, operating premises, etc.
In Denmark, it is not illegal to provide sexual services so long as prostitution is not the main source of income (in which case the charge is vagrancy). Recruiting is illegal.
Greece and Turkey have both legalized prostitution. Women must register and attend clinics for regular examinations, in some cases as frequently as twice weekly.
In India, despite the many laws against the sex industry and traditional caste-bound prostitution, prostitution and trafficking is still common. Conditions are very bad for those involved.
In Senegal, it is illegal to aid, abet, procure or live off prostitution earnings or run a brothel. Female prostitutes must register, carry cards and have regular medical exams. Most women take part in the informal sector. Enforcement is weak.
In Thailand, it is illegal to be a prostitute or to live off a prostitute’s earnings. However, the laws are not consistently enforced.

[EVD]

one side could lower the rape rate but the other could promote children starting to sell there bodies.

[goldpan]

Well if you look at Nevada, the crime rate is most likely higher than elsewhere. Don't see where it would reduce anything and would only increase drugs and other crimes.
I am old fashioned, so I voted No on this.

[EVD]

Quote: Originally Posted by goldpan

Well if you look at Nevada, the crime rate is most likely higher than elsewhere. Don't see where it would reduce anything and would only increase drugs and other crimes.
I am old fashioned, so I voted No on this.

is ok I just want people input on this topic I also vote no but want to try to show both side of the coin .

[Kane]

i just figured it already is decriminalized here (in canada)for the prostitute anyways.They seem to put the blame on the person looking for it

[Rebel]

The problem is they cant decide how to tax it

[Stevnick]

At present, we are aware of the problems and inequities surrounding "illegal" prostitution. Legalization may initiate an evolutionary leap that changes a illegal kitten into a legal lion. I, for one, am not ready to watch a 100-foot penis parade float go down the street (as is done in some pagan cultures both ancient and modern). Perhaps I'm just old-fashioned, but I prefer not to step over a couple having sex on the street to go into the corner bar.

Yes, it doesn't seem fair to jail prostitutes but what are the social ramifications of complete legalization? Is is possible that the brothel would no longer be located on a dark city street? Instead, we might find them in the suburban malls located next to Radio Shack, Sears, and Kohls (with several small Kiosks scattered down the walkways). Sex would dominate marketing and our economy as never before. You see, I'm not afraid of freeing the prostitute from prosecution . . . I'm afraid of what comes next.

Growing up in the 50's and early 60's gives me a different world-view than those born in later decades. While growing up none of my friends came from a broken family (I knew only one divorced couple). Nearly all of my friends came from "Ozzie and Harriet" type families.

You might laugh, but it was my generation that fought for civil rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, and the sexual revolution. Nearly every single person I knew had marched in some kind of protest. We had a strong social conscience and a strong sense of justice, equality, and fair-play.

I don't think any of us ever realized what our victories would do to this country's social fabric (if we would have known, we probably wouldn't have done it). The next step in America's social revolution will be taken by younger generations, who will not see the "fruit" of their decisions for another twenty years. Believe me, by then its too late to go back.

Stevnick