Continuation Prostitution part 2

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

I agree a desperately poor sex worker is being exploited more so than a better paid one that has much more discretion in their work, but that's generally true for anyone accepting work conditions they don't really like because the alternative is being homeless or starving.

There's more than a shade of difference between working in conditions you don't like, and allowing yourself to be raped.

Quote:

We can talk about how precarity of the working class is the engine that drives capitalism all day long, but if you're saying this is something that uniquely applies to sex work you've totally lost me.

Unique, you say? My first job in the work force was laboring on a large condo development. Grunt work, carrying trusses with razor sharp gang plates that left me looking like a bloodbath daily (the guys called me Jason, of Fri 13 fame). Yet even though you might say this is the lowest of the low work, selling my body or whatever, I could tell anyone my job, and never once felt I had to use a fake name and disguise myself or what I did. I can't even think of a job that a young person would feel compelled to do so...except one. Keep in mind that prostitution is generally a young woman's game: young people often work less than glamorous gigs, but don't get shy about admitting they are at the entry level of a work force.

Yup, I'm standing by sex work as being unique on several fronts.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Thermal

There's more than a shade of difference between working in conditions you don't like, and allowing yourself to be raped.

This would probably be more pointed if I agreed with your conclusion that a person less than enthusiastically deciding to pursue sex work is equivalent to being raped.

Originally Posted by Thermal

Unique, you say? My first job in the work force was laboring on a large condo development. Grunt work, carrying trusses with razor sharp gang plates that left me looking like a bloodbath daily (the guys called me Jason, of Fri 13 fame). Yet even though you might say this is the lowest of the low work, selling my body or whatever, I could tell anyone my job, and never once felt I had to use a fake name and disguise myself or what I did. I can't even think of a job that a young person would feel compelled to do so...except one. Keep in mind that prostitution is generally a young woman's game: young people often work less than glamorous gigs, but don't get shy about admitting they are at the entry level of a work force.

Yup, I'm standing by sex work as being unique on several fronts.

Sex work is especially stigmatized work, but is not unique in this regard. Probably more than a few people not super proud of working the kill floor of a slaughterhouse, for example. Plenty of people hold pretty elitist views about "dirty" work like janitorial and personal service jobs like being a housekeeper or secretary. The whole white collar/blue collar culture divide is pretty real to a lot of people, pecking orders about which careers are honorable and desirable and which are not are extremely common.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Unique, you say? My first job in the work force was laboring on a large condo development. Grunt work, carrying trusses with razor sharp gang plates that left me looking like a bloodbath daily (the guys called me Jason, of Fri 13 fame). Yet even though you might say this is the lowest of the low work, selling my body or whatever, I could tell anyone my job, and never once felt I had to use a fake name and disguise myself or what I did. I can't even think of a job that a young person would feel compelled to do so...except one. Keep in mind that prostitution is generally a young woman's game: young people often work less than glamorous gigs, but don't get shy about admitting they are at the entry level of a work force.

Yup, I'm standing by sex work as being unique on several fronts.

But isn't that circular? "I'm ashamed of this work because it's shameful work"?

At different times and places other professions were considered shameful that aren't today: acting, for instance. You would blow some minds if you timetravelled a couple centuries back and told people that actors would be possibly the most admired, most beloved celebrities on earth, and that much of the public would crawl through broken glass in order to meet them socially.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by smartcooky

You forgot to mention the third option, which is how prostitution works in this country..

"We'll negotiate for exactly what we are doing to do, and if I don't like what I'm hearing, I'll say no (and he can go find someone else)

That works great when the worker is basically financially secure, or already made it. What twists my gut is a woman who hears the landlord banging on her door, or the electricity being shut off, and has to make that decision: "well, I either suck a lot more dicks than I want to, attached to men I want nothing to do with, or I'm out on the street".

I mean, when I labored on construction sites, I could theoretically refuse to work because "I didn't quite like it", and that was my prerogative. Financial coercion forced me to keep going. But not to be raped, which is the...wait for it...unique dilemma of sex work.

Quote:

.. further, those who argue against legalization also appear to demand women not even be allowed the right to choose option one.

Not my position,as surely you picked up on by now, so nothing to do with my argument. Not sure what it has to do with anything.

[TurkeysGhost]

Just worth pointing out that "burger flipper" is like the most common insult used to describe someone who has failed spectacularly in life. The idea that prostitution is the only shameful job is simply ridiculous. The stigma of "unskilled labor" seems to apply quite broadly. There are entire professions that are considered so lowly and contemptible that they are almost exclusively performed by hyper exploited illegal immigrants or people otherwise on the ragged edges of society.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Just worth pointing out that "burger flipper" is like the most common insult used to describe someone who has failed spectacularly in life. The idea that prostitution is the only shameful job is simply ridiculous.

You can make fun of people for almost anything. I just watched a clip of a comedian mocking a medical doctor for his job because he was a family practitioner, which the comedian described as being a glorified secretary (since they often end up referring patients to specialists). Yeah, people make fun of "burger flipper" jobs, but the primary reason is because the job pays poorly, not because of anything intrinsic to the job itself. Which is why it's more shameful to be doing that at 40 than at 16. And whether or not there are other jobs that are considered shameful, the fact remains that prostitution is considered very shameful, even if you earn a lot of money doing it, because of the intrinsic nature of the job. I'm not really interested in whether it's truly "unique" or not, but it's clearly much different than most jobs. And it's certainly not similar to burger flipping in terms of shame.

Quote:

The stigma of "unskilled labor" seems to apply quite broadly. There are entire professions that are considered so lowly and contemptible that they are almost exclusively performed by hyper exploited illegal immigrants or people otherwise on the ragged edges of society.

And that's based almost entirely on the low pay rate, not the actual nature of the job itself. If being a hotel maid paid well, there would be no stigma. But a high priced prostitute is still a whore.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

But isn't that circular? "I'm ashamed of this work because it's shameful work"?

But that's the thing: it shouldn't be, if we are accepting this as a societally cool to the point of legalizing it. Dude, I argued for dozens of pages to try to get a baseline established for how we think of sex work, being told it was no different than hauling lumber or flipping burgers. Just getting posters to be pragmatic about what we are talking about has been an apocalyptic battle.

I mean, if I told you there was an exciting fountain of money to be made in your spare time, on your own hours and terms, no special skills or investment, would you be interested (assuming it was real and not a scam)? I'll bet a lot of people here would love to hear about making $200/hr in such a gig. But when you tell them it is sucking off a line of strangers, suddenly interest plummets. Because this work is unique like no other.

Quote:

At different times and places other professions were considered shameful that aren't today: acting, for instance. You would blow some minds if you timetravelled a couple centuries back and told people that actors would be possibly the most admired, most beloved celebrities on earth, and that much of the public would crawl through broken glass in order to meet them socially.

Agreed. Which is why I'm wrestling with how we collectively view it in the here-and-now society that we are proposing widespread legality and acceptance.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You can make fun of people for almost anything. I just watched a clip of a comedian mocking a medical doctor for his job because he was a family practitioner, which the comedian described as being a glorified secretary (since they often end up referring patients to specialists). Yeah, people make fun of "burger flipper" jobs, but the primary reason is because the job pays poorly, not because of anything intrinsic to the job itself. Which is why it's more shameful to be doing that at 40 than at 16. And whether or not there are other jobs that are considered shameful, the fact remains that prostitution is considered very shameful, even if you earn a lot of money doing it, because of the intrinsic nature of the job. I'm not really interested in whether it's truly "unique" or not, but it's clearly much different than most jobs. And it's certainly not similar to burger flipping in terms of shame.

Considering how often I see right wing reactionaries freaking out when they find out that their lowly UPS man or other presumed wage slave is making a decent union living, I think that the low wage itself doesn't explain why "burger flipper" is seen as derogatory. Every McDonalds' employee could be making $80/hr and there would still be plenty of contempt for this line of work I suspect.

The stigma surrounding well paid, glamourous sex workers is complicated. Hell, one was the first lady. Money and success seem to make a big difference in how respectable this line of work is.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Thermal

I mean, if I told you there was an exciting fountain of money to be made in your spare time, on your own hours and terms, no special skills or investment, would you be interested (assuming it was real and not a scam)? I'll bet a lot of people here would love to hear about making $200/hr in such a gig. But when you tell them it is sucking off a line of strangers, suddenly interest plummets. Because this work is unique like no other.

Probably because your trope of the easy path to riches through sex work is plainly not true. Otherwise every street walker would be rich rather than living in pretty clear poverty. Some lucky or otherwise special sex workers seem to hit the high life, many others do not.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

So, if someone is unable to find a partner - as many disabled or disfigured people are - they can just miss out on this wonderful, special part of human existence.

No worries.

You brought this up earlier, about a sex worker who thought a root should be rolled into a basic services package, and I thought it was an intriguing idea. Who would it apply to? An incel or creepy dude who can't get a willing partner? Does he have the same right?

I'd also argue that rights, by definition, you don't pay for, which is why I said "sort of" to the question of it being a right. Paying for something is almost (but not quite) the opposite of it being a right.

[Tony99]

I think some of the issue/stigma around legalization, particularly in the US, is the perceived risk to fidelity.
Like drug legalization, if made legal then people who wouldn't normally visit a sex worker would be irresistibly tempted to do so. Again, more puritanical nonsense, but certainly part of the argument.
Current and Ex sex workers I know (pro-doms, full service providers) say the overwhelming majority of their clients are married men and women.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Probably because your trope of the easy path to riches through sex work is plainly not true. Otherwise every street walker would be rich rather than living in pretty clear poverty. Some lucky or otherwise special sex workers seem to hit the high life, many others do not.

Which has been my argument all along. What we are arguing here is our Kiwi contingents' representation of the gorgeous and well educated prostitute, versus what you and I know to be in the States. Smartcooky, in particular, says the desperate streetwalker "vanished" with legalization down there. I can't see how, and online sources say he's dead wrong.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Which has been my argument all along. What we are arguing here is our Kiwi contingents' representation of the gorgeous and well educated prostitute, versus what you and I know to be in the States. Smartcooky, in particular, says the desperate streetwalker "vanished" with legalization down there. I can't see how, and online sources say he's dead wrong.

I suppose it depends on what forms of exploitation such reforms are meant to address. "Some forms of sex work pay not very well" isn't really what I think this kind of legalization was meant to address, it seems more worried about more extreme forms of exploitation, like human trafficking of foreigners/minors, drug addiction, and violent coercion.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

This would probably be more pointed if I agreed with your conclusion that a person less than enthusiastically deciding to pursue sex work is equivalent to being raped.

It follows then, that you would think an addict or runaway living on the streets and selling their ass for food "has agency/gives consent and is therefore definitionally not raped"?

Before you deny it, yes, that's exactly what you said. Consent need not be willing.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Thermal

It follows then, that you would think an addict or runaway living on the streets and selling their ass for food "has agency/gives consent and is therefore definitionally not raped"?

Before you deny it, yes, that's exactly what you said. Consent need not be willing.

I don't think it's rape, I think it's the common exploitation of labor from the poor. That's my whole point, you seem determined to engage in special pleading for low wage sex work, when it's quite obvious to me that it has a lot in common with many other highly exploitative jobs that aren't sex work.

The most extreme forms of exploitation operate on outright criminal predation, and dragging sex work out of the black market into the daylight is supposed to make that kind of law breaking illegal. Your example of a "runaway" is a good one because ideally legalized sex work would make it less likely for minors to enter this line of work.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

I don't think it's rape, I think it's the common exploitation of labor from the poor. That's my whole point, you seem determined to engage in special pleading for low wage sex work, when it's quite obvious to me that it has a lot in common with many other highly exploitative jobs that aren't sex work.

That may be an irreconcilable difference in our positions, then. If someone held a gun to my head and said "suck my dick or I'll shoot", I'd call that rape, no matter my technical consent. Less dramatic forms of coercion are no less rapey in my book.

Quote:

The most extreme forms of exploitation operate on outright criminal predation, and dragging sex work out of the black market into the daylight is supposed to make that kind of law breaking illegal. Your example of a "runaway" is a good one because ideally legalized sex work would make it less likely for minors to enter this line of work.

Why? They do it right now when it is illegal. A 15yo runaway can't enter the work legally, so what's to stop her from offering cut rate tail illegally, just like she does now?

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Why? They do it right now when it is illegal. A 15yo runaway can't enter the work legally, so what's to stop her from offering cut rate tail illegally, just like she does now?

Presumably because a reasonably convenient legal alternative might influence the buying decisions of clients. Dealing with the legal market is often much preferred to dealing with the many drawbacks of the black market.

Legal weed is available in my state, and while many of my pothead friends bemoan that it's more expensive than the stuff they used to get from the weedman (not sure if this is true anymore, but it was at one point), dealing with a friendly cashier at a legit potshop has certain advantages over dealing with some sketchy drug dealer. I'm not buying bathtub gin even if it's cheaper than the liquor store that has to pay alcohol tax, it's just not worth the trouble.

People are willing to play along with modest regulation in a way they aren't willing to play along with total prohibition.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Presumably because a reasonably convenient legal alternative might influence the buying decisions of clients. Dealing with the legal market is often much preferred to dealing with the many drawbacks of the black market.

Legal weed is available in my state, and while many of my pothead friends bemoan that it's more expensive than the stuff they used to get from the weedman (not sure if this is true anymore, but it was at one point), dealing with a friendly cashier at a legit potshop has certain advantages over dealing with some sketchy drug dealer. I'm not buying bathtub gin even if it's cheaper than the liquor store that has to pay alcohol tax, it's just not worth the trouble.

People are willing to play along with modest regulation in a way they aren't willing to play along with total prohibition.

Ok. In the NZ model, street walking is legal. The sex worker interviewed up thread said she was giving $60 blowjobs on the street. With no record of the cash transaction, I have doubts about how much she was paying in taxes. There is no difference there between her, and our 15 yo runaway.

The "modestly regulated completion" is a brothel with the women making, according to our correspondents, double or more for that service, although in a more respectable environment. The women, we are told, can refuse a creepy guy.

You pretty sure a creepshow guy will not find the lower cost servicing he wants, legal or not? I see no reason for the desperado market to vanish.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Ok. In the NZ model, street walking is legal. The sex worker interviewed up thread said she was giving $60 blowjobs on the street. With no record of the cash transaction, I have doubts about how much she was paying in taxes. There is no difference there between her, and our 15 yo runaway.

The obvious distinction is one is legal and the other is not. I question whether or not would-be clients can easily tell the distinction, as you'd hope that were the case for this kind of regulation to be most effective.

Originally Posted by Thermal

The "modestly regulated completion" is a brothel with the women making, according to our correspondents, double or more for that service, although in a more respectable environment. The women, we are told, can refuse a creepy guy.

You pretty sure a creepshow guy will not find the lower cost servicing he wants, legal or not? I see no reason for the desperado market to vanish.

Beats me, what does the data show?

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

The obvious distinction is one is legal and the other is not. I question whether or not would-be clients can easily tell the distinction, as you'd hope that were the case for this kind of regulation to be most effective.

Which is my argument for individual registration cards. If a guy pays up without seeing one, he has every reason to believe that the work is illegal, and possibly rape. That there is a deterrent.

Quote:

Beats me, what does the data show?

Street walking being entirely undocumented, there is of course no even theoretical data. Does that mean we don't understand market forces and human nature anymore?

ETA: we could refer to existing data for the prostitution market in the States. There wouldn't be any difference if legalized, except to make it easier to do.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Which is my argument for individual registration cards. If a guy pays up without seeing one, he has every reason to believe that the work is illegal, and possibly rape. That there is a deterrent.

Seems reasonable to me, maybe there's a good reason why this isn't a good idea, but on its face I'd agree. You seem really gung-ho about this "charge Johns with rape thing" for whatever reason, but as I've pointed out before, severity of punishment has very little deterrent value. Liklihood of being caught is what you'd want to focus on to have any practical impact.

Originally Posted by Thermal

Street walking being entirely undocumented, there is of course no even theoretical data. Does that mean we don't understand market forces and human nature anymore?

ETA: we could refer to existing data for the prostitution market in the States. There wouldn't be any difference if legalized, except to make it easier to do.

Doesn't make much sense to declare the NZ street-walking data unknowable then immediately suggest that data from the US market, which is entirely black market, would make a good comparison.

I suspect legalization, even for the most unsophisticated forms of sex work like street walking, is having more impact than you let on. It's already been covered. Removing the fear of reporting crime seems like a huge benefit.

Another benefit of legalization is that it definitively tells cops to stop wasting their time with certain types of enforcement regarding sex work. Either they focus on the remaining illegal forms of sex work (like minors or whatever) or they use those police resources elsewhere entirely (or just eliminate these positions and use the money on non-cop budgets), either of which strike me as a good outcome.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Seems reasonable to me, maybe there's a good reason why this isn't a good idea, but on its face I'd agree.

I have been reprimanded quite soundly for even suggesting it. Something about sex workers either lying to their friends, families and all about what they do for a living having the lid blown off it in a theoretical data breach, that everyone would be scouring the breached data to find.

Seems to me it's not the kind of thing that could stay secret very long, before a client comes in and says "hey, I know you".

Quote:

You seem really gung-ho about this "charge Johns with rape thing" for whatever reason, but as I've pointed out before, severity of punishment has very little deterrent value.

Yet you think a legal alternative would snuff out the black market? Isn't that deterrancy in action?

Quote:

Doesn't make much sense to declare the NZ street-walking data unknowable then immediately suggest that data from the US market, which is entirely black market, would make a good comparison.

NZ is not paying attention to the trade, since it's legal. Being illegal here, we have arrest records for a start. We actually are keeping track of it to some degree that is greater than zero.

Quote:

I suspect legalization, even for the most unsophisticated forms of sex work like street walking, is having more impact than you let on. It's already been covered. Removing the fear of reporting crime seems like a huge benefit.

Another benefit of legalization is that it definitively tells cops to stop wasting their time with certain types of enforcement regarding sex work. Either they focus on the remaining illegal forms of sex work (like minors or whatever) or they use those police resources elsewhere entirely (or just eliminate these positions and use the money on non-cop budgets), either of which strike me as a good outcome.

None of which I am disputing, or even the idea of legalization here. No idea what you are going on about.

I'm sussing out the details and restrictions of a proposed US legal market, with much stricter parameters to keep out the underage, addicts, trafficked women, etc. It could all theoretically work, without victimizing the women, if we are crystal clear about it from the jump off.

[TomB]

Originally Posted by Thermal

That may be an irreconcilable difference in our positions, then. If someone held a gun to my head and said "suck my dick or I'll shoot", I'd call that rape, no matter my technical consent. Less dramatic forms of coercion are no less rapey in my book.



Why? They do it right now when it is illegal. A 15yo runaway can't enter the work legally, so what's to stop her from offering cut rate tail illegally, just like she does now?

The highlighted is one of the questions I have.
I'm not sure what going rates are, but my impression is that the legal brothels in Nevada are pretty expensive. (The HBO show that followed one of them gave me that impression while avoiding actually divulging the amount.) My impression is that the illegal prostitutes are significantly less expensive.

The effect was that a client had to be fairly well off and willing to part with a significant sum to visit a legal brothel, which leaves plenty of room for a black market to operate in.

A parallel is legalized marijuana here in Illinois. Legalization is great, but the price is significantly higher than the black market price. I think this is largely due to an extremely high tax rate (26%-41%). There is still a significant black market for marijuana.

Not every john who pays a streetwalker $50 is going to switch to the legal brothel and pay $200. (Again, I don't know prices. I just made them up.)

Making the supply side legal does not eliminate a black market if the price is out of reach of clients and can be undercut.

[TomB]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Presumably because a reasonably convenient legal alternative might influence the buying decisions of clients. Dealing with the legal market is often much preferred to dealing with the many drawbacks of the black market.

Legal weed is available in my state, and while many of my pothead friends bemoan that it's more expensive than the stuff they used to get from the weedman (not sure if this is true anymore, but it was at one point), dealing with a friendly cashier at a legit potshop has certain advantages over dealing with some sketchy drug dealer. I'm not buying bathtub gin even if it's cheaper than the liquor store that has to pay alcohol tax, it's just not worth the trouble.

People are willing to play along with modest regulation in a way they aren't willing to play along with total prohibition.

For the record, I know a number of people who still buy the illegal weed. Some because the price is a lot less, and some who say the quality (by their metric) is better. I don't do weed, so I can't vouch for their judgement on that.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by TomB

The highlighted is one of the questions I have.
I'm not sure what going rates are, but my impression is that the legal brothels in Nevada are pretty expensive. (The HBO show that followed one of them gave me that impression while avoiding actually divulging the amount.) My impression is that the illegal prostitutes are significantly less expensive.

The effect was that a client had to be fairly well off and willing to part with a significant sum to visit a legal brothel, which leaves plenty of room for a black market to operate in.

A parallel is legalized marijuana here in Illinois. Legalization is great, but the price is significantly higher than the black market price. I think this is largely due to an extremely high tax rate (26%-41%). There is still a significant black market for marijuana.

Not every john who pays a streetwalker $50 is going to switch to the legal brothel and pay $200. (Again, I don't know prices. I just made them up.)

Making the supply side legal does not eliminate a black market if the price is out of reach of clients and can be undercut.

That's my understanding of the Nevada brothels too, but in fairness they were set up to be a train wreck right out of the gate. $100k+ licensing fees for brothel operation (and that's the only legal variety) put the workers in a minimal competition market, so they have no other alternatives.

ETA: one brothel found that they were making more money as a luxury resort spa, with the ladies actually not being the main attraction anymore. Weird stuff.

[TomB]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Seems reasonable to me, maybe there's a good reason why this isn't a good idea, but on its face I'd agree. You seem really gung-ho about this "charge Johns with rape thing" for whatever reason, but as I've pointed out before, severity of punishment has very little deterrent value. Liklihood of being caught is what you'd want to focus on to have any practical impact.

Not sure if they still do it, but the police in Peoria Illinois used to post mugshots of all the johns they arrested/ticketed on their web site.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Thermal

That's my understanding of the Nevada brothels too, but in fairness they were set up to be a train wreck right out of the gate. $100k+ licensing fees for brothel operation (and that's the only legal variety) put the workers in a minimal competition market, so they have no other alternatives.

Compared to that, I can kinda see the appeal of NZ's more hands off approach.

Legalization that's so bogged down with these kinds of burdens is hardly legalization at all, and illegal sex work in Las Vegas is still rampant because the legal options are extremely limited.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Street walking being entirely undocumented, there is of course no even theoretical data.

"undocumented" doesn't mean there's no data. For illegal activity, there's going to be data on how many people get arrested for it, for example. That's data. It's subject to sampling bias, so arrest rates may fluctuate based on factors like how much emphasis police put on the problem which don't reflect changes in the underlying activity. But even with big caveats, it's still data.

Knowing human nature, I would expect under age or coerced prostitution to decrease with legalization, but not vanish completely. I would expect the total amount of prostitution to increase. For both, I have no idea by how much, though.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

illegal sex work in Las Vegas is still rampant because the legal options are extremely limited.

Illegal prostitution in Las Vegas is rampant because there are no legal options for prostitution in Las Vegas. Prostitution isn't legalized across the state, it's only permitted in some counties with smaller populations. And both Las Vegas and Reno are in counties that do not permit it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Nevada

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Illegal prostitution in Las Vegas is rampant because there are no legal options for prostitution in Las Vegas. Prostitution isn't legalized across the state, it's only permitted in some counties with smaller populations. And both Las Vegas and Reno are in counties that do not permit it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Nevada

Yeah, I'm aware. There was some discussion of this pages back. I agree that having to take a drive out into the boonies to visit one of the handful of legal brothels is not really a good example of legalization, and it's not surprising that illegal sex work still dominates in Las Vegas.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Thermal

That works great when the worker is basically financially secure, or already made it. What twists my gut is a woman who hears the landlord banging on her door, or the electricity being shut off, and has to make that decision: "well, I either suck a lot more dicks than I want to, attached to men I want nothing to do with, or I'm out on the street".

In NZ, that isn't actually a thing. While far from perfect, our welfare system is such that no person need resort to selling their body.

Originally Posted by Thermal

You brought this up earlier, about a sex worker who thought a root should be rolled into a basic services package, and I thought it was an intriguing idea. Who would it apply to? An incel or creepy dude who can't get a willing partner? Does he have the same right?

Incels actually choose to be celibate by being total ******* wankers.

I'm more thinking of physically disabled people - of both genders - who can't find a willing partner.

Originally Posted by Tony99

I think some of the issue/stigma around legalization, particularly in the US, is the perceived risk to fidelity.

The best estimate I have is that 2/3 of clients are married.

Originally Posted by Thermal

Smartcooky, in particular, says the desperate streetwalker "vanished" with legalization down there. I can't see how, and online sources say he's dead wrong.

There are still plenty of street hookers. Transgender, for starters, almost exclusively work the streets, and so do a lot of druggies, because brothels won't employ them.

[The Atheist]

I hope none of the people who think sex is so special and should only be done when both parties achieve orgasm through it never realise that 80% of women fake orgasms.

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna38006774

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

I hope none of the people who think sex is so special and should only be done when both parties achieve orgasm through it

Starting out with a straw man, this should be good.

Quote:

never realise that 80% of women fake orgasms.

I'm not sure what you think this proves. Women fake orgasms because orgasms are significant. If they weren't, there'd be little point in faking them.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by Thermal

But that's the thing: it shouldn't be, if we are accepting this as a societally cool to the point of legalizing it.

Attitudes change.

As I stated earlier, there is no-one in New Zealand under the age of 20 who has grown up in a time when prostitution was a crime. In a few decades, there will be no-one alive who has lived in a time when it was a crime. Later Gen Z members would mostly just roll their eyes at this thread, and say "OK, boomers" and move on.

They also have a much less prudish attitude to sex than previous generations. For them it is more a part of a fun lifestyle - they regard it as just another part of the social interactions along with drinking and partying. They, and the generation before them were the genesis of terms like "friends with benefits"

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Which has been my argument all along. What we are arguing here is our Kiwi contingents' representation of the gorgeous and well educated prostitute, versus what you and I know to be in the States. Smartcooky, in particular, says the desperate streetwalker "vanished" with legalization down there. I can't see how, and online sources say he's dead wrong.

Firstly, I never said they vanished, I said they have dramatically diminished. You only have to be old enough, and I am, to remember what the streets Auckland (K'Road in particular) were like in the 1970s and 1980s and what they are like now, to realize that there would not be more than a few percent of the street corner hookers there now that were there back then. In my own town, the west end of Hardy Street was well known as the red light district. It was rife with street walkers, you couldn't miss seeing them if you drove down there on a Friday or Saturday night. There is still a well-known brothel down that end, but the street walkers are all but gone - I haven't seen one there for at least decade.

Secondly, I'm sure its easy to find information that contradicts the opinions of others on the web - its the nature of the beast. Take crime for example. Looking at some sources, you'd be forgiven for thinking that all policemen are criminals, all airplanes are death-traps, and everyone is being murdered. But the reality is that your chances of having an encounter with a criminal cop, of dying in a plane crash or being murdered, while non-zero, are extremely small.

You are, to some extent, making yourself a victim of some cognitive bias - if you go looking for information that will confirm your existing opinions, you are going to find it, and while you are doing so, you tend not to see that which contradicts your pre-existing bias.

"We demand strict proof for opinions we dislike, but are satisfied with mere hints for what we’re inclined to accept"
- John Henry Newman

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Which is my argument for individual registration cards. If a guy pays up without seeing one, he has every reason to believe that the work is illegal, and possibly rape. That there is a deterrent.



Street walking being entirely undocumented, there is of course no even theoretical data. Does that mean we don't understand market forces and human nature anymore?

ETA: we could refer to existing data for the prostitution market in the States. There wouldn't be any difference if legalized, except to make it easier to do.

Answer? If you want to make sure you're getting a legit sex-worker who has a clean bill of health and is paying her taxes, use a brothel - they are all certified - without exception.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Starting out with a straw man, this should be good.

You're the one claiming sex is something "special", so it's not much of a strawman, and the suggestion that sex should be mutually satisfying has been made.

I think a **** is just a ****.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I'm not sure what you think this proves. Women fake orgasms because orgasms are significant. If they weren't, there'd be little point in faking them.

Probably should have read the article:

Quote:

Rather, it was a tactic they used to induce their man to do something, like get it over with. In most cases, they were also trying to be nice. “Importantly, 92 percent of participants felt very strongly that these vocalizations boosted their partner’s self-esteem,”...

Women are so caring. The poor wee men.

[The Atheist]

Two things occurred to me as I was driving along this morning:

1 Women's desperation driving them to it, and putting them in danger.

I cast my mind back to when I had a team of 300 women staffing betting terminals at the races. All casual employees with zero job security, and almost exclusively solo mothers desperate for the cash. They were abused, spat at, and occasionally sexually assaulted, all to earn a paltry extra few dollars the week they got some work.

2 The moralist attitude.

I trust those making moral arguments against prostitution are also anti-abortion, because women's bodily autonomy either does or does not exist, and there are a lot more - and far better - moral arguments against abortion than prostitution.

That baby you just sucked up the Hoover might have been the next Einstein, MLK or Sagan! You monsters!

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Two things occurred to me as I was driving along this morning:

1 Women's desperation driving them to it, and putting them in danger.

I cast my mind back to when I had a team of 300 women staffing betting terminals at the races. All casual employees with zero job security, and almost exclusively solo mothers desperate for the cash. They were abused, spat at, and occasionally sexually assaulted, all to earn a paltry extra few dollars the week they got some work.

2 The moralist attitude.

I trust those making moral arguments against prostitution are also anti-abortion, because women's bodily autonomy either does or does not exist, and there are a lot more - and far better - moral arguments against abortion than prostitution.

That baby you just sucked up the Hoover might have been the next Einstein, MLK or Sagan! You monsters!

THIS! If you are pro-abortion rights, and the basis for your position is that it is a woman's right to choose what happens with their own body, you MUST also be pro the legalization of prostitution. If you are pro-abortion rights, but against legalized prostitution that means you MUST believe that women's rights should be limited.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

In NZ, that isn't actually a thing. While far from perfect, our welfare system is such that no person need resort to selling their body.

Well, I guess I can understand why that wouldn't be high on your hit parade then, if it cant really happen.

Our social welfare system, in keeping with the threads theme, sucks dick. So it remains a front and center concern when talking about legalizing in the States. That very clear and present danger is breathing right down the neck of many of us. As soon as we start talking about any sweeping change in the States, my eyes turn towards the most vulnerable. They get ****** over hard and mercilessly over here, brother.