ZOMBIE FORUMS

You have to look at it on a case-by-case basis, MiB. Just because prostitution is wrong, or because people aren't necessarily forced into it, does not mean that outlawing it does any good, or at least doesn't do more harm than good.

When did we agree on this?

(btw: If it is in fact, wrong, and people don't, in fact, have to do it, I think that's a perfectly reasonable excuse for something to be outlawed. Thing is: 1) Who's to say it's wrong? and 2) Some people are indeed forced into it.)

Notice, Unum, I did not make a judgement, only put out information. Kindly stop putting words in my mouth, or it's gonna start some nasty flaming.

To be frank, I don't care either way. But the information needed to be said because so many people on both sides were talking out of their asses.

-MiB

this may come as a shock, forevergray, but sex doesn't have to be about love. hell, it doesn't have to be about anything more than sex.

you may take issue with some people thinking like this, but then, there's likely people out there that take issue with your attitude.

whether we like it or not, there is going to be a sex industry. ever since there was the concept of money, or worth, sex has been deemed worthy of effort and recources.

Now, if a person deems themselves to be good at sex, to like sex, and considers it to be a valuable and saleable commodity, then is there such a terrible danger in them selling that service in a LEGAL, REGULATED industry?

plumbers seel their skills with a wrench, Lawyers sell their legal know-how. it's a service or skill, and if the individual is capable and willing to sell that service, of their own volition, in a professional manner, i personally cannot see the harm in it.


an agent doesn't treat his/her talent/actors/sportspeople like crap, because they are his livelihood, and in a legally regulated sports/talent industry, an agent who shoots his clients for leaving him is over-reacting, because unless he's into shady bussiness, he has nothing to hide.

i' also don't see anything morally wrong or entirely shameful in someone going to see a prostitute, for whatever reason they have. if they are willing to pay out the large amounts of cash that legal, professional prostitutes charge, that is their bussiness, like a head shrinker. it's ac service where they can see someone, and relax, be themselves, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE, and expect confidentiality.

the only reason i wouldn't bother with a prostitute is on monetary grounds. i have far better things to spend my cash on.

regardless, there will still be an illegal sex industry as well, because of the dealers/pimps that use aforementioned methods to get themselves whores. but a legal sex industry is a far cry from alleyway criminal prostitution rings and such.

i could keep ranting, but it wouldn't go anywhere, so i'll end here.

as always, make of it what you will.

Prostitution has been legal for one long while.

Let me be a little less open ended with this. The pornography industry has been allowing women to exploite themselves for fun and profit, on film, since the invention of the camera. A little money, two people 'making love', and display it on screen for the select perverted masses to watch, review, and enjoy.

In the beginning, the women either came from a wealthy enough home, where degeneracy meant little, and the director would hire the couple (Stretching the line between prostitution, and voyeurism), or, poor strugling families, where whatever monies could be gathered simply were.

That of course changed as time did. Now, a woman could, and some do, do well for themselves, by selling themselves for the camera.

Over the decades, pornography was innocent enough, with, of course, the occasional deviant film or naughty magazine to deviate from it. Nowadays, pornography can, and does, cover nearly and fetish a deviant could possibly desire. Pornography has come down to paying a person, to preform possibly unspeakable acts for ludicrous amounts of money.

So where is the line drawn? Can a person honestly say that pornography is any different than buying a person's sexality?

Is it any different than buying a woman's body for personal enjoyment?

Is it any different than buying a whore?

...

I'm anti-prostetution, personally. I understand the hipocracy (Observe the title, folks.), but that's how it is. I can say that woman in pornography chose to do so for positive reasons. Prostetes don't exactly have that luxury.

-H-Kat

H-Kat raises and interesting point.

for me, i'd say that prostitution and pornography mostly differs on the client side. The client rarely comes in actual contact with the people involved in the media they are enjoying. the client's active role begins and stops with the aquisition and enjoyment of the media, wheras with prostitution, the client deals directly with the person selling their sexuality.

on the professional's side of the interaction, mostly, they still perform the act, and get paid. porn is likely a safer medium, and maybe because it is a somewhat legalized and regulated industry, with standards and practices that need to be followed, or the film company will have their product confiscated and their bussiness sut down.

Now, the actors only have sex with the other actors involved in the film, but they may well be watched by thousands, or perhaps even millions of people of all races, ages, both sexes, physical appearance, personality, ect. and never have to meet them.

that's a much larger demographic being satisfied, with a much smaller risk.

sex is sex. people are going to have it, and people are going to deviate from the norm...getting all tied up in moral knots about what the neighbors are doing behind closed doors is really a little pathetic.

Because I want a crack whore making my pharmasuticals.

Bitch, Marx is your God. Trotsky's great, but he doesn't hold a CANDLE to Marx, or even Engles for that matter. Communist Manifesto, 1848 baby. Year of the revolution. It doesn't get any better. Neo-Marxist Socialism.

Anyway. Oh yes. Prostitution.

Well. You can flame all you want if I say something that's already been repeated over and over again, but I only read a part of this thread, and I feel compelled to throw in my own input.

Let's look at the logic behind legalizing prostitution. For starters, when we say legalizing it, we mean we can either make it a federal statute or leave it up to the states to decide, or districts, et cetera et cetera, meaning that if a "sweet little suburb" didn't want "scandalous, drug-addicted, disease-carrying whores" "traumatizing" their "precious little children", then they wouldn't. But let's ignore that situation, and just talk about it in base issues.

Okay, first there's the possibility of registration. Prostitutes could register with an agency that would be responsible for this newfound business, their information could be kept on file. Sure, there will be some "practicing without a license", but this way ensures that those who do register follow rules. Rules such as enforcing the usage of contraceptives (most specifically, condoms, to prevent the spread of disease). This would take a lot of wind out of the oppositions argument. So would the fact that the government could slap a hefty tax on prostitution, thereby generating revenue and, while keeping it legal, a deterrant reason, (not to mention getting rid of the disliked and infamous pimps). This is similar to the tax recently put on cigarettes. I mean, whoa. These women, because they would be under regulations and the like, would also be less likely to be involved in kinds of crime and drug-use, and thereby raising their own standards of living and welfare.

And for those of you playing the morality card, oh the sad exploitation of women... you know what, shut the fuck up, because everytime you jack off to a porn magazine or watch porn that's exploitation, and, for whatever reason, the women choose to do it. I'm one of the biggest feminists out there, which is why I advocate the right to have a choice, and if women choose to be prostitutes, hey, fine.

The point of the issue is simply exploitation. Not what kind of exploitation, but that it exists, and that it is done voluntarily. It may be, in some ways, what could be called a "safe medium" because it is a legalized and regulated industry, but prostitution could be too, and I think it would be a lot less stress on police forces if they didn't have to go busting down some whore house when they could be spending time and energy on things that actually have priority.

It is exploitation, I don't think there is any room to deny that, nor any substantial proof otherwise, but regulated exploitation under controlled situations with rules to keep parties safe and secure and to prevent involuntary exploitation is much better than the system we have now.