Prostitution-what to do

Well, then I guess I'm over on your side of the line; it's beyond ridiculous to try to pretend that in practice, prostitution isn't tremendously more exploitative than even other forms of sex work.The human traffickers aren't kidnapping girls to fill supermarket check-out positions. But that's basically true. The more a prostitute charges, in fact, the more discretion she has about clients and whether or not to have sex with them. The $2000-an-hour escorts are paid to look hot on some CEO's arm; to be a status symbol. To converse intelligently about art and finance. They're more like geisha than hookers, and the more expensive they are, the more everybody involved understands that sexual activity is at their discretion, not the client's. It's the people at the absolute top that have that luxury. Top-rated decorators. High-priced hair and makeup artists. Jewelers to the stars. They essentially have absolute discretion about which clients they take on, what projects they'll work, etc. Despite commanding incredible premiums for their services, they typically have waiting lists of people just to be considered - because their services become a status symbol for the wealthy.I wouldn't describe this situation as common, though, and I apologize if I've given that impression. The vast majority of prostitution is exploitative human bondage.But it really seems like the debate here is whose perspective can be ignored. Because the things you're saying are true - but the things your opponents are saying are true, too. You want to ignore all the people who benefit from prostitution, including some of the prostitutes. Jar seemingly wants to ignore the hideous human cost of "regular" prostitution. That's why the problem is a problem - neither reality can be ignored.

Examples.

Huh?I didn't say it was good. Many towns don't have high-end prostitutes either. Sorry, but I have no idea what point you're trying to make.All I did was compare prostitutes to restaurants: Both have a wide variety of prices and services (from sit-down to drive-through), both exploit their workers (especially at the low end), both have workers who wish they were somewhere else....My point was that prostitutes should be regarded the same way as workers in any other industry. Treating them as "victims" doesn't help.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

quote:

---

But that's basically true. The more a prostitute charges, in fact, the more discretion she has about clients and whether or not to have sex with them. The $2000-an-hour escorts are paid to look hot on some CEO's arm; to be a status symbol. To converse intelligently about art and finance. They're more like geisha than hookers, and the more expensive they are, the more everybody involved understands that sexual activity is at their discretion, not the client's.

---

Sure, but they have to, as you say, look really hot and be better than well-educated, and adept at high-society social graces so as not to embarrass their client. Your average-looking middle-aged uneducated poor woman who ends up a prostitute because she became homeless after fleeing an abusive partner just isn't going to be able to ever do that. That latter woman, along with homeless or human-trafficked women, children and teenagers, are the vast majority of prostitutes worldwide. There are even problems with human trafficking in countries where prostitution is legal, like the Netherlands.The people who get to charge that kind of money are likely only a very tiny percentage of all prostitutes, and jar in no way made any sort of distinction.The more I think about it, the more I think that Jar has some kind of sanitized, Disneyfied Pretty Woman image of prostitution that is just this side of pure fantasy.

quote:

---

But it really seems like the debate here is whose perspective can be ignored. Because the things you're saying are true - but the things your opponents are saying are true, too. You want to ignore all the people who benefit from prostitution, including some of the prostitutes. Jar seemingly wants to ignore the hideous human cost of "regular" prostitution. That's why the problem is a problem - neither reality can be ignored.

---

I'm not ignoring anybody's perspctive, I don't think. I freely accept that people at the very top likely have it great and might not trade their lives for anything.I freely accept that legalization would be the best solution to improve conditions for everyone involved.The only reason I am participating in this thread is to point out the ridiculousness and of jon's and jar's positions.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Excellent points, Crash.One detail, FYI. Maybe not 'check-out positions,' literally speaking--but in this part of the world, where human trafficking is a scourge, women are not only kidnapped to work as prostitutes. They are also kidnapped to work in factories.The lure is the same: a young woman from a relatively desperate country like Cambodia or Vietnam or China decides the single best chance she has to improve her lot, and help her family, is to marry a foreigner. There are many marriage brokers in this part of the world to help her find a husband. But some of the businesses are fronts. An unlucky woman gets a fake 'broker' who arranges a match, she is told, with a husband/job in a rich country like Japan or South Korea or Taiwan. When she arrives, she is told she will meet her fiance later but she can start working now. The rest is pure exploitation.Until the woman is legally married to a resident she is an illegal alien. She is dependent on her 'employer' for all her support, meagre as it is. She can't report her 'employer' to authorities without risking everything she depends on--along with risking jail for herself or deportation or possible violence from the 'employer.' Language limitations complicate things as well. What she knows of the new country is mostly whatever her employer tells her. She has no idea what a reputable workplace looks like in the new country or what the standard wage really is or what her rights are. And she is not given much opportunity to find out._____Edited by Archer Opterix, : repair.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

quote:

---

My point was that prostitutes should be regarded the same way as workers in any other industry. Treating them as "victims" doesn't help.

---

What if many of them have, in fact, been victimized?Sometimes, people actually are victims, you know.

quote:

---

Many towns don't have high-end prostitutes either. Sorry, but I have no idea what point you're trying to make.

---

Jar said that prostitutes get to pick and choose what they do and whom they do it with. He also said that if they get fewer customers because they are very selective, they could just charge more money to make up the difference.Well, if nobody in that town is willing to pay what that protitute is charging for the services offered, that prostitute must either lower their prices or lower their standards if they wish to remain in business. Or, they must relocate.Therefore, jar's claim is unrealistic.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Victims should be treated as victims, regardless of their jobs.Workers should be treated as workers, regardless of their jobs. Which many of them do. If you look at the top of my posts, you might notice that I'm not jar.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

And if she would read jar's thread with less ... zeal(?)... she would see that they were obviously written tongue in cheek.

Ringo is talking about the economics.If 'victimization' is the issue rather than economics, there's a distinction to be made between having been 'victimized' in some way, as you say, and knowingly taking a crappy job to ameliorate the situation on the other.If the latter makes one an instant 'victim', one can argue that everyone working a job they hate is a 'victim' by definition.____Edited by Archer Opterix, : brev.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Sure. They have to be at the top of their game and have natural talent to boot - in addition to looks. I agree. I think the appropriate solution remedies the human trafficking and exploitation you describe without illegalizing the lucrative, legitimate, positive business your opponents are talking about. I've never known Jar to be a person of nuance. I agree that much of what has been set against you is pretty ridiculous. Hopefully you haven't found what I've been saying to be equally ridiculous.

Well, I guess it's time for another question.We recently watched the movie Monster, which has absolutely nothing to do with Frankenstein's monster. The wife told me she rented a movie called Monster and I assumed it was a horror movie.Anyway, does anyone know if such a situation (without the killing part) is an accurate portrayal of a life of a hooker?

---

We are BOG. Resistance is voltage over current.

​

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

These men and women certainly are a product of their environment, however, I wouldn't say that they are incapable of leaving such a lifestyle in trade for a healthy, productive one. Who is the "we" in this? Do you mean society as a whole?Also, prostitutes don't generally end up in prisons, unforgotten, unless they committed some other crime of greater consequence. Usually if they get picked up for prostitution, they are released the next day. They could always do what most everyone else does-- they can work. They are being payed for offering sexual services in trade for money. The John's that visit these women for sexual favors could care less about their welfare. If you want someone to blame, start with them. Prostitution is only as lucrative as the people with the money. If there was no one paying people to have sex with them, prostitution would cease. Questions about morality don't apply when speaking about survival of the fittest. The survival of the fittest is the most ruthless, the most revered, the most feared. Yet, those people don't seem to last too long out in the wild (society) without suffering some sort of act of reprisal. Its a moral matter, not an intellectual one. By paying a prostitute to have sex with you, you simply keep her locked in that world that is completely detrimental to her well being. I think the best way to handle it is to offer her money just to sit and talk with you about any other possible avenues in life for her to travel. One, she'll appreciate that she isn't losing money, and two, I'm sure it would be nice for her to a have man sit and talk with her without using her for her body. She may be more apt to listen to someone who treats her like a person, not a walking vagina.

---

"God is like the sun. You can't look at it. But without it you can't look at anything else." -G.K. Chesterton

You are speaking about prostitution as if it a desired job for the prostitute. 9 out of 10 times the men and women who offer these services are destitute and looking for money to support an ever-increasing drug habit. Its surely a cycle of despair for them and means to an end, not something they do to "bring joy and pleasure to so many." What? Jar, you can't be serious... Do you honestly believe that prostitutes become such because they want to please other people? They are prostitutes because they can make good money and basically make their own hours. Its a quick, easy way to make money. But its costly on their well-being. By you supporting prosistution, the only thing you help is keeping them in that state longer.But by "helping," I think in the long run, you only hinder them.

---

"God is like the sun. You can't look at it. But without it you can't look at anything else." -G.K. Chesterton

Just remember that I'm not disagreeing with you. I just want to say that what you described can be said of many other professions. Care to explain more?

---

We are BOG. Resistance is voltage over current.

​

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

Did you miss the part where it was a biopic about Aileen Wuornos?