[QUOTE] by schraf+++++++++++++++++++++++++
I disagree with the notion that (mostly) males seem to have that sexual access to females (or males) through the purchasing of their bodies is some kind of right; therefore, prostitution is normal. I think sex is normal. Buying sex is archaeic.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well, if by archaic you mean part of the ancient make-up of human beings then I would agree. I don't understand why you skipped my comments about the Bonobos which directly related to this point.
In Bonobo communities sex is both shared (for free) and traded (for profit) between all sexes for different things. They have replaced threats of violence with trade in sex as the primary method of conflict resolution (usually over discrepencies in resource distribution).
This inate behavior (withholding and granting sexual favors) is found in human culture as well. It takes place within relationships (for social reinforcement as well as material trade) just as much as outside of them (just for trade).
It's not just a few men who have been used in relationships (or even on dates) for money and/or services and later realized that it would have been more honest if the girl had simply said she was a prostitute that was only interested in money. In other words, they got used by a prostitute, though the prostitute called herself a girlfriend or wife.
I think it's sort of ironic that you claim it is "mostly males" which think prostitution is some sort of right. Facts are that it was "mostly men" who made it illegal in the first place... in order to gain control over women!
And there are many women, growing in number too, fighting to regain their right to control their body (including selling sexual services) as they see fit. The fight for abortion rights is almost a mirror image for the fight to legalize prostitution, and I guess this makes sense as they are both battles for whether women control either end of their reproductive cycles.
[QUOTE] by schraf++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Can't court the females effectively? Can't learn the social skills that will get you some? Don't worry! You can simply buy the sex you always wanted, since it's now illegal to take it by force."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is pure ad hominem, and shows less than careful thought on the subject. There are many reasons people go to prostitutes other than an inability to "court females effectively."
In truth, the desire for sex is wholly separate from a desire to have a relationship. While almost everyone wants sex within their relationships, the proscription that sex must be part of a relationship is not held by everyone. The latter is a social construct, often mixed with a prudish distaste for sex (which only relationships can "excuse" or "validate").
For those without such internalized proscriptions the need for sexual release is much the same as wanting a back rub.
There are many times in life where one desires a release of sexual tensions but would not want, or cannot have, a relationship. If one has a "fuck buddy" on hand, or access to sex clubs, or a significant "meat market" bar, then there is little problem in finding this release. Unfortunately such things aren't always at hand, or aren't worth investing time and money into. That's when prostitutes are very convenient. It is a fair trade for that physical release JUST LIKE GOING TO A MASSEUSE!!!!
I wish you didn't ignore this point I had made either (in addition to the Bonobos). Unless you have problems with masseuses?
I mean do you think "who are these losers that can't get someone to rub their back?", "How socially inept do you have to be to need a masseuse?"
They are essentially one and the same thing, unless one is a prude. I'm sorry but that is a fact. Without the guilt and stigma, sexual organs are just body parts that build up with tension and provide pleasure when that tension is released.
Of course, many people that have internalized the bond between sex and relationships wind up going to prostitutes as well, when they find the social construct does not always work in reality.
The first general group is the class that you just slammed. Should the "socially inept" that cannot "court women effectively" be punished and not allowed to have some sexual fun now and then? If women are willing to provide this comfort in a fair exchange, it seems cruel for you to ridicule and punish those not as attractive or socially skillful as the average person.
And let's take a look at some of these "socially inept" people we are talking about.
There is a bordello in Holland designed specifically for people with disabilities (mental and physical). Many people are physically repulsed by the idea of being with those who are mentally and physically handicapped (or how about physically deformed). Yet sexual release is just as important for them. Thenkfully Holland realized this particular case was so important that that bordello's services (since it is restricted to those cases) is covered by health insurance.
How about the elderly who may not have the time or the interest in seeking another longterm relationship, but would like some temporary companionship and sexual satisfaction?
How about those suffering from conditions (noncommunicable) which prevent them from entering long term relationships, or being able to "get some"? There was a scandal when (I think in Australia) a teen boy dying from cancer had a wish to have sex before he died. Seeing as he was lacking in "good looks" and "social skills" his doctors and some friends arranged for him to be with an escort. He was very happy for this opportunity.
The second group of people are not restricted by their inability to "get some", but rather the inability of their partners to "put out". Illness, extended separations, and other life events may prevent one's partner from being able to share sexual intimacy. Rather than dropping the first partner completely (due to lack of physical intimacy), or entering into another relationship which puts the first one at risk, a person will go to a prostitute as a temporary release until their significant other is able to provide this again.
There are many times where a person (unable to have sex) has fully enouraged their partner to go to prostitutes so as not to affect their own emotional relationship.
The third group are those where the nature of their work prevents them from meeting others or carrying on a longterm relationship. If one is limited to relatively short "windows of opportunity" to "get some", then it becomes time and cost effective to go to a prostitute rather than trying to find a date. It is also more honest than getting new girlfriends all over the country or the world, which you never intend to, or logically would be unable to see again. Why do you think bordellos are big around port towns?
It can also happen (an extreme example of the third group) that relationships have been destructive or are distracting to a person's work (even if they don't move around a lot). The need for sexual release is there, but strong emotional relationships are too time consuming and emotionally draining.... imagine having to spend hours with your masseuse every day in idle chitchat when all you wanted was a backrub.
I hate to quote Al Goldstein, but he put it well (for this case) when he said that one doesn't pay a prostitute to have sex with you, you pay her to leave you alone afterward.
The fourth group are those persons who may want to experiment with people that he (or she) would not have ready access to in the course of their regular life. And I'm not talking about guys looking for girls much better looking than they could normally get (though there is this as well). It could be the intrigue of an exotic beauty from some other country (or section of town). Or some woman promising sexual delights that one might like to try (having had no partner interested in that so far, but one wants to try it sooner rather than later).
It's easy to tell someone to look for and hold out for someone that matches one's "fantasy" criteria. But that is not facing reality. No one is going to go to a bar and keep asking "Hi, do you like anal sex? I'm looking for a girl that likes anal sex", especially when one hasn't tried it yet to know that's what one wants. Prostitution allows one to try out many different fantasies in order to get a better understanding of onesself (which helps them know what they want in a real relationship).
Honestly, your characterization of people who go to prostitutes as basically socially inept came off as heartless to me. Even a little bit of thought should have pushed you passed the cardboard effigies you decided to burn.
[QUOTE] by schraf+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Personally, I tend to think of prostitution as a product of restrictive, putitan social constructs...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is a perfect example of the what gets me hot under the collar with your arguments against prostitution. You would never have accepted such flippant "I tend to think" commentary on other subjects, but do so here.
It is easy enough to show that you are completely wrong.
First of all the Bonobo research I referenced should have made you think twice about your opinion. Bonobos do not have ANY puritanical constructs and yet engage in the same goods-for-sex behaviors that humans do.
There are some (maybe many) within the "swinging" lifestyle that go into prostitution, as well as hire prostitutes. There is no puritanical streak in this community and yet it continues to go on within it. Personally I have not heard anyone in the lifestyle community saying it was only for "pathetic" people, or should be wiped out. That has only come from prudes.
Even a little bit of historical or anthropological research into prostitution, especially with regards to ancient societies, will reveal the FACT that prostitution has been with us forever, and is not the product of nor promoted by restrictive, puritanical societies.
To be honest, this seems like a bit of wishful thinking on you part.
Puritanical societies have always moved to wipe out prostitution as it increases patriarchal control within those societies. While such moves definitely increase the profitability for those brave enough to continue plying their trade, no one should thank puritan thinkers for this kind of contribution to the business.
[QUOTE] by schraf+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
because if people were simply able to have sex with a willing partner without feeling guilty or strange, people wouldn't feel the need to go buy a body to use.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not having been a prostitute (I'm assuming), or having had no interest in going to a prostitute, it's easy to slam people that do. While some may truly seek out a "body to use" that is not usually the case. Most people looking for prostitutes want a human on the other end, someone with emotions and desires, otherwise inflatable dolls would have wiped out the prostitute industry long ago.
This is underscored by the Bonobo and lifestyle examples I gave above. None of them feel strange or guilty with having sex with anyone... in addition, they do not feel strange or guilty when a person is willing to trade sex for something else (good or service) which they can provide in turn.
I think my point should be clear by now. People going to prostitutes are (by and large) not the ones with a hangup, people ripping into prostitution are the ones with a hangup.
[QUOTE] by schraf (responding to my secretary reductio)+++++++++++++++++
....I don't think this is a good example. Being raped as a child would seem to tend to have a pretty strong effect on what you grew up thinking sexuality was all about, while being raped as a child wouldn't have a lot to do with how you grew up thinking how typing or colating should be performed, don't you think?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I didn't say the children were raped, I said violated, and I think in another part "victimized". The idea being that a child is traumatized in some general sense. A child beaten and drug through nonsexual slave labor may very well have some issues about working in secretarial or other nonsexual careers. That does not make such work nonconsensual.
In fact, your new statement seems counterproductive to your original argument. Raped children would have anxieties about performing sexual activities and so less inclined to go into prostitution, right?
Unless you are saying that sexually abused children learn to like sexual things that they shouldn't, and thus go into prostitution unable to realize how wrong it is? That's a huge bit of circular logic... which starts from the assumption that sex, or promiscuous sex, or at the very least trading sex for money is wrong.
It seems to me any link between abused children and prostitution is through self-esteem issues. Prostitution is an easy way to make money and does not require a lot of formal education (which people with self-esteem issues would shy away from). It's illicit or illegal nature may also provide outlets for self-punishment or conversely a sense of "rebel glamour".
But the point I was actually trying to make was about the statistically-correlated blame you were tossing onto prostitution. Just because some children who are sexually abused (or other), and have identity issues which may tend to drive them toward careers which are less glamorous, or blatantly illicit, does not allow you to fault those careers for that correlation.
[QUOTE] by schraf+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I wonder if you think it is possible for a prostitute to be raped? I mean, the customer is just getting what he paid for, right? What about the pimps?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pure ad hominem. Of course a prostitute can be raped. Unless the prostitute (from now on "P") agreed beforehand to play a rape scenario, a customer is going well out of bounds to try that.
It's funny that you should ask if a P can be raped and then mention pimps. One of the only reasons P's put up with pimps is that they offer protection from rapists.
This is not to condone pimps. By and large they are worthless (as they take money from the Ps) and are perhaps more harmful than rapists (they beat Ps and hook them on drugs for greater control).
The Hughs brothers' documentary "American Pimp" provides some insight into that world, as do many of Iceberg Slim's autobiographical novels.
Your moral outrage seems misplaced on this issue.
Legalizing prostitution reduces the need for pimps (because the girls can get good legal security), allows them to gain power over pimps (they can get police help against such beings without beings arrested themselves), and ultimately cripples that side of the business.
It is the prohibition of prostitution which empowers pimps and makes the whole world of the P more dangerous.
This is another point where Prostitution and abortion rights are nearly analogous. When pressed underground, abortions become more dangerous to women. Many butchers, posing as doctors, come out of the woodwork to "help" women in need. This is exactly what the pimps do (though pimps maintain a parasitic relationship afterward).
[QUOTE] by schraf+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I do not deny the possibility of there being some prostitutes which are in their occupation out of a great feeling of self-worth. However, I am not as yet convinced, as you seem to be, that many, or most, are.
According to the statistics I found (admittedly at a pretty over-the-top "everything is prostitution" site) it said that the average age of females entering prostitution was 13 years old. The sex trade in very, very young children overseas is quite popular with Western and tourists. The site also stated estimates for incest/childhood sexual abuse for prostitutes ranging from 65%-90%.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Snooze. Using this same method, we can also show how people are forced to work from very young ages for very long hours, for little or no money at all sorts of "regular" jobs. This IS the majority of people working in the garment industry. Shall we close the garment industry.
Percentages, especially coming from third world countries, are nothing but a scare game. One country has nothing to do with another, and a case of slavery has nothing to do with a women choosing to do something of her own free will.
BTW, you might want to give those stats another look. Prostitution is illegal in most of those "overseas" countries they are talking about. Prostitution goes on of course, as it does everywhere. It's only the illegality which allows for more rampant use of child prostitutes.
All your percentages might argue for, is that P OUGHT to be legal and it OUGHT to be regulated. Waste less time worrying about women that want to do it, and more time using existing child-labor laws (whoops 3rd world countries don't have those) to stop child slavery (including P-slaves).
[QUOTE] by schraf+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You mentioned something about "all those studies" being debunked, but I think I missed where and by whom this debunking had been done. Can you please elaborate on which studies you specifically object to, and what subsequent studies have shown differing results?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You insinuated there were high numbers correlating P and child abuse. I said there were none that I knew of that delivered such high correlations except older studies which had been debunked.
I will NOT enumerate and elaborate on studies which have been debunked.
The reason I will not do this is because it will take some time to compile a list and it's time which I am not willing to invest in this part of our argument. If it helps, I discovered them during my Sociology days, and reread some during research for a documentary on pornography.
The studies were debunked by many academics based on flawed techniques (no need for counter studies) and so I did not keep records of them. If you are interested, just look up Dworkin and go from there. She and her pals made some "objective" studies by asking women in counseling what brought them to X (you name it).
Ultimately, the onus is on you to produce studies which support your position, not me to produce studies which I can prove are wrong. If you provide studies I will be more than happy to invest time looking at them.
[QUOTE] by schraf+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I did go looking for evidence which disconfirmed my ideas, and I found some, but most references were not actual studies but popular press books. Having said that, I am not a particular fan of certain kinds of feminist writing and research and there is a lot of really horrible crap passing as science in the social sciences.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I agree, my days in sociology (and psychology) increased my skepticism of the social sciences. They have some use, but much of it turns out to be half-assed pondering followed by statistical manipulation. They are at their best when limited to neutral descriptions of activities and/or histories of cultures.
[QUOTE] by schraf+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
...What percentage of all the sex workers in the world, would you say, feel good about their jobs?
Just because there are some people who feel good about being prostitutes doesn't mean that most, or even many, do.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I addressed this fallacious line of argument already. Nevertheless I will try to make my point again.
What percentage of all the secretaries in the world feel good about their job? How about janitors? How about dishwashers? How about waiters/waitresses? How about fastfood restuarant workers?
My guess is the percentage of people in P that like their job is higher than for those scrubbing toilets, working in a slaughterhouse, and working mines (oh let's talk about child labor in 3rd world countries on that one).
But if I'm wrong, what does it matter? If people don't like the job they work at then they should get another job. If they can't because they are being forced to work at it, then the issue is slavery not the occupation they are being forced to do. If they can't because they need lots of money and this is the fastest way to get it, then the issue is what causes them to need money in such a manner they cannot do something else.
In the end, prostitution and other sexual careers will continue despite the laws that restrictive, puritanical societies may put in place. This is because it is inate human behavior. Illegality makes everything worse for women (just like with abortions). Legality improves conditions and empowers women... not just men.
I'm glad my initial "over the top" post didn't keep you from responding. Unfortunately, your response did not show much (if any) improvement in logic and evidence. I tried to show a bit more restraint in this post, and so hammer home the original points I was trying to make.
I really think you are in error on this topic and the logic and evidence proves me right. While I don't ask that you come out of this argument liking prostitution, I hope you understand that the cliches you have used are not worthy of being used, that they are not reasons for considering prostitution a crime (much less a victimless one), and that there is a reason it exists in human society besides mysanthropy, mysogyny, and restrictive, puritanical cultures.
holmes
{Yet another message edited for overlong lines of plus symbols - STOP IT HOLMES!!! - Adminnemooseus}
[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 02-17-2003]
™ Version 4.2