Legalising Brothels

[belboid]

And why do we need to do what the workers recommend? How do you know they are right when the evidence suggests they are wrong (if, indeed, you do speak for all prostitutes)

but 'the evidence' suggests no such thing - not even the evidence which YOU have quoted. You are ignoring all the evidence which doesn't back up your position, and then criticise others for dong the same thing!

I make no claims as to being definitely, unarguably, right - that you are doing so just makes your argument look even weaker, imo

 

[CyberRose]

but 'the evidence' suggests no such thing - not even the evidence which YOU have quoted. You are ignoring all the evidence which doesn't back up your position, and then criticise others for dong the same thing!

I make no claims as to being definitely, unarguably, right - that you are doing so just makes your argument look even weaker, imo

Sorry but everyone on this thread, you and me included, are arguing from the assumption our opinion is correct, I admit that and you should to. You also say I'm doing the same thing, yet I've been through other people's evidence and said why I think it's wrong, those supporting legalisation don't appear capable of returning the favour - you included

 

[belboid]

You have done no such thing, you've simply dismissed everything from the NZ example as being totally irrelevant, which is blatantly nonsense. And you've likewise dismissed the evidence and opinions from the ECP & SWU as being somehow 'unrepresentative' whilst the Coalition Against Trafficking is seen as holy script!

I make no assumption that my opinion is correct, and you shouldn't either. I prefer to actually look at the balance of evidence, rather than choosing in advance which I want to believe.

 

[Giles]

gawd...no one did, or would, argue that sex work is a 'cool place to work' - but it exists, and pretending it doesn't do doesn't work, as doesn't criminalising the men that pay for it.

Everyone seems to assume that its a feminist issue - there are surely male prostitutes also? What about them? Are they oppressors by virtue of being men, or oppressed for selling their bodies?

And no-one seems to have thought of asking men if they think it should or should not be legalised.

Why should the law stop two people agreeing to exchange money for sex, really? What business is this of a bunch of politicians anyway?

Giles..

 

[belboid]

Everyone seems to assume that its a feminist issue

really? Were that the case I doubt that 80% of the contributors on this thread would be men.

 

[CyberRose]

You have done no such thing, you've simply dismissed everything from the NZ example as being totally irrelevant, which is blatantly nonsense. And you've likewise dismissed the evidence and opinions from the ECP & SWU as being somehow 'unrepresentative' whilst the Coalition Against Trafficking is seen as holy script!

The figures from New Zealand are attractive, but I think New Zealand and prostitution are a very different kettle of fish to the UK, as evidenced by comparative stats. It's also worth pointing out that New Zealand is a "model for legalised prostitution", a model which exists in a number of countries, including various states of Australia and the Netherlands. The quote I provided above, where the research showed the negative effects of legalisation, are based on these two countries, so lets say New Zealand was a success, the same model has not proven to be a success in Australia or Netherlands...

I make no assumption that my opinion is correct, and you shouldn't either. I prefer to actually look at the balance of evidence, rather than choosing in advance which I want to believe.

But I originally shared your belief that prostitution should be legalised, for all the reasons you and others say, but when I started researching into the subject, I became aware that there is a very real danger that legalisation will make matters worse or not change anything (eg Australia/Netherlands) and that it was merely an assumption on my part that legalisation would be an improvement, so I really don't think you can accuse me of "choosing a belief in advance"

 

[belboid]

well, you have made such a choice on this thread And I find it hard to believe you've really read that much about the comparative models if you think the same model as is used in NZ operates in Australia and the Netherlands. It doesn't. That is why I would tend towards supporting an NZ type model, but not a Netherlands one.

 

[CyberRose]

well, you have made such a choice on this thread

Well so have you then!

And I find it hard to believe you've really read that much about the comparative models if you think the same model as is used in NZ operates in Australia and the Netherlands. It doesn't. That is why I would tend towards supporting an NZ type model, but not a Netherlands one.

Well could you point out the differences between the Australian, Netherlands and New Zealand models?

 

[tangentlama]

What about the Scandinavian model?

 

[CyberRose]

What about the Scandinavian model?

Well there isn't a Scandinavian model as prostitution is legalised in Norway, Finland and Denmark, but illegal in Sweden

 

[fela fan]

Ladies of the night sell their bodies.

Politicians sell their souls.

Plenty of other jobs sell their freedom.

Why pick on 'prostitution'? In fact, a terrible word that comes with all sorts of connotations. As does 'brothel'.

Men want to buy sex, so women will always be there to supply the demand. It is none of the state's business to interfere with this. The only reason they do is in reaction to the prudes who object to what other people do with their bodies.

And nor is it the business of officious people seeking to impose their own opinions on this inescapable aspect of human life.

The first thing that needs sorting out is the language. And that shouldn't be difficult in a country where the politicians are now banning the word 'obese'...

Why should prostitution be illegal and involve such seedy connotations? All because some people have decided that buying and selling sex is wrong in some way. Why the fuck is it wrong? So much bloody bullshit on sex and love being bedfellows. Sex and money often make much better partners.

 

[CyberRose]

Why the fuck is it wrong?

Because the vast majority of women don't choose to be in that kind of work?

 

[tangentlama]

Well there isn't a Scandinavian model as prostitution is legalised in Norway, Finland and Denmark, but illegal in Sweden

I think you might have defined the approach in those countries incorrectly.

 

[fela fan]

Because the vast majority of women don't choose to be in that kind of work?

No rights for the minorities, just because the majority think otherwise?

The majority, by its inherent nature, can and will decide what's best for the rest?

 

[CyberRose]

No rights for the minorities, just because the majority think otherwise?

The majority, by its inherent nature, can and will decide what's best for the rest?

So because a minority of prostitutes (in the Billy Piper/Belle de Jour mould) have a great time in their line of business, that makes it acceptable to turn a blind eye to the situation of rape, violence and drug addiction of the majority?

 

[CyberRose]

I think you might have defined the approach in those countries incorrectly.

Well perhaps you could do me the decency of expanding on that a little and tell me why it's incorrect

 

[belboid]

Ladies of the night sell their bodies.

Politicians sell their souls.

Plenty of other jobs sell their freedom.

Why pick on 'prostitution'? In fact, a terrible word that comes with all sorts of connotations. As does 'brothel'.

Men want to buy sex, so women will always be there to supply the demand. It is none of the state's business to interfere with this. The only reason they do is in reaction to the prudes who object to what other people do with their bodies.

And nor is it the business of officious people seeking to impose their own opinions on this inescapable aspect of human life.

The first thing that needs sorting out is the language. And that shouldn't be difficult in a country where the politicians are now banning the word 'obese'...

Why should prostitution be illegal and involve such seedy connotations? All because some people have decided that buying and selling sex is wrong in some way. Why the fuck is it wrong? So much bloody bullshit on sex and love being bedfellows. Sex and money often make much better partners.

what a load of old fucking cock.

 

[CyberRose]

Ha ha belboid told you off!!!

 

[belboid]

Well so have you then!

mebbe, except I'm quite happy to look at and take on board the other evidence as is provided, whereas ytou seem to want to brush it all under the carpet.

Well could you point out the differences between the Australian, Netherlands and New Zealand models?

surely you already know, as you've studied all the documents

The main difference is in diminishing/doing away with the role of the 'pimp' - its tackled in NZ (thru SOO's and workers' contracts) but not in the Netherlands or Australia.

 

[fela fan]

So because a minority of prostitutes (in the Billy Piper/Belle de Jour mould) have a great time in their line of business, that makes it acceptable to turn a blind eye to the situation of rape, violence and drug addiction of the majority?

No.

Never turn a blind eye to rape or violence or any crime by humans on humans.

But paying for sex to a willing 'sex-worker' is not a crime.

Perhaps part of the problem of 'prostitution' and 'brothels' is indeed the connotations that the language brings as i said just before.

But wait a minute, how does a buyer of sex rape a seller of sex?

Cyber, i realise i may come from a different viewpoint by virtue of having lived in thailand for so long, but it took me, a briton, fully two years to shed the baggage i carried over 'prostitution' before i could begin to see what happened over in thailand for what happened in thailand. Ie, to just see things, rather than judge them.

In britain it is considered just so absolutely wrong to pay for sex.

I do not concur.

However, i abhor violence of any sort. But i feel the two issues are separate ones. Certainly, legalised 'houses of sex' would surely have a major impact on eliminating violence in the exchange...

 

[fela fan]

what a load of old fucking cock.

Yeah? Why? Or no time to elaborate?

 

[fela fan]

Ha ha belboid told you off!!!

Yes. But why?

 

[CyberRose]

But paying for sex to a willing 'sex-worker' is not a crime

IF they are willing, and that is one hell of a big IF

But i feel the two issues are separate ones

And that flippant attitude is why belboid, who, incidentally shares your view on legalising brothels, said what you said was a load of cock

Certainly, legalised 'houses of sex' would surely have a major impact on eliminating violence in the exchange...

Go to page 1, do not pass go or collect £200, just go to page 1

(should keep you occupied for a few days!)

 

[fela fan]

mebbe, except I'm quite happy to look at and take on board the other evidence as is provided, whereas ytou seem to want to brush it all under the carpet.



surely you already know, as you've studied all the documents

The main difference is in diminishing/doing away with the role of the 'pimp' - its tackled in NZ (thru SOO's and workers' contracts) but not in the Netherlands or Australia.

You seem to be arguing from theory.

Selling and buying sex should be allowed to be kept free from the tyranny of theory.

Talking about pimps and models of 'prostitution'...

And talking only about western countries and how they 'deal' with the 'problem'.

Amazing.

Now, in practice, women want money, they use their bodies to make money from men who want their bodies for a short time.

Physical needs coincide with monetary needs. Deal done.

The illegality of it in britain, and the massively negative connotations it carries surely lead to any violence that results in 'prostitution'.

 

[belboid]

Yeah? Why? Or no time to elaborate?

come back and tell us what you think after you've had some fat sweaty bastard ramming a large dildo up your arse for a couple of hours and see if you've still got the same opinion. Whilst his mates are sitting around jerking off and laughing at you. And then demanding you spit ping pong balls out of your newly enlarged arsehole.

 

[belboid]

You seem to be arguing from theory.

Selling and buying sex should be allowed to be kept free from the tyranny of theory.

Talking about pimps and models of 'prostitution'...

And talking only about western countries and how they 'deal' with the 'problem'.

Amazing.

Now, in practice, women want money, they use their bodies to make money from men who want their bodies for a short time.

Physical needs coincide with monetary needs. Deal done.

The illegality of it in britain, and the massively negative connotations it carries surely lead to any violence that results in 'prostitution'.

wow, one half sane point at the end of a load of specious twaddle.

I have made no recourse to 'theory' (however you misunderstand it), I have had plenty of recourse to facts and lived experience. Tis you who are coming out with utter bullshit 'theories' about how you think sexual transactions are made.

And who thinks we are only talking about 'western'; countries? Please do regale us with tales of how Thai prostitutes all absolutely love their work and how its 'traditional' n all.

 

[fela fan]

IF they are willing, and that is one hell of a big IF


And that flippant attitude is why belboid, who, incidentally shares your view on legalising brothels, said what you said was a load of cock


Go to page 1, do not pass go or collect £200, just go to page 1

(should keep you occupied for a few days!)

Oh look man, i did read the first page or two, but felt i wanted to post without having the time to read the rest of it.

I don't have a view that we should legalise 'brothels'.

I have a view that we should not even have brothels in the first place. Nor should we have prostitutes.

In thailand, brothels are places where prostitutes work. The workers have in some way been forced to work at these places and have no choice but to sell their bodies, often not getting the money due to them.

Brothels are places of human degradation and human rights abuses.

I don't agree with them in any shape or form.

But what i see in thailand does not conform to this context in any way at all.

[they do have brothels, but they're hidden away, and frequented by men with very little money to spend, and in the dark dingy side streets]

 

[belboid]

Physical needs coincide with monetary needs. Deal done.

'tramp' needs money, fuckwit needs to hit someone (& preferably film it on their mobile too!) - done deal.

 

[CyberRose]

mebbe, except I'm quite happy to look at and take on board the other evidence as is provided, whereas ytou seem to want to brush it all under the carpet.

I'm sorry but I really have given you my reservations about the New Zealand model and why the effects in the UK could be very different, I can't do any more than that

surely you already know, as you've studied all the documents

I have never said that, nor have I claimed to be an expert

The main difference is in diminishing/doing away with the role of the 'pimp' - its tackled in NZ (thru SOO's and workers' contracts) but not in the Netherlands or Australia.

How is that different from the Netherlands?

 

[fela fan]

come back and tell us what you think after you've had some fat sweaty bastard ramming a large dildo up your arse for a couple of hours and see if you've still got the same opinion. Whilst his mates are sitting around jerking off and laughing at you. And then demanding you spit ping pong balls out of your newly enlarged arsehole.

Is this the interpretation you arrived at from my post?

If so, then your answer to me becomes understandable.

However, you took a wrong turning with that interpretation.