protect women, or legalise prostitutes activities...

[Long Duck Dong]

found this during a random surf of the net..... and I have copied parts of it, here is the full article

new canadian ruling (http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/867332--prostitution-laws-struck-down)

A Toronto judge has struck down Canada’s prostitution laws, saying provisions meant to protect women and residential neighbourhoods are endangering sex workers’ lives.

If Justice Susan Himel’s decision stands, prostitutes will be able to communicate freely with customers on the street, conduct business in their homes or brothels and hire bodyguards and accountants without exposing them to the risk of criminal sanctions.

Himel found Criminal Code prohibitions against keeping a common bawdy house, living on the avails of prostitution and communicating for the purposes of the trade violated the women’s Charter rights to freedom of expression and security of the person.




now this is interesting.... its a infringement of a person rights if they are denied the right to sell their body for sex......
but prostitution is regarded as emotional / mental abuse and mistreatment of a female by many people and its believed that prostitution should be illegal to stop females being pushed into it

so you give females the rights to sell themselves as part of their rights of expression..... yet in doing so, you are allowing them to degrade themselves and be treated like pieces of meat.........

gotta love the rights of people to express themselves, versus their rights not to be mistreated, v's their right not to be treated like sex objects and sexually harassed v's their right to express themselves sexually in activities such as BDSM ( which can involve beating, whipping and other forms of consentual inflicting of pain and humiliation )

[darkeyes]

It is precisely because prostitution is either illegal, or as in the UK made so difficult to do business that so many women and girls, and many young boys are abused and pulled into the profession, to be considered and treated just as u say say Duckie. Legalising it properly, and regulating it is the only way women will ever get the protection they need while working their profession. It is not for us to say what a woman does with her body.. if she wishes to sell it to make a living then she should be able to do so.. as should any men who decide to go down that route.

Yes its true.. women who are prostitutes are considered just so much meat.. less than human almost and certainly no a person people would like their sons to marry. But isnt this so every night that men go out on the prowl? Many men consider women just so whatever the circumstances. I know several women who are prostitutes. I couldnt do their job for all the tea in China, yet believe they should be able to do as they wish with their bodies, legally and safely, and not be judged as somehow less because of what they do.

That it should be regulated and controlled, the women who ply their profession contributing their tax just like anyone else as either as a self employed person or an employee of for instance the bawdy house of which you spoke but two issues to be considered and provided for, as well as health checks, and as with every other worker in any profession or job, given the rights and protections as provided by law. They are human beings, and just as we do not or should not restrict peoples freedom of speech, we should not censor what they read, we should not restrict or censor what they do... most abuse of prostitutes comes because of illegality.. much slavery is because of illegality.. the illegality of prostitution doesnt protect women or men who are prostitutes.. rather it encourages their misery and abuse and loss of freedom...

[danreidbarmi]

Isn't every profession, to one degree or another, a form of prostitution, and therefore degrading in it's own way? To sell one's body for sex is the ultimate career prototype. Certainly, it takes a damaged or desperate soul to engage in such commerce. But, I can't say that working at Walmart for minimum wage offers a hell of a lot more in the self-esteem department (actually, I don't think Walmart has a self-esteem dept. lol).

Victimless activities (drugs or prostitution) should not be criminalized on moral grounds. The double speak is that moralists claim that the perpetrators of prostitution are actually the victims of the crime, that potential prostitutes need to be protected from the inherent dangers of the profession by making it illegal. But, is being a coal miner any less dangerous? Why are those that do other extremely risky and essential jobs not protected for the same reason?

If prostitution (and drugs) were to be legalized, regulated, and taxed, there would be far less crime, far fewer STDs, and prostitutes and drug addicts would not suffer the kind of negative stigma that kills self-esteem. Hooray for the Canadian judge. Her courageous decision is a huge step toward a more sane and just world.

[tenni]

Prostitution has been legal in Canada for many years. A woman or man may legally accept money for sexual services. However, almost everything connected to it was declared illegal (soliciting being the biggest). Those that think that prostitution is regarded as "emotional / mental abuse and mistreatment of a female by many people and its believed that prostitution should be illegal to stop females being pushed into it" are in direct conflict with many Canadian sex trade workers and ignoring that males are also sex trade workers. Ignoring that aspect makes a person appear either ignorant of male sex workers or a bit paternalistic and sexist? (protect female sex trade workers?) The term "sex trade worker" has become the more acceptable term in many parts of Canada rather than prostitute. I must admit that my own personal experience in my family does tend to agree with the idea that sex trade workers are more inclined to have an abusive background. Sex Trade workers unions and activist disagree. This includes domanatrices(sp?).

The present laws connected to prostitution in my province were thrown out this week. One case that came to the bench the next day was immediately dismissed. Discussion in the media is presently bringing up ideas that each municipality will create bylaws as far as licensing etc. There is commentary that the expense of such licenses and the invasiveness may drive many sex trade workers underground again. Our neocon federal government will do their damndest to come up with another law (I suspect).

The issue of the neighbourhoods where sex trade workers work the streets is an interesting one. The rights of the people in the neighbourhood versus the rights of sex trade workers to ply their trade makes the two at odds. This has been so for a long time and the removal of the prostitution laws make it even a greater problem now. I'm not sure if our Charter or Rights and Freedoms have come in to impact the cancelling of these laws. (think so though) It is the same Charter that gave same sex people the legal right to marry and so those that state and believe that prostitution is mental abuse should sit back and speak with activist Canadian sex trade workers.

[Long Duck Dong]

on here in NZ, prostitution is legal, but its controlled, you have to be registered as a sex worker, and things like street walking are not allowed....

I remember thinking about it appeared on the surface to be better protection for sex workers.... but a lot of the comments by the government about the legalising, referred to taxes and bring it in line with other forms of work.....

at that stage the government expected to make 200 mill a year in taxes.....

what actually was the cost never went up to the client ( average rate is $120 a hour ).... but the brothel still took 40-50%, then the worker paid tax and got what was left......

so all the BS about protecting the sex workers and making their industry safer..... was mostly not true......

sex workers were already covered under existing nz laws that protected a female regardless of what she was doing and that was more cases of domestic violence against females, than attacks on sex workers.....

so i am gonna watch the further events of this ruling in canada to see if they are doing something different and handling things differently

[tenni]

Laws and rulings like this are good in theory. In reality they are not going to actually protect any prostitutes or whores from what goes on when one is a prostitute.

They are not going to stop prostitutes and whores from being beat up, from being robbed, not going to protect them from being date raped or have worse things done to them by their clients.

These laws and rulings by judges are not going to protect the whores and prostitutes from working in a massage parlor or brothel and having that place take most of the money, from any illegal drugs that are given in trade for sex or to help the prostitutes out who are addicted to such drugs, and they are not going to give prostitutes and whores any self worth or help them get out of the viscous cycle of selling their body for sex.

I think that you need to remember that you are judging by your country's legal system and your Bill of Rights. Our Charter does act much more powerfully than the US Bill of Rights at times.

Sex Trade workers are stating that it is their belief that the removal of these law will help protect them as far as laying charges should the things that you mention happen to them. Even though prostitution was legal, the laws surrounding it made it difficult for the sex trade worker to approach the police. Even before these laws were rescinded, sex trade workers could lay charges for rape etc. However, there seems to be several? categories of sex trade workers. The sex trade workers who went to court to have these laws removed and the ones who are drug addicts are two types. I've heard a documentary discussing how difficult it was to get a sex trade worker to show up in court if charges are laid for rape etc. The example was a drug addicted sex trade worker. As you stated, in theory that removal of the laws should make it less of a problem in Ontario now. I find it interesting that you are making these judgments and your opinion contradicts the sex trade workers in Ontario.

[Long Duck Dong]

you raise a interesting issue tenni, I know with a few cases of rape and sexual assault in nz, that the defence has argued that the sex worker placed them self in a situation of allowing a client to pay for a service that the sex worker has allowed, then claimed they denied the client the service they paid for......

I know that the ruling is NO means NO, but if a client is offered a service, pays for a service and then is denied any aspect of the service, its a breach of the sales and service law..... yet the same law doesn't extend to sex workers.....

they have the right to deny any aspect of the service to the client at any time... so why offer a service if you are not going to deliever the service offered....
its actually a form of fraud by deception, but again, sex workers are exempt from that law.....

so the hard part comes from the sex worker having to prove that they offered a service, were paid for it, provided the service, yet were violated while providing the service they offered, by means of the client using the services they were offered and paid for.....

there have been cases of successful rape prosecutions against males for raping a female, but they have been cases when its clear cut, the sex worker has not accepted any money, nor agreed to providing a service and stated that no service is being offered......

recently there was a interesting case where a sex worker was paid over 200K for services rendered on a on going basis over a few years, but the client had embezzled the money he paid her, from a business, so the prostitute was ordered to repay all the money recieved even tho she was not involved in any way in the embezzling.........and this was done under the proceeds of crime act......

so not only did the sex worker get screwed by the client, but she got screwed by the law, and screwed by the clients actions......
now most offenders are ordered to repay any funds gained by fraud.....so this case was a first in NZ...... interesting thing to note, was there was another sex worker who also recieved about 100K from the same client, and she is allowed to keep her money.......

so yeah, even with prostitution being legal in nz, and all the protections and stuff for them, they are still not safe... cos even the legal system will screw them over if it can....... and its still something that I can not believe, happened

[falcondfw]

darkeyes, I don't know your friends. But i have several of my own. All of them claim they chose "the profession". But when you dig down deep, they "chose" it, because it would make them money and they did not know of or did not believe they could make it another way.

These women were Forced into it because of economics . they made stupid choices, yes (not to finish their education), but they should not be punished for a mistake this way.

Several were gang raped. And that was the mildest form of abuse they suffered. Many were forced to not use condoms and became pregnant by their rapists, furthering their humiliation, because they live in a country that does not believe in abortion and that adores children.

There is no reason to legalize it. There is no reason to continue the trade. It is simply an abusive, disgusting relationship that takes good, decent young women and absolutely destroys their minds. I have watched what it does over and over. I have helped people recover from it. The damage ... is indescribable. Am I a shrink? no. Just a concerned friend. If you truly have friends in the business and you do nothing to get them out ...

[DuckiesDarling]

It's an interesting conundrum, legalising prostitution would give some protection to women and the men that engage in that profession. But would it stop abuses that have been described? No. The thing is over history prostitution has been viewed as a victimless crime yet when many serial killers get started their first choice of victims are prostitutes.

Legalising would give them more protection than walking the streets. It would allow them to have a place of business and take security precautions. But in the end it's mostly about money isn't it? They can't stop this crime so legalising is a government's way of getting their hands on the money.

[falcondfw]

It's an interesting conundrum, legalising prostitution would give some protection to women and the men that engage in that profession. But would it stop abuses that have been described? No. The thing is over history prostitution has been viewed as a victimless crime yet when many serial killers get started their first choice of victims are prostitutes.

Legalising would give them more protection than walking the streets. It would allow them to have a place of business and take security precautions. But in the end it's mostly about money isn't it? They can't stop this crime so legalising is a government's way of getting their hands on the money.

DAMN! Duckie, you nailed it! that is EXACTLY what all this legalizing talk is about. So the government can tax things. they could give a rats a$$ about the people involved, as long as they get their taxes. That's why this talk of legal marijuana is such a joke.

[tenni]

I think that there is more than one reason why a person turns to prostitution. I am inclined to believe from seeing a person in my family turn to prostitution that some enter it for the wrong reasons. Some are damaged from abusive backgrounds. Even when they leave the trade, I suspect that they continue to make decisions that are self damaging. I think that others enter and remain in the trade making wise decisions or at least not self destructive like the first group. I think that those who make self destructive decisions would do so whether they were in the trade or not.

Why not legalize it? I see no reason not to.

[falcondfw]

I think that there is more than one reason why a person turns to prostitution. I am inclined to believe from seeing a person in my family turn to prostitution that some enter it for the wrong reasons. Some are damaged from abusive backgrounds. Even when they leave the trade, I suspect that they continue to make decisions that are self damaging. I think that others enter and remain in the trade making wise decisions or at least not self destructive like the first group. I think that those who make self destructive decisions would do so whether they were in the trade or not.

Why not legalize it? I see no reason not to.

Tenni, I feel for you. I have been there, seen that, and done that. You are right. Many enter into it for the wrong reasons.And many have abusive backgrounds. The woman i am most specifically thinking of had no sexual abuse in her background. But her mother tried to kill her when she was 7. By drowning. She made the decision to get into first web camming, then the bars, because her papa was sick with cancer and her siblings would do nothing to help. They claimed they could not, but there is always a way if you truly want to find one. She did it to pay for her father's cancer treatments. but she and her family had waited too long. Papa died after only 5 months. But in the meantime, her mother had become sick with diabetes. So, she continued to buy her mother's meds, while her 9 siblings did nothing.
She did not know another way. She made the mistake of leaving school when she was in her freshman year in high school. Where she is from, the bars are seen as a way out.
I cannot speak of what she was put through. Honestly, i cannot deal with it.
She is no longer part of that world. She says it is because I made her see what was happening to her.
She recently was very short of money. She walked in the bar thinking she could earn some quick money. She threw up before she walked out. She has transformed into the woman I knew she was. She is disgusted by what she used to do. And she knows now that there is a better way. i am so proud of her for her growth.
People can recover from this life if they are given the right support.

[AidanS57]

I've never used a prostitute but I have been tempted at times. What stopped me was the seediness of it. If it was legalized and more of a business who knows if I would or not.

[eddy10]

Just to lighten things up a bit ...
Prostitution is the "2nd" oldest profession.
Sales is the oldest.
She/he had to make the sale first.
:):):)

[innaminka]

I've always considered that prostitution should be completely legal.
If it was - including soliciting - there would a good chance the criminal element would disapear.
Crime thrives on providing what you can't have!!!

I only know one woman who was a prostitute. She is a close friend.
20 years ago she worked 3 nights a week for a year, in a brothel to help pay for her Uni Degree. (B. Comm)
Passed with credits and said she had a wonderful time as an escort.

She now runs a very successful childcare centre.

Legaluise completely, I say!

[darkeyes]

DAMN! Duckie, you nailed it! that is EXACTLY what all this legalizing talk is about. So the government can tax things. they could give a rats a$$ about the people involved, as long as they get their taxes. That's why this talk of legal marijuana is such a joke.

..an what bollox this is.. it isnt about collecting tax.. if it was simply that it would have been made respectable decades ago.. it is whether or not people have the freedom and the right to have control over their own bodies as much as anything. Prostitution laws in the anglo saxon world are such that the vast majority of women involved in the profession dont have that.. they and their use of their bodies, and the earnings from their clients are controlled almost entirely by pimps and organisations which are less than savoury.. the cost of policing and supressing prostitution is prohibitive.. the time and effort put into the supression performs no service to women or to society as a whole, except to take those resources away from areas where they could be much better devoted.

From eastern Europe and other parts of the world hundreds of thousands of girls disappear into the morass of illegal prostitution throughout Europe, controlled and enslaved by unscrupulous bastards and criminal organisations for profit, to help spread narcotics around the population and money laundering which are but a few of the criminal activities which illegality of the oldest profession brings upon our society.. apart from deprivation of liberty, many are murdered and disappear and are treated as nothing more than cattle.. to be used and abused as a few nasty bastards see fit. Thousands of young girls (and boys) disappear from the streets of Britain and Europe (and no doubt the US) and live similar lives, addicted to drugs and made to work whether healthy or otherwise, whenever they are told. They have NO freedom of action whatever until such times as they are felt of no further use to the pimps and bastards who are their masters. They see little or nothing of their earnings. Even those who are "lucky" enough to work independently are harrassed and beaten, treated as inhuman by our society.

Making prostitution legal, or in the case of the UK acceptable and providing the conditions where it is not forced underground since it is already legal, and bringing the profession properly into the workforce and giving it the proper protections of employment law, health and saftey law is a necessary step tp providing protection and some dignity to those people. How they make their living will no longer be at the mercy of unscrupulous criminal gangs and individuals who treat them as nothing, but to themeselves, and they will either as proeprly self employed individuals, or as employees be ggiven the same rights and privileges of the rest of the workforce. Yes Duckie you are right.. in brothels the company running the brothel will take probably half what is earned.. and yes the girls will pay tax.. but they will pay tax on their rate of pay whatever that is as agreed between them and there employer.. like everyone else who is employed in society.. and the employer who runs the brothel will be taxed on the earnings of his company.. like every other company throughout society. Emploeyers will have to operate within legally binding guidelines and a vast amount of coercion will disappear. The workers will be given access to the law in respect of employment rights, arbitration, unfair dismissal and discrimination at work. In a funny way.. they will even have some sort of career prospects.. they will be entitled to holiday pay and a minumum amount of leave, public holidays, sick pay, unemployment benefits, a maximum working week (in Europe). possibly overtime pay.. Trade Union rights if that is what they wish.. a whole new word would potentially open up for them. Prospects for a pension.

Legalisation will not end the misery of all.. but it will for most.. there will still be prostitution outwith the law.. just as there are illegal sweatshops and other business doing much more mundane things in our society.. there will still be abuse and enslavement..just like in other more "respectable" areas of our society.. legalisation is not a panacea.. but it is a far far better way than how it is dealt with at present.. and will allow our societies to devote much more time, resources and energy into areas where that time, resources and energy would be better deployed.

This is in part a question not of morality but of prejudice.. the good old anglo saxon prejudice against woman in particular having complete control over herself. it is a question of freedom and allowing people the liberty to use their bodies as they see fit, not society. It is a question of beginning to provide a dignity and a greater element of safety for those employed in the profession.. it is about rights and not thinking that they bhave none and are less than human.. it is about removing from our societies the conditions where hundreds of thousands of young girls and boys disappear and are enslaved every year from the cities, farms and villages of the world. It is about remving from our societies a vast area of criminality which we need no have.

[DuckiesDarling]

Long and short of it, Fran, you are wrong on this. Legalising prostitution will not guarantee any of the things you say. It's not a 9-5 job, you get paid to sleep with people not overtime no holiday pay and even if you screw two at once you are not guaranteed double pay.

[Long Duck Dong]

The workers will be given access to the law in respect of employment rights, arbitration, unfair dismissal and discrimination at work. In a funny way.. they will even have some sort of career prospects.. they will be entitled to holiday pay and a minumum amount of leave, public holidays, sick pay, unemployment benefits, a maximum working week (in Europe). possibly overtime pay.. Trade Union rights if that is what they wish.. a whole new word would potentially open up for them. Prospects for a pension.



but.... do they get references if they change employers,...and who writes them ?

how would a employer work out if their employee is any good at the job ??? by the number of clients they get....and is it legal to fire a employer for slacking off and not doing their job, where there are not clients......

is the employer going to offer a a satisfaction or your money back, guarantee ?

i really have to know.... are the employees allowed to have work place insurance in case they are made redundant from their jobs ???

and what are the terms for unfair dismissal ??? the employee failed to perform to a reasonable standard and fulfill their work quote

do they get offered a performance bonus for exceeding productivity quidelines ???

sorry, I am bloody near in tears from laughter here....

[falcondfw]

I totally agree with Duckies.
Darkeyes, it is not bollox. It is a fact. Governments could give a rats A$$ about the people involved in this. They just see it as a revenue source. And as a way to gain power over those involved in the trade. If you believe anything else, you are delusional. It is all about the money and money is power. Show me a government that truly has the wellfare of their citizens in mind. Show me a government that will not do ANYTHING to keep or gain power or money. Don't bother. I know you can't. That government does not exist.
If we legalize prostitution, the syndicates will go underground to use and abuse women and the women will enable them to, because many see it as their only way out.
Dark, I feel for you, because I think you have been involved in trying to help these women, as I have (just from your posts). But as long as there are animals that seek this kind of sex, there will be evil people that will take advantage of these women and will promise them the moon to get them to take their clothes off. And the women will continue to believe in the false promise that the bars and prostitution are "the way out".
If you truly want to understand this problem you need to talk with Father Shay Cullen in the Philippines. I disagree with much of his politics, but the work he is trying to do to help sex workers in the former subic bay area is ... just fantastic. He fights for EVERY kid. EVERY worker. He is there and sees what happens. I may disagree with some of his politics, but his heart has won tremendous respect from me.
I am not so familiar with the former Eastern Europe, but I have heard stories. Honestly, it breaks my heart. But if you feel legalizing it will get these women protection, you are sadly mistaken.

[falcondfw]

Long Duck,
This is a serious issue and needs to be treated that way. There is no room for levity in this issue, not when you have known people involved in it and seen what it did to them.

[Long Duck Dong]

Long Duck,
This is a serious issue and needs to be treated that way. There is no room for levity in this issue, not when you have known people involved in it and seen what it did to them.

no laughter, no humour, no mirth, only doom and gloom, aye aye sir.....

oh sir, can i play the violin for added dismal effect in the thread I started about this issue.... and should i leave out the positive side of sex working... and stick with the * poor victims * stance ????

if you do not like what I post, put me on ignore.....

[falcondfw]

Stop being an A$$.
If you think there is something funny in this issue, then you obviously have no experience with the issue or with women involved in it (except maybe as a customer).
People like you are the reason why people like me and others (who might actually have experience with the issue) don't post.
If you want a web site that dies on the vine, keep ridiculing people who post seriously on issues and actually try to do good in the world.
I hope no one you know is ever involved in this life and you can keep your humorous, child-like outlook on life.
Those of us who live in the real world know the truth.
Your mama is calling you up from the basement junior.

[DuckiesDarling]

Falcon, he was amused at Fran's take on prostitution in what he quoted, lighten up. We know this is a serious issue but the way Fran put it about having benefits did make me laugh as well.

[falcondfw]

Ok duckies. Stepping down. I am sorry. i guess I am just too close to the issue. Sorry long duck.

[Long Duck Dong]

read my post history, falcon, I have experience as a counsellor and therapist, ( now retired ).... so I know a dammed site more than most people in the site when it comes to dealing with sex workers and victims of sexual abuse....
so I would suggest that you take your 3 friends and their experiences and stick to posting about that, not telling me what I can and can not say in the forum.... cos I have done over 8,000 individual cases with sex workers...


the reason I started the bloody thread is cos I took the matter seriously, cos the same thing happened in NZ..... and a lot of the claims like you make of the syndicates taking it over, never happened...... so i am interested in what canada will do with the court ruling and the outcome.....

[tenni]

Long and short of it, Fran, you are wrong on this. Legalising prostitution will not guarantee any of the things you say. It's not a 9-5 job, you get paid to sleep with people not overtime no holiday pay and even if you screw two at once you are not guaranteed double pay.

There are very few "guarantees" in life. The question for me is what benefit does criminalizing a sexual act for pay create?

To write that another poster is wrong and give no evidence to support your view seems a very weak position.

9 to 5 job
There are many jobs that are not 9-5. Sex trade workers get to determine their hours of work if they have a independent business. If they work for a house, the shift is negotiated. Workers would have the same legal rights as any other worker in Canada as far as their hours of work. This is not a point against legal prostitution.

Holiday Pay
As far as commenting on holiday pay, if the person is self employed I don't believe that they receive holiday pay in my country which is the source of this thread. If prostitution was legal and the sex trade worker worked for a company then yes the sex trade worker's company would be required by law to pay holiday pay by Canadian law.

Overtime
Self employed people do not receive overtime in Canada. Laws dealing with overtime of a country would come into effect if prostitution was legal.

Screw two at once no double pay
I'm not quite clear on what this means but a self employed person sets their own rate for services whether they are carpenter, repairman or sex trade worker. In a free market place, the client decides whether those service fees are worth it. If you have ever watched televised programmes about the sex trade workers in Nevada, you see that there is a menu of sexual services that the house presents. I'm not sure whether the sex trade worker sets her own rate or that is negotiated between the client and the sex trade worker. I have seen on the programme that clients may request specific numbers of workers to service them. All types of fantasies are dealt with and the rate of service seem to be decided between the worker and client.

[tenni]

Falcon, he was amused at Fran's take on prostitution in what he quoted, lighten up. We know this is a serious issue but the way Fran put it about having benefits did make me laugh as well.

It is interesting that you feel the need to come to the aid of your partner. This happens over and over again and you are the only "couple" to act in this manner on this site. I recall you posting that you could defend yourself and didn't need him to come to your defense. He is an adult. Let him explain or defend his own posts. This constant going about supporting/defending each other in threads is deceptive.

The fact that you find the way that Fran's explanation of the benefits of legalization of prostitution funny and how you are explaining your position indicates to me that you have personal issues without logic. The fact that you find an explanation "funny" may indicate a certain narrow minded hang up about sex for pay.

[DuckiesDarling]

No, Tenni, I simply thought Fran's ideals for even legalised work of a prostitute were funny. It doesn't happen that way even in countries where it's legal. There is no 401K or other retirement plan except what these women manage to put away for themselves. It's not a glamourous life, it's a job they do to put food on table and make ends meet in the only way they know how. I do not find humor in women forced by circumstances to sell themselves, I do find humor in an idealist's take on what a legal job of prostitution would be. See the difference?

[falcondfw]

No, Tenni, I simply thought Fran's ideals for even legalised work of a prostitute were funny. It doesn't happen that way even in countries where it's legal. There is no 401K or other retirement plan except what these women manage to put away for themselves. It's not a glamourous life, it's a job they do to put food on table and make ends meet in the only way they know how. I do not find humor in women forced by circumstances to sell themselves, I do find humor in an idealist's take on what a legal job of prostitution would be. See the difference?

I see duckie, but it still makes me cry. ok. no guessing about it. I am WAY too close to the issue.

[Long Duck Dong]

It is interesting that you feel the need to come to the aid of your partner. This happens over and over again and you are the only "couple" to act in this manner on this site. I recall you posting that you could defend yourself and didn't need him to come to your defense. He is an adult. Let him explain or defend his own posts. This constant going about supporting/defending each other in threads is deceptive.

The fact that you find the way that Fran's explanation of the benefits of legalization of prostitution funny and how you are explaining your position indicates to me that you have personal issues without logic. The fact that you find an explanation "funny" may indicate a certain narrow minded hang up about sex for pay.

most couples share accounts, very few have separate accounts.....
DD has a opinion, I have a opinion..... we have seperate computers in seperate countries..... and we have seperate accounts.......

now to my knowledge, that has nothing to do with the subject, or the subject matter..... and having a opinion concerning posts in the forum is not rule breaking unless its a personal attack etc......

but yet again, we have tenni against the straight female for having a opinion in the site and this is not the first time that you have done this tenni.....
remember the other female that quit the site due to your pursing her with your lil games.......

so let it go...... or take it to the other thread that was started over you suggesting that DD did not express her opinion so much in a bisexual site cos she was a straight female

[darkeyes]

Falcon, he was amused at Fran's take on prostitution in what he quoted, lighten up. We know this is a serious issue but the way Fran put it about having benefits did make me laugh as well.

I dont mind people laughing.. I can see why they do.. Im not offended by it... I was 16 when someone first put it to me in those terms and I laughed as well.. but I'm not 16 now and it doesnt make it any less ridiculous than how it operates now just about anywhere u care to mention Darling darling. I just want people to think seriously about it and try and overcome their prejudices and preconceptions..

[darkeyes]

read my post history, falcon, I have experience as a counsellor and therapist, ( now retired ).... so I know a dammed site more than most people in the site when it comes to dealing with sex workers and victims of sexual abuse....
so I would suggest that you take your 3 friends and their experiences and stick to posting about that, not telling me what I can and can not say in the forum.... cos I have done over 8,000 individual cases with sex workers...


the reason I started the bloody thread is cos I took the matter seriously, cos the same thing happened in NZ..... and a lot of the claims like you make of the syndicates taking it over, never happened...... so i am interested in what canada will do with the court ruling and the outcome.....

No one is trying to tell u what to say u daft bugger.. u have your opinion.. others theirs.. I take it seriously too Duckie.. very.. u dont live in Europe.. many prostitutes are independent of large scale organised crime.. but the fact is many are enslaved one way or another, many are kidnapped or lied to and persuaded to come west by promises of a better life.. and find themselves enslaved.. and most, independent or pimped or in a brotherl are considered so much shit..I have said it is not a panacea.. it is however better than what we, in Britain, and in most of Western Europe have now.. and the USA for that matter.. I have never said either that once legalised sydicates would take it over..although it is likely in centres of larger population such as Europe.. not necessarily criminal ones.. but they will be run as legitimate businesses.. criminals run legit businesses now which have nothing to do with the sex trade.. so nothing is impossiblethat is what I argue for...... ur country and mine are two different places... what I am arguing for is wherever we are, is for a civilised and decent way of allowing prostitutes to ply their trade and earn a living.

[darkeyes]

I totally agree with Duckies.
Darkeyes, it is not bollox. It is a fact. Governments could give a rats A$$ about the people involved in this. They just see it as a revenue source. And as a way to gain power over those involved in the trade. If you believe anything else, you are delusional. It is all about the money and money is power. Show me a government that truly has the wellfare of their citizens in mind. Show me a government that will not do ANYTHING to keep or gain power or money. Don't bother. I know you can't. That government does not exist.
If we legalize prostitution, the syndicates will go underground to use and abuse women and the women will enable them to, because many see it as their only way out.
Dark, I feel for you, because I think you have been involved in trying to help these women, as I have (just from your posts). But as long as there are animals that seek this kind of sex, there will be evil people that will take advantage of these women and will promise them the moon to get them to take their clothes off. And the women will continue to believe in the false promise that the bars and prostitution are "the way out".
If you truly want to understand this problem you need to talk with Father Shay Cullen in the Philippines. I disagree with much of his politics, but the work he is trying to do to help sex workers in the former subic bay area is ... just fantastic. He fights for EVERY kid. EVERY worker. He is there and sees what happens. I may disagree with some of his politics, but his heart has won tremendous respect from me.
I am not so familiar with the former Eastern Europe, but I have heard stories. Honestly, it breaks my heart. But if you feel legalizing it will get these women protection, you are sadly mistaken.

Until society recognises the rights of people to be themselves, to utiltise their talents and the right to use their bodies as they see fit, and earn a living as they wish without judgement and codnemnation then there will always be a stigma against prostitution.. it is this stigma which drives it underground.. not legality or illegalailty.. illegality exists because of the stigma..

When are we going to grow up, and accept the rights ofnpeople to be as they wish to be, and not as society and its hypocrisies wish them to be? Legalising or creating a famework where postitution can operate in the open is not perfect, just as no business is ever run perfectly.. I am no fool. But I believe that the creation of such a legal framework will improve the rights of these women and men no end. It will provide them with an element of security that does not exist at present. Time and a change in attitudes by our societies is what is required. We are trying to do that now for gay and bisexual people with considerable success.. there is a long way to go there too, but priogress has eben and continues to be made. It is up to all of us who have compassion for our fellow human beings to do the same when we see injustice wherever it exists. Prostitutes are an oppressed minority just as we were, and still to a great extent are. But at least in our case there has been a sea change in publlic attitudes in many countries.

There will always be corruption and criminal activiity, abuse of human ebings in every walk of life. Whether or not prostitution is legalised and becomes acceptable this will not change. What will change is the sheer scale of it. I have no issue whatever with someone selling their bodies for sex. many do it quite legally in other areas which do not involve the act of sex. What is so special and sacrosanct about the act of sex that we should prohibit its sale? Nothing whatever. Why it is looked down upon is because of the hypocrisies of our societies and religions. That is where the fault lies, and in our attitudes which have resulted because of them.

[tenni]

No, Tenni, I simply thought Fran's ideals for even legalised work of a prostitute were funny. It doesn't happen that way even in countries where it's legal. There is no 401K or other retirement plan except what these women manage to put away for themselves. It's not a glamourous life, it's a job they do to put food on table and make ends meet in the only way they know how. I do not find humor in women forced by circumstances to sell themselves, I do find humor in an idealist's take on what a legal job of prostitution would be. See the difference?

DD
I'm not quite sure what aspects of darkeyes post # 17 that you find too idealistic?

I'm uncertain as to what happens in the Netherlands and the sex trade workers in Amsterdam. Things have changed quite a bit over the decades and maybe what was once acceptable and sane has been degraded. I recall hearing that the workers were required by law to pass STD tests at regular intervals or they would lose their license. I recall that sex trade worker back a few decades who were from small villages didn't like their picture taken because their neighbours didn't know what they were doing. The villages were not as tolerant as the big city people.

[darkeyes]

DD
I'm not quite sure what aspects of darkeyes post # 17 that you find too idealistic?

I'm uncertain as to what happens in the Netherlands and the sex trade workers in Amsterdam. Things have changed quite a bit over the decades and maybe what was once acceptable and sane has been degraded. I recall hearing that the workers were required by law to pass STD tests at regular intervals or they would lose their license. I recall that sex trade worker back a few decades who were from small villages didn't like their picture taken because their neighbours didn't know what they were doing. The villages were not as tolerant as the big city people.

Its ok Tenni darlin'.. let them laugh.. not so long ago people used to laugh in exactly the same way about legalising homosexuality.. they can laugh all they like, that is their right. As long as they allow me to laugh at the dinosaur attitudes they display... one oppressed section of society has a bloody cheek to laugh at and dismiss another and wish it to be kept under a damp rock.. but that too is their right... I suppose.

[Long Duck Dong]

ok...... lol... as for why I laughed......

show me a prostitute that does a 40 hour week and I am refering to a 9 to 5 type aspect..... cos I have never met a prostitute that logs in a 9 am and promptly lays on their back, for the next 9 hours solid ( minus meal breaks ) with a guy between their legs, 5 days a week

sex work is a supply and demand job, and most brothel owners may have a sex worker on a retainer, but I have never met any sex worker that is paid a weekly wage for what she is not doing

unlike jobs like teachers etc, a sex worker doesn't go to work and think I have 9 clients today and tomorrow and the day after, some go to a brothel and hope that a client walks in waiting them or rings requesting them.... or if the sex worker works from home, that a client will make a booking.....

so things like unfair dismissal are harder to claim.... cos as a sex worker, you are not required to sleep with people, you offer a service with the right to decline.....
and claiming things like you were fired for failure to sleep with clients, is not unfair dismissal, ... if you engage a employer and agree to offer a service that you never follow thru with, then the employer has every right to fire you


anyways, what would I know, I only live in nz with the sex workers collective ( a form of sex workers union ) and I have a copy of the sex workers legal stature on my desk, and I know 3 brothel owners and many sex workers......
and none of the sex workers have the type of employment contract that darkeyes talks about........
and that is simply cos any employer that offers that type of contract to sex workers, is either drunk and stoned, or runs a brothel / escort agency with sex workers on retainer
even street walkers are paid for services rendered, so they have to hope they get clients... otherwise they do not get paid

and if a sex worker could be paid a hourly wage and never have to sleep with anybody for it..... then fuck it, I am becoming a sex worker too......... darkeyes, where can I sign up for that

[bisexual Bill]

ok...... lol... as for why I laughed......

show me a prostitute that does a 40 hour week and I am refering to a 9 to 5 type aspect..... cos I have never met a prostitute that logs in a 9 am and promptly lays on their back, for the next 9 hours solid ( minus meal breaks ) with a guy between their legs, 5 days a week

sex work is a supply and demand job, and most brothel owners may have a sex worker on a retainer, but I have never met any sex worker that is paid a weekly wage for what she is not doing

unlike jobs like teachers etc, a sex worker doesn't go to work and think I have 9 clients today and tomorrow and the day after, some go to a brothel and hope that a client walks in waiting them or rings requesting them.... or if the sex worker works from home, that a client will make a booking.....

so things like unfair dismissal are harder to claim.... cos as a sex worker, you are not required to sleep with people, you offer a service with the right to decline.....
and claiming things like you were fired for failure to sleep with clients, is not unfair dismissal, ... if you engage a employer and agree to offer a service that you never follow thru with, then the employer has every right to fire you


anyways, what would I know, I only live in nz with the sex workers collective ( a form of sex workers union ) and I have a copy of the sex workers legal stature on my desk, and I know 3 brothel owners and many sex workers......
and none of the sex workers have the type of employment contract that darkeyes talks about........
and that is simply cos any employer that offers that type of contract to sex workers, is either drunk and stoned, or runs a brothel / escort agency with sex workers on retainer
even street walkers are paid for services rendered, so they have to hope they get clients... otherwise they do not get paid

and if a sex worker could be paid a hourly wage and never have to sleep with anybody for it..... then fuck it, I am becoming a sex worker too......... darkeyes, where can I sign up for that


I agree with you.

I am friends with men and women who once were prostitutes. None of them did it as a lifetime job or a fulltime job for decades.

Meaning they did not start at age 18 as a legal adult and do it for 30-40 years until they were in their 50s. There was a lot of downtime and some days they were with a few johns in a day or night but this was not common. Most of the time they sat around waiting for clients to show up. Or they worked other jobs that actually paid more and gave them more benefits than having sex with strangers and established johns did.

Some would do it just to try it out and discovered they did not like prostitution or sex for pay. One of my friends did it when he was addicted to drugs and so he could have sex with lots of people. Actually more than a few of my friends were addicted to drugs while prostitutes. I'm not talking about just smoking pot every so often or on weekends or drinking too much just on weekends.

Others did it just while on vacation with people who they met in bars or online. Even the ones that were on the streets and homeless didn't do it for decades or the rest of their lives like Darkeyes wishes they would be able to do.

Even in countries such as the Netherlands and states like Nevada that have legalized prostitution or have brothels, prostitutes are not given all of the pointless benefits that darkeyes wrote about. It's not a fulltime or lifetime 9-5 job in those countries or in Nevada either.

From what all of my ex prostitute friends have told me even if you do have lots of johns you do not make a lot of money from it.

[darkeyes]

Even in countries such as the Netherlands and states like Nevada that have legalized prostitution or have brothels, prostitutes are not given all of the pointless benefits that darkeyes wrote about. It's not a fulltime or lifetime 9-5 job in those countries or in Nevada either.

From what all of my ex prostitute friends have told me even if you do have lots of johns you do not make a lot of money from it.

Because something is not, does not mean it should not and never shall be... and I have no doubt that whether legal or otherwise, the vast majority will never make a huge amount of money.. it is not a question of remuneration.. it is a question of what is right.

Some however do make a fair amount... escorts who sell sex as part of their offering, can make a more than goodly living at it. Quite legally too in this country. I know not all do sell sex, but many do.. of both genders. But most prostitutes are not escorts and most escorts I doubt, prostitutes..

[darkeyes]

Just a thought.. I have never ever taken money for my sexual favours.. I have however on a number of occasions been invited by both guys and girls for dirty weekends.. a couple of times even a longer break.. at their expense.. naughty times... fun and great enjoyment... does that mean I was a whore???? I suppose it does thinking about it... am not saying sex was conditional on the weekend or break.. but on at least some of those occasions it would never have happened otherwise..

[falcondfw]

Until society recognises the rights of people to be themselves, to utiltise their talents and the right to use their bodies as they see fit, and earn a living as they wish without judgement and codnemnation then there will always be a stigma against prostitution.. it is this stigma which drives it underground.. not legality or illegalailty.. illegality exists because of the stigma..

When are we going to grow up, and accept the rights ofnpeople to be as they wish to be, and not as society and its hypocrisies wish them to be? Legalising or creating a famework where postitution can operate in the open is not perfect, just as no business is ever run perfectly.. I am no fool. But I believe that the creation of such a legal framework will improve the rights of these women and men no end. It will provide them with an element of security that does not exist at present. Time and a change in attitudes by our societies is what is required. We are trying to do that now for gay and bisexual people with considerable success.. there is a long way to go there too, but priogress has eben and continues to be made. It is up to all of us who have compassion for our fellow human beings to do the same when we see injustice wherever it exists. Prostitutes are an oppressed minority just as we were, and still to a great extent are. But at least in our case there has been a sea change in publlic attitudes in many countries.

There will always be corruption and criminal activiity, abuse of human ebings in every walk of life. Whether or not prostitution is legalised and becomes acceptable this will not change. What will change is the sheer scale of it. I have no issue whatever with someone selling their bodies for sex. many do it quite legally in other areas which do not involve the act of sex. What is so special and sacrosanct about the act of sex that we should prohibit its sale? Nothing whatever. Why it is looked down upon is because of the hypocrisies of our societies and religions. That is where the fault lies, and in our attitudes which have resulted because of them.

Dark,
Society has nothing to do with it. Whether you legalize it or not, there will still be a$$holes who will find a way to take advantage of theses women and their economic situations.
In many ways, we live in a predatory society. This is one of those ways.
Legalized or not, women will still be taken advantage of in this situation and will still be used and abused. Many countries have absolutely no protection for the women in this trade. Once they take a "customer" home, he can beat the snot out of them, rape them, even kill them and no one is there to stop it or care.
The problem is not legal or illegal. The problem is the thought process of the men who patronize this "business". Until that changes (and it never will), there needs to be some form of protection for these women.
Legalization is not protection, as many cops in the countries I am talking about arrest a prostitute or bargirl and then force her to perform.

[falcondfw]

I agree with you.

I am friends with men and women who once were prostitutes. None of them did it as a lifetime job or a fulltime job for decades.

Meaning they did not start at age 18 as a legal adult and do it for 30-40 years until they were in their 50s. There was a lot of downtime and some days they were with a few johns in a day or night but this was not common. Most of the time they sat around waiting for clients to show up. Or they worked other jobs that actually paid more and gave them more benefits than having sex with strangers and established johns did.

Some would do it just to try it out and discovered they did not like prostitution or sex for pay. One of my friends did it when he was addicted to drugs and so he could have sex with lots of people. Actually more than a few of my friends were addicted to drugs while prostitutes. I'm not talking about just smoking pot every so often or on weekends or drinking too much just on weekends.

Others did it just while on vacation with people who they met in bars or online. Even the ones that were on the streets and homeless didn't do it for decades or the rest of their lives like Darkeyes wishes they would be able to do.

Even in countries such as the Netherlands and states like Nevada that have legalized prostitution or have brothels, prostitutes are not given all of the pointless benefits that darkeyes wrote about. It's not a fulltime or lifetime 9-5 job in those countries or in Nevada either.

From what all of my ex prostitute friends have told me even if you do have lots of johns you do not make a lot of money from it.

Bill,
In the countries I am talking about, they don't make a ton of money, but they make FAR more than they would get through a legitimate job.
That is what attracts them initially. A relative needs chemo or insulin. They see the bars and the pick-up spots as an easy, quick way to get the money needed. They tell themselves it is only so they can pay for the chemo treatment, but they end up staying for years, because of the easy money for whatever.

[falcondfw]

Just a thought.. I have never ever taken money for my sexual favours.. I have however on a number of occasions been invited by both guys and girls for dirty weekends.. a couple of times even a longer break.. at their expense.. naughty times... fun and great enjoyment... does that mean I was a whore???? I suppose it does thinking about it... am not saying sex was conditional on the weekend or break.. but on at least some of those occasions it would never have happened otherwise..

No dark.
I will go back to the classic definition.
A whore gets paid.
A slut does not.
You did not. Hence, you are a slut, not a whore.
Wear the slut title with pride. I would. lol.

[falcondfw]

ok...... lol... as for why I laughed......

show me a prostitute that does a 40 hour week and I am refering to a 9 to 5 type aspect..... cos I have never met a prostitute that logs in a 9 am and promptly lays on their back, for the next 9 hours solid ( minus meal breaks ) with a guy between their legs, 5 days a week

sex work is a supply and demand job, and most brothel owners may have a sex worker on a retainer, but I have never met any sex worker that is paid a weekly wage for what she is not doing

unlike jobs like teachers etc, a sex worker doesn't go to work and think I have 9 clients today and tomorrow and the day after, some go to a brothel and hope that a client walks in waiting them or rings requesting them.... or if the sex worker works from home, that a client will make a booking.....

so things like unfair dismissal are harder to claim.... cos as a sex worker, you are not required to sleep with people, you offer a service with the right to decline.....
and claiming things like you were fired for failure to sleep with clients, is not unfair dismissal, ... if you engage a employer and agree to offer a service that you never follow thru with, then the employer has every right to fire you


anyways, what would I know, I only live in nz with the sex workers collective ( a form of sex workers union ) and I have a copy of the sex workers legal stature on my desk, and I know 3 brothel owners and many sex workers......
and none of the sex workers have the type of employment contract that darkeyes talks about........
and that is simply cos any employer that offers that type of contract to sex workers, is either drunk and stoned, or runs a brothel / escort agency with sex workers on retainer
even street walkers are paid for services rendered, so they have to hope they get clients... otherwise they do not get paid

and if a sex worker could be paid a hourly wage and never have to sleep with anybody for it..... then fuck it, I am becoming a sex worker too......... darkeyes, where can I sign up for that

LDD,
I agree with you that what Dark proposes is unrealistic.
However, you live in a country where, by your own admission, the sex trade is unionized, etc.
I am talking about countries where that is not the case - Thailand, The Philippines. There is absolutely no protection for the women in those countries and when they try to get out of the trade, they are harassed by the bars and madams and customers they used to work for.
Many of the women I know keep quite busy in those countries. 3 or 4 customers per night. And that does not go into the customers they get during the day, if they are up to working after their night.
Until society changes thought processes, the animals that prey on these women will continue. And every last one of them needs some Texas Justice.

[tenni]

Dark,

The problem is not legal or illegal. The problem is the thought process of the men who patronize this "business". Until that changes (and it never will), there needs to be some form of protection for these women.
Legalization is not protection, as many cops in the countries I am talking about arrest a prostitute or bargirl and then force her to perform.

What I do not understand about your thoughts is how does criminalizing prostitution protect women?

As far as a cop arresting a bargirl and then forcing her to perform, the cop may only arrest a person for doing what is illegal. If prostitution was not criminalized the cop would be held more accountable. Your views about the police are a bit telling though. I agree that the attitudes of men towards female (and male?) prostitution that they may do whatever they want sexually to the person is an issue. If they were able to think that they are paying for a service and the sex trade worker agreed to give that service and nothing more then it may work better.

An issue may be that something must click in a client's mind to think that they may do anything to the sex trade worker even if the worker has not agreed. More than not, the client who beats and kills a sex trade worker is raping and has/will do this to a person who is not offering sexual services. They are murders plain and simple. That issue may be a separate issue from prostitution. The mixing that you write about is more about violence entering into sexual activity and not sexual activity itself. Clients of a barber hair stylist or massage therapist do not go about beating and killing the stylists or theraputic massage therapist. Why not? They are paying for a service to be done to their body and do not consider that they "own" the stylist or theraputic massage therapist and may do whatever they want to the stylist. In fact, both a hair stylist and massage therapist place their hands on the body of their clients. In the case of the registered massage therapist, it is a rather intimate service. In the sex trade of rub and tug, sex enters into it and genitals are touched. In my country, I don't think that is illegal..well now everything is legal until laws are revised one way or other. Beating and rape are not though and so the laws will still protect anyone (sex trade worker or virgin nun). It will not stop rapists or murders from doing it but it will give consequences for doing it. It is the attitude of the client that sets up the problems that you refer to. I agree. It may be that something is being done to their body rather than using the server's body? It is the society's laws that also have separate prostitution from licensed massage therapists and hair stylists.

[falcondfw]

What I do not understand about your thoughts is how does criminalizing prostitution protect women?

As far as a cop arresting a bargirl and then forcing her to perform, the cop may only arrest a person for doing what is illegal. If prostitution was not criminalized the cop would be held more accountable. Your views about the police are a bit telling though. I agree that the attitudes of men towards female (and male?) prostitution that they may do whatever they want sexually to the person is an issue. If they were able to think that they are paying for a service and the sex trade worker agreed to give that service and nothing more then it may work better.

An issue may be that something must click in a client's mind to think that they may do anything to the sex trade worker even if the worker has not agreed. More than not, the client who beats and kills a sex trade worker is raping and has/will do this to a person who is not offering sexual services. They are murders plain and simple. That issue may be a separate issue from prostitution. The mixing that you write about is more about violence entering into sexual activity and not sexual activity itself.

My views do not protect women, but they keep the punishment in there for those who mistreat these women. Legalize prostitution and you have a simple assault case. Don't legalize it and you have assault committed in the commission of another crime and these jerks go to jail.

These women will never be protected until society changes their views on these women. These are not seedy, disgusting people. These are people trying to survive the only way they know how.

As for my views on cops, I honestly love cops, but not in the countries I am talking about. In those countries, they are extremely corrupt. The cops in this country, for the most part, should have their praises sung from the top of the sears tower in Chicago.

The sex trade worker would agree to give that service regardless, whether it is because she needs money for her family, she loves her boyfriend too much, or her pimp beats the snot out of her. There are many forms of coersion. And yes, there are some who would agree to give the service, because they enjoy it.

Yes, idiots who beat up sex workers or murder them are simply committing murder, But what if they don't kill the girls? What if they just beat the girls to within an inch of their lives? Or what if they just rape the girls? The girls will be too frightened to report the animal and he will get away with it. Get off on the power trip. Legalizing prostitution will not change this behavior for these animals. They simply need to be eradicated.

[tenni]

My views do not protect women, but they keep the punishment in there for those who mistreat these women. Legalize prostitution and you have a simple assault case. Don't legalize it and you have assault committed in the commission of another crime and these jerks go to jail.

These women will never be protected until society changes their views on these women. These are not seedy, disgusting people. These are people trying to survive the only way they know how.

As for my views on cops, I honestly love cops, but not in the countries I am talking about. In those countries, they are extremely corrupt. The cops in this country, for the most part, should have their praises sung from the top of the sears tower in Chicago.


The sex trade worker would agree to give that service regardless, whether it is because she needs money for her family, she loves her boyfriend too much, or her pimp beats the snot out of her. There are many forms of coersion. And yes, there are some who would agree to give the service, because they enjoy it.

Yes, idiots who beat up sex workers or murder them are simply committing murder, But what if they don't kill the girls? What if they just beat the girls to within an inch of their lives? Or what if they just rape the girls? The girls will be too frightened to report the animal and he will get away with it. Get off on the power trip. Legalizing prostitution will not change this behavior for these animals. They simply need to be eradicated.

Ok...it will be clear that I kept writing and revising after you offered your rebutal. I always edit for a bit...gotta give me 10 minutes. lol

Anyway, you are referring to a country like Thailand where police corruption exists. That adds factors outside of legalizing prostitution in countries where the police are less corrupt does it not? That is adding complexities beyond your country or mine. It is my country where the prostitution laws have been found unconstitutional. I will remain in discussing it from a Canadian (or British or US) situation but mainly the thread references Canada's situation.

You write
"These women will never be protected until society changes their views on these women. These are not seedy, disgusting people. These are people trying to survive the only way they know how."


I completely agree with this statement. How does a society change its views? A comparison may be made with how the Canadian society has changed its views towards homosexuality. There are people who oppose it and do not want it for themselves. There are still people in Canada who think that it is evil and quote the bible against homosexuality. Hell,there are even some politicians who think this. They can not however prevent or murder homosexuals without a consequence. The law is now on the side of protecting homosexual activity. No homosexual may be thrown in jail for being a homosexual. Same sex marriage is legal and no religious nut case may stop a same sex partner from getting all the equal rights that a hetero partner is entitled to. If laws are made to equalize prostitution, prostitutes will have the same right as any other rape victim or victim of physical abuse as if they were a hair stylist or masssage therapist or nurse etc.

Laws must be changed as part of a society changing its attitudes. In Canada, even the religious righteous know that the law is not on their side. The vast majority of Canadians accepts same sex marriage now. This is quite different from 15 years ago and even ten years ago. Upholding our constitution and protecting a homosexual is as important to Sik Canucks even though their religion opposes it because the same constitution will also protect a Sik from being forced to remove his headdress(religious based) or wearing a kirpan in schools. Both have been found legal according to our constitution. Now, prostitution has been found legal. Laws and attitudes change only through discussion and supporting human rights. This attitude change is all very fragile though. With our present government sending out propaganda that is basically against equal rights from a more progressive perspective, society attitudes are wobbling I fear. It is important that the government leaders believe in change towards equality. If the Canuck, British, US governments are sending out less progressive messages attitudes may shift back to oppose equality.(that is what I am fearful of and sensing..but it is confusing to determine)

Your first paragraph is very confusing and contradictory from my perspective.

[danreidbarmi]

If you believe anything else, you are delusional.

And, so, I am comforted to know that I'm not the only one this know-it-all, pedantic, self-righteous fellow thinks is an a$$ (as he spells it in this thread; very cute).

There is no sense in criminalizing victimless behavior on moral grounds. As I'm sure the falcon knows (as he is an expert on this subject, as well as Shakespeare, manic depression, and who knows what else), most women who go into prostitution have suffered from abuse, have severely damaged self-esteem, anger issues toward men; and, many are drug addicts trying to keep enough stuff in their veins to get through the day. They are under the thumbs of criminals and drug dealers, under the constant threat of arrest, living in a shadow world, and shunned by mainstream society.

If prostitution were legalized, how many of these factors would be immediately and automatically eliminated? The histories of abuse and the self-esteem issues cannot be erased, nor can the male hatred (which is probably, in most cases, completely justifiable). The rest of the stigma and victimization, however, would be removed.

Falcon is obviously of the Libertarian bent, so the tax benefit to any self-serving, evil government means nothing to him. But, to a child who received a better education, those tax dollars might be meaningful. And, through strict regulation, licensing, etc., STD's from the clap to AIDS could be pretty much removed from the picture.

In the meantime, maybe somebody else might think about stopping being an "A$$," and buy a sense of humor. But, that's just my opinion.

[falcondfw]

And, so, I am comforted to know that I'm not the only one this know-it-all, pedantic, self-righteous fellow thinks is an a$$ (as he spells it in this thread; very cute).

There is no sense in criminalizing victimless behavior on moral grounds. As I'm sure the falcon knows (as he is an expert on this subject, as well as Shakespeare, manic depression, and who knows what else), most women who go into prostitution have suffered from abuse, have severely damaged self-esteem, anger issues toward men; and, many are drug addicts trying to keep enough stuff in their veins to get through the day. They are under the thumbs of criminals and drug dealers, under the constant threat of arrest, living in a shadow world, and shunned by mainstream society.

If prostitution were legalized, how many of these factors would be immediately and automatically eliminated? The histories of abuse and the self-esteem issues cannot be erased, nor can the male hatred (which is probably, in most cases, completely justifiable). The rest of the stigma and victimization, however, would be removed.

Falcon is obviously of the Libertarian bent, so the tax benefit to any self-serving, evil government means nothing to him. But, to a child who received a better education, those tax dollars might be meaningful. And, through strict regulation, licensing, etc., STD's from the clap to AIDS could be pretty much removed from the picture.

In the meantime, maybe somebody else might think about stopping being an "A$$," and buy a sense of humor. But, that's just my opinion.

Yes dan, I am proudly of the libertarian bent, except when it comes to their stance on drugs. I firmly believe in less government, less taxes, and an attitude of stay the hell out of my life, as long as i am not hurting someone.

But my postings on this thread were not meant to be a political rambling (ok. they ramble, but they are not political). My postings are based on experience with several of these women. (no. not THAT kind of experience.).

In many ways you are right. Many of them come from abusive backgrounds. Many of them have substance abuse issues. But many of them did not get substance abuse issues until they started working in the business. The ones I know were very innocent women who happened to be raised in the wrong area of the world and went to the bars or whatever out of economic need. Where they were raised, the bars were seen as a way to make easy cash and as a way out. They were taught that all their lives.

For you to say prostitution is a victimless crime just shows your ignorance. Before you speak on a subject like this, you might want to educate yourself on it first. I would recommend that you speak with Fr. Shay Cullen in the Olongapo area of the Philippines. Then come back and post on this thread and we will see if your opinions are the same.

Legalizing prostitution would do nothing to get the drugs out of it or any of the other things you mention. It would not make STD's less prevalent in the industry. It would not make violence and abuse less prevalent. It would only give prosecutors one less thing they could charge the abusers with.

[danreidbarmi]

Yes dan, I am proudly of the libertarian bent, except when it comes to their stance on drugs. I firmly believe in less government, less taxes, and an attitude of stay the hell out of my life, as long as i am not hurting someone.

But my postings on this thread were not meant to be a political rambling (ok. they ramble, but they are not political). My postings are based on experience with several of these women. (no. not THAT kind of experience.).

In many ways you are right. Many of them come from abusive backgrounds. Many of them have substance abuse issues. But many of them did not get substance abuse issues until they started working in the business. The ones I know were very innocent women who happened to be raised in the wrong area of the world and went to the bars or whatever out of economic need. Where they were raised, the bars were seen as a way to make easy cash and as a way out. They were taught that all their lives.

For you to say prostitution is a victimless crime just shows your ignorance. Before you speak on a subject like this, you might want to educate yourself on it first. I would recommend that you speak with Fr. Shay Cullen in the Olongapo area of the Philippines. Then come back and post on this thread and we will see if your opinions are the same.

Legalizing prostitution would do nothing to get the drugs out of it or any of the other things you mention. It would not make STD's less prevalent in the industry. It would not make violence and abuse less prevalent. It would only give prosecutors one less thing they could charge the abusers with.

How can you call yourself a libertarian when you believe that drugs and prostitution should be prohibited by the government? That's the government meddling in the most personal aspects of our lives.

If prostitution and all drugs were legalized, regulated, and taxed, our prisons would be nearly empty. The people who finance campaigns for tougher sentencing for these crimes are the private prison corporations. They profit from these laws, while states are going bankrupt putting up millions of prisoners who should be getting rehabilitated into productive, tax-paying (dirty word for you Libertarians) citizens with vocational training and help with their addictions. Let the child molesters, the rapists, the murderers rot in prison. But, let's get off our moral high horses, let the drug addicts and the sex merchants out and make them legitimate members of society.

We are making them into a drain on our economy and pariahs because of our puritan moralism. You are like the Christian who says that abortion is murder, yet approves of capital punishment and war. If life is sacred, all life is sacred. You can't have it both ways. If you want smaller government, less meddlesome government, you can't support laws that invade people's private, personal decisions.

Over and out,
Dan

[falcondfw]

How can you call yourself a libertarian when you believe that drugs and prostitution should be prohibited by the government? That's the government meddling in the most personal aspects of our lives.

If prostitution and all drugs were legalized, regulated, and taxed, our prisons would be nearly empty. The people who finance campaigns for tougher sentencing for these crimes are the private prison corporations. They profit from these laws, while states are going bankrupt putting up millions of prisoners who should be getting rehabilitated into productive, tax-paying (dirty word for you Libertarians) citizens with vocational training and help with their addictions. Let the child molesters, the rapists, the murderers rot in prison. But, let's get off our moral high horses, let the drug addicts and the sex merchants out and make them legitimate members of society.

We are making them into a drain on our economy and pariahs because of our puritan moralism. You are like the Christian who says that abortion is murder, yet approves of capital punishment and war. If life is sacred, all life is sacred. You can't have it both ways. If you want smaller government, less meddlesome government, you can't support laws that invade people's private, personal decisions.

Over and out,
Dan

How can I call myself a Libertarian when I disagree with their stance on drugs? Because I think for myself. If you had actually read what I wrote, you would see it says I am proudly of the libertarian bent. Translation - I think a lot like them. I am not a libertarian or a democrat or a republican. I am a conservative.

Now, as for the rest of what you said, I would bet there are significantly few people in this country who are in prison for solicitation or for hiring a prostitute. As for the drugs, yes, if we legalize drugs, a good portion of our prisons would be empty, but our morgues would be full.

As for the rest of what you said about who funds campaigns to toughen sentencing for drugs, I cannot say. I am not in law enforcement or involved with the companies that run the prisons. To be honest, your statement seems kind of conspiracy theorist to me, but who's to say, you might be right.

Personally, they would not have to fund a campaign to get me to vote for tougher sentences. I have seen what drugs do first hand. Anybody who would sell that crap to a minor should get the chair in my opinion.

The drugs stop being private, personal decisions when they are sold to minors. Not saying you do (I don't know), but if you wanted to roll up a blunt the size of my arm and smoke til you couldn't smoke no more, I would care less, because you would be doing it in the privacy of your own home and it would not be hurting anyone else. Where I draw the line is when you smoke some maryjane and then get behind the wheel or when you sell some of that maryjane to 14 year old Timmy. If you want to do it yourself, in the privacy of your home, and you are not getting behind the wheel stoned, that's fine with me. But sell to underage kids or get behind the wheel and you have crossed the line. Even if people want to shoot up heroin or do ice (or shabu) or snort a line, that's fine with me. Just be an adult, keep it to yourself, don't get behind the wheel of a 4000 pound killing machine, and don't sell it to kids. So yes, I can be for less government and still want stricter drug laws.

Oh, and as for puritan moralism? Are you serious? We are on a site called bisexual.com. Think about it.

[Long Duck Dong]

LDD,
I agree with you that what Dark proposes is unrealistic.
However, you live in a country where, by your own admission, the sex trade is unionized, etc.
I am talking about countries where that is not the case - Thailand, The Philippines. There is absolutely no protection for the women in those countries and when they try to get out of the trade, they are harassed by the bars and madams and customers they used to work for.
Many of the women I know keep quite busy in those countries. 3 or 4 customers per night. And that does not go into the customers they get during the day, if they are up to working after their night.
Until society changes thought processes, the animals that prey on these women will continue. And every last one of them needs some Texas Justice.

we have unions but they got castrated..... we have laws.... and individual employment contracts......

but I do know what you talking about.... and I understand, I travelled when I was younger..... laos, nam, singapore, malay, Thailand, japan etc.......and I saw things that will haunt me for the rest of my life......

[falcondfw]

I cannot speak for LDD, and I can only speak from my experience with the Philippines.
I love the country and I love the people. But there are only 2 kinds of people in the Philippines. The haves and the have nots.
If you are a have not, you are less than a slave used to be treated in the USA.
If you are a sex worker, the authorities actually believe in the BS of a "victimless crime". That is why so many end up dead or with aids.
I personally know people who were hired by a guy. He did not tell the girls he had 2 friends waiting back at his house. The girls were gang raped all night long and no condoms were used. There is not protection for the girls in these countries. The "mamasan" would not scare an 80 year old man. There are no bouncers. The clubs do not care what happens to the girls, as long as the club gets their barfine.
In the Philippines, the thing that was hard for me to get used to is you will have a big, beautiful house standing there. And 3 generations of the same family living in it. But that is ok. There is plenty of room. Right next to this beautiful house is a one room shack. It has 3 generations of that family living in it. no bathroom. no electricity.
That contrast was VERY hard for me to accept. The thing is, the people in the shack -- they are actually happy. Truly happy. They have no idea why the "cano" feels sad for them. They are together. That is all that matters.

[darkeyes]

Oh, and as for puritan moralism? Are you serious? We are on a site called bisexual.com. Think about it.

I suggest you do that.. you and a whole gaggle of other geese. :) You did say you thnk for yourself after all... and while you at it.. read up on why people die because of taking illegal drugs since u raise the subject. Try and bring some vision, imagination and depth into your thinking.. havent seen much evidence of it so far..

[danreidbarmi]

Yes, if we legalize drugs, a good portion of our prisons would be empty, but our morgues would be full.

And you know this because? Is this a theory, or do you have actual documentation for such a claim?


Where I draw the line is when you smoke some maryjane and then get behind the wheel or when you sell some of that maryjane to 14 year old Timmy.

So, alcohol (my drug of choice, btw, maryjane makes me paranoid, and coke turns me into a raving asshole) should be legal, but other drugs should not? Timmy has just as much access to booze now as he has to pot. It certainly should be a crime to sell or give Timmy either. That's not the issue. If drugs were legal, they would be regulated, controlled, licensed. They would be of a certain quality standard. And sleazy criminals would not be selling them to people of age in back alleys or public parks. There would be no more addicts than there are now, and they would not be breaking the law to feed their habits.


If you want to do it yourself, in the privacy of your home, and you are not getting behind the wheel stoned, that's fine with me.

So, now you're saying that drugs SHOULD be legal?


So yes, I can be for less government and still want stricter drug laws.

Stricter drug laws, meaning that cops can arrest me for what you just said was fine with you? Or laws against dealing drugs? If drugs were being sold legally, drug dealers would be out of business, unless they were selling to underage buyers -- in which case, lock 'em up and throw away the key. That's the kind of law that makes sense.


Oh, and as for puritan moralism? Are you serious? We are on a site called bisexual.com. Think about it.

I didn't accuse YOU of puritan moralism. What I meant was that laws against prostitution and drugs came from our nation's puritan moralism. And, we've seen more than a few cats lately preaching homophobia who suck cock (sometimes underage cock, btw) in private. It's a double standard and a form of self-hatred that destroys lives. It's why that poor kid from Rutgers jumped off the George Washington bridge. But, that's another subject altogether. Prostitution laws and drug laws are moral judgments that make private behavior a crime -- every Libertarian knows that, especially "thinking" ones. I'm not saying for a minute that we should sanction selling drugs to minors or allow minors to engage in prostitution, for the same reason that we don't let 6-yr-olds drive cars. (You see, government does some good things, too -- like preventing little people from driving those two-ton machines on the roads that our tax dollars pay for. I'm ranting. Sorry.)

[falcondfw]

And you know this because? Is this a theory, or do you have actual documentation for such a claim?



So, alcohol (my drug of choice, btw, maryjane makes me paranoid, and coke turns me into a raving asshole) should be legal, but other drugs should not? Timmy has just as much access to booze now as he has to pot. It certainly should be a crime to sell or give Timmy either. That's not the issue. If drugs were legal, they would be regulated, controlled, licensed. They would be of a certain quality standard. And sleazy criminals would not be selling them to people of age in back alleys or public parks. There would be no more addicts than there are now, and they would not be breaking the law to feed their habits.



So, now you're saying that drugs SHOULD be legal?



Stricter drug laws, meaning that cops can arrest me for what you just said was fine with you? Or laws against dealing drugs? If drugs were being sold legally, drug dealers would be out of business, unless they were selling to underage buyers -- in which case, lock 'em up and throw away the key. That's the kind of law that makes sense.



I didn't accuse YOU of puritan moralism. What I meant was that laws against prostitution and drugs came from our nation's puritan moralism. And, we've seen more than a few cats lately preaching homophobia who suck cock (sometimes underage cock, btw) in private. It's a double standard and a form of self-hatred that destroys lives. It's why that poor kid from Rutgers jumped off the George Washington bridge. But, that's another subject altogether. Prostitution laws and drug laws are moral judgments that make private behavior a crime -- every Libertarian knows that, especially "thinking" ones. I'm not saying for a minute that we should sanction selling drugs to minors or allow minors to engage in prostitution, for the same reason that we don't let 6-yr-olds drive cars. (You see, government does some good things, too -- like preventing little people from driving those two-ton machines on the roads that our tax dollars pay for. I'm ranting. Sorry.)

Hmmm,
Now that I think about it, no they should not be legal. Yes, they might be of a consistent quality, but there will be easier access and more people will probably be using them. The medical costs of long term use and abuse and of overdoses would go up and put a further strain on our health care system. Then, as a said before, you have the idiots who will do an 8 ball and get behind the wheel. So no, they should not be legalized, but I do think the laws for dealing to kids should be strengthened.
But we are getting off on rabbit trails here.
The original part of this thread I commented on was legalizing prostitution, not drugs. And I still say it should not be legalized. I do, however, think the laws for sex slavery and getting minors involved or soliciting a minor need to be strengthened tremendously and they need to be enforced a damn site better than they are now.

[darkeyes]

Isnt it interesting? So many from the land of the free dont want people to be free to make a living legally doing something which in the normal way of things is quite legal. So many from other places too.. all hamstrung by a lack of imagination and without truly understanding just how much our societies could be improved by legalising prostitution. Minds hamstrung by the attitudes of the very same people who have fought tooth and nail to stop true sexual freedom for all and who would exterminate us given the opportunity.. hamstrung by outdated religious attitudes...

Not so long ago ordinary workers were treated like shite by employers and Governments alike.. as the undustrial revolution advanced, conditions for and
attitudes toward those workers gradually changed because of pressure by those self same workers and the enlightened attitudes of a a few statesmen, theorists and company owners. Our society for good or ill is a product of what those people fought and in many cases died for. For all the social and employment problems workers have today these are as nothing compared to what until just a few decades ago, our ancestors endured at their place of work... those of you who have laughed its ok... for throughout the 19th century and much of the 20th many laughed at the ideas and ambitions of millions of workers and fought tooth and nail to prevent them making the advances they did in working conditions. Very often many workers, being their own worst enemy backed up the employer to their own disadvantage, and thus delay progress and sometimes set it back decades...

Prostitutes are human beings, and the attitude of our society is that they are only just human beings.. they are consequently treated just so.. as something less than human.. if some I think my ideas are silly thats ok... think what you like.. but knowing that sex for pay is with us, and always shall be, no matter how much we try to stamp it out. and continuing to keep it illegal or making it difficult to work, then it is not I who continues the oppression and enslavement of millions of working people... certainly attitudes will need to change but that is not impossible.. attitudes to gay, bisexual and transgendered people have been changing quite quickly realtively speaking for over half a century.. it is time that attitudes toward prostitution and those who work in the trade began to change. It can be done with the will... ignore the fact of how prostitution is now.. if it could be made safe for worker and client, within the law, and if it were considered an acceptable business to enter.. is there anything wrong with selling our bodies for sex to earn a living? If you believe that it is wrong fine... but I ask you this... do you watch porn, hardcore or any other? Should pornography then not be made illegal and legally policed and erradicated? Is that not performing the act of sex for pay? That the production of pornography leaves much to be desired, and that the health of many workers is endangered by performing, and that working conditions for performers can hardy be described as ideal is a fact... but for all that their lot is a great deal better than the much less accepted world of prostitution.. I doubt very many on this site would make the production of pornography illegal.. I fail to see the difference... is selling our bodies to perform the act of sex in order to make a living morally wrong? I dont happen to think so.

Both the production of pornography and the trade of prostitution should be legal.. both should be the subject of greater regulation, not of what they produce or what they do in the performance of their job, but in matters of health and safety, working conditions, pay, and all the paraphernalia that every other worker has in society... laugh at that if you will... it lessens you greatly as human beings...

Legalisation will make things worse? For fucks sake... wake up and think about it... if you truly think that then you are every bit as bad as those who have opposed the advances of homosexual freedoms in the last 50 years... the fucking hypocrisy of it all...

[rissababynta]

I could never quite understand how a person could get paid to have sex on film, but not in private. I could also not understand how anyone could get into trouble for something that people do all the time anyway...just because they happen to get money for it.

Whatever :rolleyes:

[Long Duck Dong]

Isnt it interesting? So many from the land of the free dont want people to be free to make a living legally doing something which in the normal way of things is quite legal. So many from other places too.. all hamstrung by a lack of imagination and without truly understanding just how much our societies could be improved by legalising prostitution.

it depends.... in all honesty

I live in a country where its legalised, monitored and controlled to the best of the prostitutes and escorts abilities, and by the law of the land......

but it still not working..... as the prostitutes will tell you themselves, the only advantages in the law, is to the government in the way of taxes....

people have argued in NZ that the prostitutes are safer, protected as they can have places to work legally etc and legal protection.....

the prostitutes will tell you different..... they are no safer than they were before, if they are gonna be attacked and raped, it will happen, the law is not protecting them from that, in the same way its not protecting people from crime, the law works best when the crime has been commuted, not before.....
as for places to work..... well, they used to make $120 a hour.... now they can work at a brothel, and the brothel takes $40-$60 per client.... the government wants 21% of the $120 and the prostitute gets whats left....
so the prostitute ends up working the same job for less money.....

with the changes to the sex workers law, came changes to the local council law..... and its used as much as possible.... and every argument in the book is used to close down brothels and stop new ones being opened..... so the prostitutes are no better off and actually worse off..... as they have to do street walking now which is more dangerous......
I have been told I was incorrect with my statement that streetwalking is illegal..... its not, what is illegal is to engage in any form of sexual conduct in a visible public place and no prositute may offer any service that will be conducted in a public place.....

so a prostitute group can seek to set up a brothel in my street and legally I can oppose it and object in writing against it, and the granting of resource consent....... but I am powerless to do anything about the same prostitutes plying their trade on the footpath outside of my house.....

while it is so easy to talk about legalising something and how it will make it better.... the honest truth is legalising something can make it worse....as the prostitutes are not the only people you have to consider and that is where the granting of rights to people can become a pain in the ass......

my right to oppose a brothel and object to it.... gives me more power than the sex workers law that was created to protect them and get them off the streets..... and I can put them right back on the street again.....

[Long Duck Dong]

I could never quite understand how a person could get paid to have sex on film, but not in private. I could also not understand how anyone could get into trouble for something that people do all the time anyway...just because they happen to get money for it.

Whatever :rolleyes:

its a dual edged argument, rissa lol..... we fight for the freedom to do as we see fit with our own bodies.... yet seek to deny the rights of others to do the same thing

this is the issue with the fight for rights...... the us v's them aspect... and thats why the LGBT are going around in circles......

[falcondfw]

Thank you LDD. At least someone sees reason.
Darkeyes,
do you know any prostitutes or former prostitutes? A friend? A family member? An ex or current gf?
Ask them how safe they feel? Ask them what they would do when a customer says he will not pay the barfine (that he already owes the bar) unless she does heavy drugs with him? And ask them what happens to the girl if he really does refuse to pay the barfine? Ask them how many friends in the business ended up in a ditch in pieces? Ask them how many ended up on drugs and strung out because they could not deal with what they were forced to do to survive or because of a customer?
Do you seriously think government oversight to get taxes would make things safer?
Do you seriously think the brothels would hire bouncers to protect the girls, unless they are forced to by the law? Of course they would not, that is added overhead. They are in business to make money. Period.
You want more information, contact Fr. Shay Cullen in the Olongapo area of the Philippines. Ask him what happens to the kids he tries to save? Ask him if laws would stop the sick perverts that go there and to Thailand to use kids? Do you seriously think these guys would care about a law?
Sorry for getting on my soapbox, but people need to wake up.


it depends.... in all honesty

I live in a country where its legalised, monitored and controlled to the best of the prostitutes and escorts abilities, and by the law of the land......

but it still not working..... as the prostitutes will tell you themselves, the only advantages in the law, is to the government in the way of taxes....

people have argued in NZ that the prostitutes are safer, protected as they can have places to work legally etc and legal protection.....

the prostitutes will tell you different..... they are no safer than they were before, if they are gonna be attacked and raped, it will happen, the law is not protecting them from that, in the same way its not protecting people from crime, the law works best when the crime has been commuted, not before.....
as for places to work..... well, they used to make $120 a hour.... now they can work at a brothel, and the brothel takes $40-$60 per client.... the government wants 21% of the $120 and the prostitute gets whats left....
so the prostitute ends up working the same job for less money.....

with the changes to the sex workers law, came changes to the local council law..... and its used as much as possible.... and every argument in the book is used to close down brothels and stop new ones being opened..... so the prostitutes are no better off and actually worse off..... as they have to do street walking now which is more dangerous......
I have been told I was incorrect with my statement that streetwalking is illegal..... its not, what is illegal is to engage in any form of sexual conduct in a visible public place and no prositute may offer any service that will be conducted in a public place.....

so a prostitute group can seek to set up a brothel in my street and legally I can oppose it and object in writing against it, and the granting of resource consent....... but I am powerless to do anything about the same prostitutes plying their trade on the footpath outside of my house.....

while it is so easy to talk about legalising something and how it will make it better.... the honest truth is legalising something can make it worse....as the prostitutes are not the only people you have to consider and that is where the granting of rights to people can become a pain in the ass......

my right to oppose a brothel and object to it.... gives me more power than the sex workers law that was created to protect them and get them off the streets..... and I can put them right back on the street again.....

[danreidbarmi]

Dark Eyes has made some very cogent points. Why is it that we can give sex away with impunity, but it's illegal to charge for it? Isn't the government impinging on our individual rights? And, why is it that porn "actors" can perform sex for money on camera, yet it is illegal for them to do the same thing and collect a fee for it without the camera rolling? (Of course, that's probably because the "actors" are not really supposed to be getting pleasure from the sex -- it's the fact that the john is getting off that becomes abhorrent, isn't it? That's the good ol' American puritanical moralistic thing I pointed out before.)

LDD and falcon, you have painted ugly pictures of the plight of prostitutes in a number of countries, but you offer no case for why criminalization makes it any better. It seems, as far as you're concerned, there is no difference whether prostitution is legal or not. It's horrific for the prostitutes either way. Please explain why those anecdotes constitute justification for making it illegal to charge someone to have sex?

Finally, to assume that governments are absolutely incapable of doing anything right, and then declare that those same governments should enact even stronger laws against prostitution? Doesn't make sense to me, and it doesn't in any way solve the problems you've pointed out.

[Long Duck Dong]

LDD and falcon, you have painted ugly pictures of the plight of prostitutes in a number of countries, but you offer no case for why criminalization makes it any better. It seems, as far as you're concerned, there is no difference whether prostitution is legal or not. It's horrific for the prostitutes either way. Please explain why those anecdotes constitute justification for making it illegal to charge someone to have sex?


its got a lot to do with the fact I am not arguing for or against making prostitution legal or illegal.... as there are differences based around culture and and understand in every country..... and indeed the reaction to sex trade workers in NZ is different is to the philipines and is different to russia and different to the us and and and...... yes you get the point

I will point out issues with the understanding of making things legal from the point of view of a 9 to 5 job v's a supply and demand trade as most of us know that sex work is not a 40 hour, 9 to 5 job

make it legal or illegal... and all you do is change the issues that need to be dealt with..... the benefits are subject to the individual......

the lest we can do, regardless of the legal standing, is offer a hand and a hot cuppa.... and thats what I do...... cos that makes a bigger difference than any legal statue, cos it tells the worker, they have a friend and a safe place ...

[darkeyes]

Thank you LDD. At least someone sees reason.
Darkeyes,
do you know any prostitutes or former prostitutes? A friend? A family member? An ex or current gf?
Ask them how safe they feel? Ask them what they would do when a customer says he will not pay the barfine (that he already owes the bar) unless she does heavy drugs with him? And ask them what happens to the girl if he really does refuse to pay the barfine? Ask them how many friends in the business ended up in a ditch in pieces? Ask them how many ended up on drugs and strung out because they could not deal with what they were forced to do to survive or because of a customer?
Do you seriously think government oversight to get taxes would make things safer?
Do you seriously think the brothels would hire bouncers to protect the girls, unless they are forced to by the law? Of course they would not, that is added overhead. They are in business to make money. Period.
You want more information, contact Fr. Shay Cullen in the Olongapo area of the Philippines. Ask him what happens to the kids he tries to save? Ask him if laws would stop the sick perverts that go there and to Thailand to use kids? Do you seriously think these guys would care about a law?
Sorry for getting on my soapbox, but people need to wake up.

I know several.. and no they dont feel particularly safe.. but that..and everything you say adds to the argument of making it legal, and where it is legal such as in the UK, allowing it to operate without the aura of illegality which it does now, and having it properly regulated to as far as possible eliminate the concerns you seem to have.. all of your concerns can be easily overcome by regulation.

There will always be an element of danger to workers.. just as there is an element in every profession.. Nurses, Policemen, Teachers, Plumbers, Shop workers.. unscrupulous bosses exist in ever walk of life, yet these workers have recourse to law should they be discriminated against or abused by management. management has a duty of care for their workers.. by legalising prostitution and/or properly regulating it we can give prostitutes an added element of protection which currently does not exist.. and all of these professions are subject to assault and worse by clients and customers. Dont we have a duty to put all workers on the same legal footing whatever their profession?

Most people are hamstrung by how things are now, and by current attitudes.. what is, need not be.. what is, should not be.. that is what I have been saying, and so few seem to have the wit, imagination or desire for things to be better for an appallingly abused sector of our workforce..

[darkeyes]

as for places to work..... well, they used to make $120 a hour.... now they can work at a brothel, and the brothel takes $40-$60 per client.... the government wants 21% of the $120 and the prostitute gets whats left....
so the prostitute ends up working the same job for less money.....



That may be so Duckie.. but is that so very different from what was when it was illegal? Pimps and brothels have their cut now.. and in the case of the former, it is a fucking sight more than 60%... you may be right that the cost to the punter has not risen.. but whether it has or not.. should a prostitute, sex worker cal them what you will, not pay their dues to our society? Do they not need health care, police protection (instead of harrasssment), and all of the other public services a society provides? Many people think taxation is a dirty word, especially in the US.. I'd like to see the state of the society which had none... every worker should pay their dues.. prostitutes are no different...

.. so maybe they do end up earning less money.. but for what legality and regulation can give them is that such a bad thing?


... the point you made about objecting to a brothel is fair.. yet is that not the case regarding the sighting or opening of any business? Some business close because local people have objected to ther plans to expand, or move to new premises, or they have moved away from the locality because of local objections.. the plight of those workers whose jobs have disappeared because of those objections were not improved by them. Some. a few, even turn to prostitution to make ends meet..

[Long Duck Dong]

yes, its a lot different........ before the sex worker law changes in NZ, the ladies paid about $40 to the escort service, which included the tax, were known as escorts, were protected under the law as females, exclusive of their employment.....had access to the family planning clinics for free std tests and condoms......etc etc etc

now, the law has been changed....

they pay 21% of the $120, which leaves $95 then $40-$60 to the brothel ( leaving $55-$35 to the worker..... they have to be certified clean and std fee by a doctor ( $35-$55 per appointment )... they have to be registered as a sex worker ( not sure on fee ) and in most cases provide the condoms ( $12 for 10 plus lube $17 )
then there is prostitutes collective fees ( not sure on cost )......

now the lady is losing money unless she is fucking more clients, so instead of being better off.... shes pushed to abuse her body more and more in order to make what money she does and for whatever reason she needs it for......

so legally we are supporting the robbery of sex workers under a legal guide line, and justifying pushing them to sleep with more people, while the government enjoys the tax, the brothel makes more money and the whole bloody time we boast about how we are looking after the ladies......

lol..... the law is a ass....... and so are stupid people that think the ladies are better off.........

most prostitutes do the work, to pay the bills, get thru uni and pay uni fees, put food on the table and it used to be that they could do 2-3 men a week, and then get on with their lives.... now they have to do 8-9 a week for the same money.......

and putting up the price only works if you can offer a better service..... a mother with 3 kids will struggle to compete with a 22 year old with no kids and bisexual.....

but darkeyes, since we are wrong, you tell us what is a good price for you to work the streets.... cos I would be interested to see how much you value your own body

now, if I was running the fucking show.... yes they would be taxed.... according to the part time workers tax rate of 17.5%. brothels would be limited to a flat rate of $30 in house and $15 call out.... the brothel would receive a business tax credit for supplying condoms and lube, and be expected to ensure not only are their ladies clean and std free... but the business pays the cost of the tests, in the same way a business will pay for a work uniform ..... you want your employers up to scratch, then get them that way.....

a brothel can be run from a private home to lower the overheads....and you can claim credits for power and lighting and heating as it would be regarded as a business premise...... and that caters to the ladies that are average, not the elite level escorts that are $600 to $2000 per client.....

if you are gonna suggest that the ladies are better off under a legalised system, then the first thing you do, is make sure they are better off....... cos its the clients that are meant to be screwing the ladies, not you....

[darkeyes]

yes, its a lot different........ before the sex worker law changes in NZ, the ladies paid about $40 to the escort service, which included the tax, were known as escorts, were protected under the law as females, exclusive of their employment.....had access to the family planning clinics for free std tests and condoms......etc etc etc

now, the law has been changed....

they pay 21% of the $120, which leaves $95 then $40-$60 to the brothel ( leaving $55-$35 to the worker..... they have to be certified clean and std fee by a doctor ( $35-$55 per appointment )... they have to be registered as a sex worker ( not sure on fee ) and in most cases provide the condoms ( $12 for 10 plus lube $17 )
then there is prostitutes collective fees ( not sure on cost )......

now the lady is losing money unless she is fucking more clients, so instead of being better off.... shes pushed to abuse her body more and more in order to make what money she does and for whatever reason she needs it for......

so legally we are supporting the robbery of sex workers under a legal guide line, and justifying pushing them to sleep with more people, while the government enjoys the tax, the brothel makes more money and the whole bloody time we boast about how we are looking after the ladies......

lol..... the law is a ass....... and so are stupid people that think the ladies are better off.........

most prostitutes do the work, to pay the bills, get thru uni and pay uni fees, put food on the table and it used to be that they could do 2-3 men a week, and then get on with their lives.... now they have to do 8-9 a week for the same money.......

and putting up the price only works if you can offer a better service..... a mother with 3 kids will struggle to compete with a 22 year old with no kids and bisexual.....

but darkeyes, since we are wrong, you tell us what is a good price for you to work the streets.... cos I would be interested to see how much you value your own body

now, if I was running the fucking show.... yes they would be taxed.... according to the part time workers tax rate of 17.5%. brothels would be limited to a flat rate of $30 in house and $15 call out.... the brothel would receive a business tax credit for supplying condoms and lube, and be expected to ensure not only are their ladies clean and std free... but the business pays the cost of the tests, in the same way a business will pay for a work uniform ..... you want your employers up to scratch, then get them that way.....

a brothel can be run from a private home to lower the overheads....and you can claim credits for power and lighting and heating as it would be regarded as a business premise...... and that caters to the ladies that are average, not the elite level escorts that are $600 to $2000 per client.....

if you are gonna suggest that the ladies are better off under a legalised system, then the first thing you do, is make sure they are better off....... cos its the clients that are meant to be screwing the ladies, not you....

I dont know how legalised prostitution works in New Zealand.. but what I do know is that if those who work the profession havent passed on increased costs to the punters they are daft... but lets look at it logically.. in a brothel, whether legal or not, would not similar rules apply and the owner take their cut whatever its legal stauts? Being illegal. I would expect that the owners would take a bigger cut than those which are legal by the very nature of its criminality.. they are not regulated or policed by any authority, and the workers have no protection of any kind in law vis a vis their employment status.. similarly those girls who work the streets or are independent, many are pimped... and I do know just how much abuse and how dangerous it is to cross a pimp... the pimp once his hooks are in a girl gives to her what he likes, not what the girl deserves.. not he rate for the job.. its the very nature of the criminality... and work 2 or 3 punters a week? wtf did u get that idea? From ur experience as a social worker? Many girls in an illegal situation are hooked..and they work when and take as many punters as they are told to.. not all for there are those who do not have pimps.. and who do not work in a brothel.. but few work as few as two or 3 clients a week whether pimped, brotheled or not...

...and robbed if they become legal? Is paying your taxes robbery? many would say it is.. but I have answered that in my previous thread.. workers pay tax..and quite right that they should..

Let me also say here and now, I know one girl, a streetwalker, who was rumbled by the revenue, and although she did not work for over 2 years at all... was stung for 7 years back tax which included the time she did not work. The assumption being that she had charged so much, worked so much and earned so much each year.. and worked throughout that time whether she did or not...she was stung by a £17000 tax bill... it was a purely arbitrary assessment by the Revenue based on God knows what..

I know another very well indeed, who to feed her addiction to narcotics worked frequently simply for those drugs she needed to satisfy her craving. She was pimped.. maybe not by one who considered himself such, but he procured clients for her, and I know she doesnt consider herself pimped.. but thats what she was..sometimes 15 and 20 clients a week.. and for that she sometimes got one scabby meal a day and the fixes her body craved. And a good kicking if she so much as said boo to the proverbial goose... and more than once those nice punters added to her woes by giving her more than she bargained for and an extra portion of brutality for the day...and it was not until she was gotten out of his hands by her parents that she finally had any kind of health check.

Properly legalised and regulated prostitution could eliminate so much of that sort of thing.. it could help stop the disappearance of hundreds of thousands of young girls and boys from the towns and cities of the world.. it wont eliminate it all.. for there will always be a criminal element who will do its thing and continue to enslave people and get them to work their will. just, as I have said before they do in every walk of life.. but it could improve things so much. We do the women and men who are prostitutes no service by keeping it illegal, or where it is legal making it so difficult to work. We endanger thousands, no millions of lives of those people, and their clients and their clients families and others because of the often unsatisfactory health of so many... legalisation and making it possible to work is the only answer.. ow it is done is open to question.. that is up to each state to decide for themselves.. but it is a damn sight better than how we have it now..

..and I resent being called stupid, Duckie. I am far from that... I know where the stupidity exists and it isnt in my corner.. and by asking me what I think a fair price would be isnt relevant... and so I ignore your question.. excpet to saythis.. I do know what soem girls charge at the bottom of the scale.. and I know how much they are left with at the end of the week.. I also know how much an escort gets should she sell sex... and being at the upper end of the scale.. a bloody sight more than at the bottom.. and although there are dangers, nothing like as many as the girls who work the streets, or are pimped.. and in conditions far far superior to any brothel... and how they work.. and what they do is perfectly legal and most even pay tax on their earnings...

The question remains.. do people have the right to sell their bodies for sex? If the answer is yes, then wtf is there any argument over its legality? And if we accept it should be legal..then we have no option but to accept that it be regulated in some way, and that it is made as safe for worker and client as we can get it... and if it is to be regulated and legal, then those who work in the profession must pay their tax, national insurance stamp and other overheads just like anyone else... no better, no worse.. that is only fair and right..

[danreidbarmi]

sex work is not a 40 hour, 9 to 5 job

make it legal or illegal... and all you do is change the issues that need to be dealt with..... the benefits are subject to the individual......

the lest we can do, regardless of the legal standing, is offer a hand and a hot cuppa.... and thats what I do...... cos that makes a bigger difference than any legal statue, cos it tells the worker, they have a friend and a safe place ...

Being a writer is not a 40 hr, 9 to 5 job either. And, the profession carries no benefits or guarantees whatsoever, other than being able to sit around in my PJs all day and play with the language (which is sometimes a hell of a lotta fun, and sometimes just a whole lotta hell). I'm not liable to get STDs from my computer keyboard, get arrested, or beat up by my pimp (fuck, sometimes I wish I had a pimp! lol)

And, yes, the least we can do is be kind to our fellow travelers. These days, I'm such an ornery pisser that I can hardly stand to have a cuppa with meself. A vodka, on the other hand, cheers me up tremendously and vastly increases my charm.

Anyway, I guess my point is we've all got a bit o' the whore in us, don't we? Whether it's 9 to 5, freelance, or slave. This bein' human is a damn riot, ain't it?

Danny Boy

[Long Duck Dong]

I dont know how legalised prostitution works in New Zealand.. but what I do know is that if those who work the profession havent passed on increased costs to the punters they are daft... but lets look at it logically.. in a brothel, whether legal or not, would not similar rules apply and the owner take their cut whatever its legal stauts? Being illegal. I would expect that the owners would take a bigger cut than those which are legal by the very nature of its criminality.. they are not regulated or policed by any authority, and the workers have no protection of any kind in law vis a vis their employment status.. similarly those girls who work the streets or are independent, many are pimped... and I do know just how much abuse and how dangerous it is to cross a pimp... the pimp once his hooks are in a girl gives to her what he likes, not what the girl deserves.. not he rate for the job.. its the very nature of the criminality... and work 2 or 3 punters a week? wtf did u get that idea? From ur experience as a social worker? Many girls in an illegal situation are hooked..and they work when and take as many punters as they are told to.. not all for there are those who do not have pimps.. and who do not work in a brothel.. but few work as few as two or 3 clients a week whether pimped, brotheled or not...

...and robbed if they become legal? Is paying your taxes robbery? many would say it is.. but I have answered that in my previous thread.. workers pay tax..and quite right that they should..

Let me also say here and now, I know one girl, a streetwalker, who was rumbled by the revenue, and although she did not work for over 2 years at all... was stung for 7 years back tax which included the time she did not work. The assumption being that she had charged so much, worked so much and earned so much each year.. and worked throughout that time whether she did or not...she was stung by a £17000 tax bill... it was a purely arbitrary assessment by the Revenue based on God knows what..

I know another very well indeed, who to feed her addiction to narcotics worked frequently simply for those drugs she needed to satisfy her craving. She was pimped.. maybe not by one who considered himself such, but he procured clients for her, and I know she doesnt consider herself pimped.. but thats what she was..sometimes 15 and 20 clients a week.. and for that she sometimes got one scabby meal a day and the fixes her body craved. And a good kicking if she so much as said boo to the proverbial goose... and more than once those nice punters added to her woes by giving her more than she bargained for and an extra portion of brutality for the day...and it was not until she was gotten out of his hands by her parents that she finally had any kind of health check.

Properly legalised and regulated prostitution could eliminate so much of that sort of thing.. it could help stop the disappearance of hundreds of thousands of young girls and boys from the towns and cities of the world.. it wont eliminate it all.. for there will always be a criminal element who will do its thing and continue to enslave people and get them to work their will. just, as I have said before they do in every walk of life.. but it could improve things so much. We do the women and men who are prostitutes no service by keeping it illegal, or where it is legal making it so difficult to work. We endanger thousands, no millions of lives of those people, and their clients and their clients families and others because of the often unsatisfactory health of so many... legalisation and making it possible to work is the only answer.. ow it is done is open to question.. that is up to each state to decide for themselves.. but it is a damn sight better than how we have it now..

..and I resent being called stupid, Duckie. I am far from that... I know where the stupidity exists and it isnt in my corner.. and by asking me what I think a fair price would be isnt relevant... and so I ignore your question.. excpet to saythis.. I do know what soem girls charge at the bottom of the scale.. and I know how much they are left with at the end of the week.. I also know how much an escort gets should she sell sex... and being at the upper end of the scale.. a bloody sight more than at the bottom.. and although there are dangers, nothing like as many as the girls who work the streets, or are pimped.. and in conditions far far superior to any brothel... and how they work.. and what they do is perfectly legal and most even pay tax on their earnings...

The question remains.. do people have the right to sell their bodies for sex? If the answer is yes, then wtf is there any argument over its legality? And if we accept it should be legal..then we have no option but to accept that it be regulated in some way, and that it is made as safe for worker and client as we can get it... and if it is to be regulated and legal, then those who work in the profession must pay their tax, national insurance stamp and other overheads just like anyone else... no better, no worse.. that is only fair and right..

daft ???? there is a limit the client will pay..... you can pass on the added costs, but you can not make a client pay them..... the average cost would go from $120 to $190 and with the country in a partly recession, most of the prostitutes are looking at street working and dropping prices.... just to ensure they get clients.......

its not like a supermarket where the client needs the goods and so has to absorb the higher costs.....

a lot of prostitutes are freelance and not pimped... well in NZ they are..... cos its illegal to live of the proceeds of prostitution unless you are a brothel.....and I get that from actually going out on the street and talking with the ladies and other sources, from spending nights in brothels and escort parlours....
I was the type of person that believed that the best source of info, is from the horses mouth and if you want that, you need the horses in the stables, at the racecourses, our in the fields, and running free
hell I have even been overseas and talked with ladies of the night.....
btw, they are ladies.... not prostitutes or sex workers, they are ladies in a profession of sex worker..... and thats why i call them ladies.....

btw 100's of thousands of boys and girls ???? really ?? I can not find any stats on that, can you give me a source..... cos I have never seen fiqures that high...

now the question about how do you value your own self is a valid question and I asked it cos many people value themselves highly... and it shows a unrealistic view point of things.... you are only as valuable as the client is going to pay.... hence a lot of sex workers do discount sex.... cos the clients can not see the person as a person and worth any value.....

and again I am not arguing over the legal or illegal aspects of sex work...... cos its a moot point.... I am clearly stating that a lot of times that its legalised, its not for the benefit of the sex worker......
pay taxes by all means, pay a commission to a brothel etc... sure.... but legalising it and enabling the very workers to be legally abused, makes a mockery of the statement that you are legalising it to protect them......

so I ask you fran, how many years have you been involved with the sex industry, has the law in the uk changed so you have more than one viewpoint.... how many brothels have you been to and visited and talked with the workers.... how many countries have you been to and talked with the workers over there..... how many counselling and court cases have you been involved in, as a legal consultant and as a friend..... .....

please share with us all and enlighten us people that have no idea about things... including the sex workers I have been talking with about this stuff over the last few days and getting their opinions..... ?????

and do not side step it, like the value of yourself if you were in the trade....
if I was in the trade and active as a bisexual male, I could charge between $180 - $500 ( for a couple on couple job )

[Long Duck Dong]

Being a writer is not a 40 hr, 9 to 5 job either. And, the profession carries no benefits or guarantees whatsoever, other than being able to sit around in my PJs all day and play with the language (which is sometimes a hell of a lotta fun, and sometimes just a whole lotta hell). I'm not liable to get STDs from my computer keyboard, get arrested, or beat up by my pimp (fuck, sometimes I wish I had a pimp! lol)

And, yes, the least we can do is be kind to our fellow travelers. These days, I'm such an ornery pisser that I can hardly stand to have a cuppa with meself. A vodka, on the other hand, cheers me up tremendously and vastly increases my charm.

Anyway, I guess my point is we've all got a bit o' the whore in us, don't we? Whether it's 9 to 5, freelance, or slave. This bein' human is a damn riot, ain't it?

Danny Boy

exactly..... you hit the nail on the head... just cos you can write, doesn't mean people will pay to read....

[citystyleguy]

...my, my, my! the conversations that can be generated with just a question! a lot of statements on what prostitution is and isnt, that governments tax things, :eek: what a shock to see that in print!!!, it is bad this, it is good this, that prostitution is horrible in economically poor countries, i wouldn't limit prostitution as the only, or even the worst, but one of countless horrible institutions in poor areas anywhere!

putting moralizing aside, and who can't get on a soap box when given morality as the subject, any attempt to ban anything on moral grounds has never worked, and most often leads to even worse abuses, the growth of black market economies at best; prohibition in this country gave rise to a huge underground economy, and provided the first chance for organized crime, and crime families equal to almost any sizable conglomerate. baning things on moral grounds have never worked, any more than walls can keep out the unwanted whatever!

legalize it, that gets most of it out in the sunshine, it will enevitably be taxed in order to regulate it, out in the open will allow participants to organize for their benefit; as to the poverty issue, eliminate the economics that create the poverty, that will in the large part enable others to make choices, rather than reaction to an ugly situation.

as for me, if i have a loving and accommadating partner, why pay for it? definitely not my preference; as to the moral issue, just mention sugar in one's diet, and just see the moralists crawl out from every crevice!

[darkeyes]

btw 100's of thousands of boys and girls ???? really ?? I can not find any stats on that, can you give me a source..... cos I have never seen fiqures that high...



According to the US State Department alone, between 600000 and 800000 human beings are trafficked accross international borders each year.. of which some 70% are women and 50% are minors. the State Departments data shows that most are trafficked for sexual exploitation.. add to that the loss of liberty of thousands who are forced into sex slavery within the borders of each country it can be seen that we are talking very biig numbers indeed... I'll get u links Duckie... cos in Europe we have seen numbers that high.. and often...

I''ll answer the rest of your post later when I have time..

[darkeyes]

btw, they are ladies.... not prostitutes or sex workers, they are ladies in a profession of sex worker..... and thats why i call them ladies.....



Far b it for me 2 quibble.. but just what is the title of this thread again? An just who was the OP Duckie me luffly?????:rolleyes::tong:;)

..an dus that go for the guys employed as "ladies" an all????

[Long Duck Dong]

According to the US State Department alone, between 600000 and 800000 human beings are trafficked accross international borders each year.. of which some 70% are women and 50% are minors. the State Departments data shows that most are trafficked for sexual exploitation.. add to that the loss of liberty of thousands who are forced into sex slavery within the borders of each country it can be seen that we are talking very biig numbers indeed... I'll get u links Duckie... cos in Europe we have seen numbers that high.. and often...

I''ll answer the rest of your post later when I have time..

ok now before I die laughing, I will not deny that human trafficking exists.... only a idiot would do that...... so I am not denying it at all

human trafficking is estimated at being between 4 million and 27 million people.....( not bad for a wild estimate and they are actual official fiqures, not some random number I thought up )

but sex trade trafficking, factors in the transporting of immigrants, refugees, illegal immigrants, the transport of people across borders for intimate reasons ( marriage etc ) and other reasons ( again, the official guidelines )....
so the actual true number is not known at all......

even the official channels that state the numbers have different criteria from stating their numbers yet have no real basis for their numbers or any real hard facts to support their claims......

here is a snippet about the 2001 report
Nationwide, between 45,000 and 50,000 people are trafficked into the United States, according to a 2001 report by the U.S. State Department. But Williamson noted that the problem is hard to quantify because of the underground nature of human trafficking, and studies often rely on estimates. Even the Ohio study, which analyzed law enforcement and government databases, is limited, she said.
williamson is Celia Williamson, an associate professor at the University of Toledo who led the research.

The U.N.-accepted definition of trafficking is as follows: Trafficking is “the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, or fraud, or deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving or payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs,”

the us state department uses the following

The Secretary of State submits the annual "Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000: Trafficking in Persons Report" to Congress. This report covers "severe forms of trafficking in persons" defined as:

(a) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or (b) the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery."

The annual report serves as the primary diplomatic tool through which the U.S. Government encourages other countries to help fight all forms of modern slavery, including forced labor, sex trafficking, bonded labor, debt bondage, involuntary domestic servitude, forced child labor, child soldiers, and child sex trafficking.


now your quessitimate, fran, covers a number of issues NOT connected to prostitution nor to making the sex trade legal, nor to the sex trade and human trafficking........ so you have thrown in numbers that prove nothing..... and will not be stopped by making prostitution legal or illegal, but by dealing with human trafficking....... when is currently underway by a number of countries....... and agencies, that openly state even they have no idea what the numbers really are........

the only point you made that carries any merit, is that human trafficking is wrong and needs to stop......

[darkeyes]

Of course the number is not known at all for sure.. guesstimates are the best anyone can do for sure... but if you want to sit back and believe by keeping protitution illegal that you further the interests of those who work the in the profession, and those who disappear from the streets of the world then I suggest you change your name to from Duck to Dick. Human trafficking is not all about forcing people into prostitution I have said that.. but a vast part is..

Die laughing if you like.. nothing you said changes things one jot..in fact if anything it reinforces my argument..

[Long Duck Dong]

Of course the number is not known at all for sure.. guesstimates are the best anyone can do for sure... but if you want to sit back and believe by keeping protitution illegal that you further the interests of those who work the in the profession, and those who disappear from the streets of the world then I suggest you change your name to from Duck to Dick.
Die laughing if you like.. nothing you said changes things one jot..in fact if anything it reinforces my argument..

I will change my name from duck to dick, when you quit teaching english at schools.....

cos i wrote the following in english and you clearly failed to comprehend it :tong::tong::tong:


its got a lot to do with the fact I am not arguing for or against making prostitution legal or illegal...

[darkeyes]

Uhuh.. u think so Duckie?

When all is said and done, cutting through all the waffle, stats, and theories.. do we own our bodies or not? Accepting that we do, do we not then have the right to use them as we see fit, so long as no intended harm is done to ourselves or others? If we accept that this is the case.. then can there be any argument that earning money from the sexual use of our body should be legal? If we accept that it should be, then is it not incumbent on our legislators to ensure that proper legislation exists to facilitate that right as safely and with the same basic rights as any other group of workers? Given that this occured, then is it not incumbent on those workers so facilitated to have the same obligations to society as any other group of employed or self employed people?

The rest of the debate isnt window dressing but important issues of concern.. but the crux of the debate, whether we own our bodies and whether we should have the right to use them as we wish to earn a living is, as I have outlined above, what the argument is about.

[Long Duck Dong]

Uhuh.. u think so Duckie?

When all is said and done, cutting through all the waffle, stats, and theories.. do we own our bodies or not? Accepting that we do, do we not then have the right to use them as we see fit, so long as no intended harm is done to ourselves or others? If we accept that this is the case.. then can there be any argument that earning money from the sexual use of our body should be legal? If we accept that it should be, then is it not incumbent on our legislators to ensure that proper legislation exists to facilitate that right as safely and with the same basic rights as any other group of workers? Given that this occured, then is it not incumbent on those workers so facilitated to have the same obligations to society as any other group of employed or self employed people?

The rest of the debate isnt window dressing but important issues of concern.. but the crux of the debate, whether we own our bodies and whether we should have the right to use them as we wish to earn a living is, as I have outlined above, what the argument is about.

thats a hard one to answer, fran..... so I will do my best

no you do not own your body as that would require proof of purchase
but yeah, your body is your domain by right of biological inhabitation and self identity

but the argument that its your body, so your right to earn money with it.... only works in your mind... as you are saying that it is your body, your right to use it to earn money, but your rights do not apply to the other person who is paying money for sex rights with your body....

so you may gain the legal right to use your body for money, but that doesn't mean that the legal system has to make it easy for you to do so, nor protect you if you do so......

unless I should have the right to argue in court that I paid money for the rights to use your body, you took the money and therefore I can not be charged with sexual assault or rape as you sold the rights to your body to me on a temp basis....

so the law is protecting females, and they are fighting against the protection of the law while arguing that they should have the protection of the law.....
IE I should have the right to use my body to earn money but the people that pay me that money should not have the right to use my body for their form of sexual activities and even if they pay the money, I should have the right also to deny them the services they paid for.......

this is what I keep talking about with the granting of rights means undoing everything we are fighting for.......
ownership of a person, even temporary, is a form of slavery, we fought to get rid of it and now you are fighting to have parts of it made legal again....

[darkeyes]

thats a hard one to answer, fran..... so I will do my best

no you do not own your body as that would require proof of purchase
but yeah, your body is your domain by right of biological inhabitation and self identity

but the argument that its your body, so your right to earn money with it.... only works in your mind... as you are saying that it is your body, your right to use it to earn money, but your rights do not apply to the other person who is paying money for sex rights with your body....

so you may gain the legal right to use your body for money, but that doesn't mean that the legal system has to make it easy for you to do so, nor protect you if you do so......

unless I should have the right to argue in court that I paid money for the rights to use your body, you took the money and therefore I can not be charged with sexual assault or rape as you sold the rights to your body to me on a temp basis....

so the law is protecting females, and they are fighting against the protection of the law while arguing that they should have the protection of the law.....
IE I should have the right to use my body to earn money but the people that pay me that money should not have the right to use my body for their form of sexual activities and even if they pay the money, I should have the right also to deny them the services they paid for.......

this is what I keep talking about with the granting of rights means undoing everything we are fighting for.......
ownership of a person, even temporary, is a form of slavery, we fought to get rid of it and now you are fighting to have parts of it made legal again....

What absolute balderdash.. I accept that the state may restrict how I use my body and indeed may even attempt to use my mind.. but constitutionally I am a free person in sole ownership of both.. I need nor does anyone else any bill of sale.. if slave I am, I am slave unto myself and my own senses and sensibilities.. no one elses.

People in their thousands sacrificed their lives to gain me freedom of body and mind.. any restrictions I may place on my use of either are my restrictions, and any, though not all of the restrictions society through Government and parliament place upon me.. any which harms another human being, or which do harm to the world in general. Where I disagree with such restrictions I am free to act and campaign against such restrictions.. my mind is free enough to know what I can and cannot do in pursuit of my ends, and it is free enough to be aware of my own sense of right and wrong, and free enough to know for the most part, how far I am prepared to go to break society's restrictions upon me.. but such restrictions placed upon me by others does not denote ownership of me.. for they have no bill of sale..

You may not believe that you have ownership of yourself Duckie.. there are societal restircitions upon you, and even obligations.. but neither restriction or obligation takes away from you one simple fact... that sole ownership of your mind and body belongs to no one else but you...

[tenni]

"unless I should have the right to argue in court that I paid money for the rights to use your body, you took the money and therefore I can not be charged with sexual assault or rape as you sold the rights to your body to me on a temp basis....

so the law is protecting females, and they are fighting against the protection of the law while arguing that they should have the protection of the law.....
IE I should have the right to use my body to earn money but the people that pay me that money should not have the right to use my body for their form of sexual activities and even if they pay the money, I should have the right also to deny them the services they paid for......."


I've had difficulty understanding how making prostitution illegal is protecting the sex worker (male or female..even though I keep reading only the word "female"). In this entry the person is stating that the client has the right to use the sex trade worker's body for their form of sexual activities. Those services are negotiated as any service is negotiated before serving begins. You may pay for what service has been stated is for sale and the sex trade worker will lead the way..unless you requested "play dead dog while I fuck you(and even then it was fuck not beat :). The use of the sex trade worker's body is limited to the agreement just as any service is limited to what has been negotiated. I do not expect a plumber to use his/her body to bake me a cake. They never offered that service. Therefore, if prostitution is legal, the sex worker has the rights to sue the client who may use their body for other purposes including beating the sex worker. If prostitution is illegal then there is no legal recourse. The 'female" and male worker are not protected if prostitution is illegal.

What issue was raised last night on the news is that so many sex trade workers are underage when they start. Pimps force them into prostitution in Ontario as young as fourteen. If it was legal and licensed, 14 year olds would not be licensed. Therefore, they would still remain illegal sex trade workers. If you could have a sex trade worker who was licensed (meaning had been tested for STD and found clean, etc.) versus an unlicensed 14 year old (who looks 20) which would a client pay?

[Long Duck Dong]

You may not believe that you have ownership of yourself Duckie.. there are societal restircitions upon you, and even obligations.. but neither restriction or obligation takes away from you one simple fact... that sole ownership of your mind and body belongs to no one else but you...

I can not own my own body..... ownership is a human concept...... ownership implies that its like a car or a house, I can upgrade it to a better model,

ownership of a human body implies slavery.....

I have the native american stance of its like the land, I do not own it, I have possession of it for a short time but ownership implies even when I am dead and no longer in possession of it, the body still beings to me....

and possession of my body extends to all points of my body, and no further.... possession of my body gives me the right to use it to interact with others.... and I am subject to the laws of the land....

while I may wish to share my body with others for money, my possession of my body doesn't give me the right to bend or break legal laws, in the same way that driving my fist into another persons face, doesn't make me innocent of assault cos its my body and I have the right to decide that I do with it

[Long Duck Dong]

I've had difficulty understanding how making prostitution illegal is protecting the sex worker (male or female..even though I keep reading only the word "female"). In this entry the person is stating that the client has the right to use the sex trade worker's body for their form of sexual activities. Those services are negotiated as any service is negotiated before serving begins. You may pay for what service has been stated is for sale and the sex trade worker will lead the way..unless you requested "play dead dog while I fuck you(and even then it was fuck not beat :). The use of the sex trade worker's body is limited to the agreement just as any service is limited to what has been negotiated. I do not expect a plumber to use his/her body to bake me a cake. They never offered that service. Therefore, if prostitution is legal, the sex worker has the rights to sue the client who may use their body for other purposes including beating the sex worker. If prostitution is illegal then there is no legal recourse. The 'female" and male worker are not protected if prostitution is illegal.

What issue was raised last night on the news is that so many sex trade workers are underage when they start. Pimps force them into prostitution in Ontario as young as fourteen. If it was legal and licensed, 14 year olds would not be licensed. Therefore, they would still remain illegal sex trade workers. If you could have a sex trade worker who was licensed (meaning had been tested for STD and found clean, etc.) versus an unlicensed 14 year old (who looks 20) which would a client pay?

its a differcult issue tenni....... a very differcult issue... and thats why most lawyers hate prostitution and sexual assault issues.....

if I was to offer you a bj and you face fucked me..... that can be regarded as sexual assault, but I offered you the bj, not a detailed guideline on depth of thrusts, force used, how much of your cock I can handle etc.....

if I offered you bdsm sex, at what point is it bdsm and at what point is it sexual assault....

part of the issue with sexual assault and rape cases is what darkeyes says.... her body, her rights..... and as people say, you consent to sleep with others for money, you gave them the right to fuck you.... yet you cry rape and sexual assault for the very same thing......
who is right and who is wrong......

to my understanding, making prostitution illegal or legal is not really a issue, its the defining laws within the realm of prostitution is the issue..... as we are talking about protecting the sex worker, yet there is no laws protecting the client.......

[darkeyes]

I can not own my own body..... ownership is a human concept...... ownership implies that its like a car or a house, I can upgrade it to a better model,

ownership of a human body implies slavery.....

I have the native american stance of its like the land, I do not own it, I have possession of it for a short time but ownership implies even when I am dead and no longer in possession of it, the body still beings to me....

and possession of my body extends to all points of my body, and no further.... possession of my body gives me the right to use it to interact with others.... and I am subject to the laws of the land....

while I may wish to share my body with others for money, my possession of my body doesn't give me the right to bend or break legal laws, in the same way that driving my fist into another persons face, doesn't make me innocent of assault cos its my body and I have the right to decide that I do with it

You believe whatever you like Duckie.. but I am human... that ownership is a human concept does not alter the reality.. my body is mine.. I own it... for as long as I breathe it is mine absolutely and completely..all of it... once I am dead what happens to it is of no matter... and owning my body gives me both the freedom to use it as my conscience dictates and no one else the right to use it in any way shape or form without my agreement..

[tenni]

You believe whatever you like Duckie.. but I am human... that ownership is a human concept does not alter the reality.. my body is mine.. I own it... for as long as I breathe it is mine absolutely and completely..all of it... once I am dead what happens to it is of no matter... and owning my body gives me both the freedom to use it as my conscience dictates and no one else the right to use it in any way shape or form without my agreement..

I think that we do own our bodies. If we do not own our bodies then who is in control of what happens to our body while we are alive if not us? The indigenous belief is that we use with permission other creatures' bodies. A person needs to ask permission of the spirit of an animal to use the body of that animal for food. This belief acknowledges an ownership concept that each living thing has control and ownership of their body.

[Long Duck Dong]

You believe whatever you like Duckie.. but I am human... that ownership is a human concept does not alter the reality.. my body is mine.. I own it... for as long as I breathe it is mine absolutely and completely..all of it... once I am dead what happens to it is of no matter... and owning my body gives me both the freedom to use it as my conscience dictates and no one else the right to use it in any way shape or form without my agreement..

by that argument, you are stating that it is your right to commit suicide and end your own life as you see fit......

that is something I agree with...... so by that token, people should respect your right to take your own life and end the existence of your body as a living entity...

however society doesn't see it that way and often, nor do most of the people that have the * your body is your body therefore your choice * stance

now if I can point out what you said about a couple of your friends and the way they use their bodies ( for sex and drugs etc ), you have no right to stop them as its their bodies and they have the freedom to do so as they see fit....... yet people will argue they are abusing their bodies and destroying themselves...... and that the purchase of narcotics is a illegal act....

therefore, by not taking action to stop them, you can be seen as condoning their actions and condoning the actions of drug abuse and sexual abuse.....

its a purely legal and logical argument and yes, its twisting things to fit the scenerio...... but unfortunately its true.....

your stance works in regards to your own body and is something I agree with.... but it challenges your own statements and opinions in regards to the rights of others with their own bodies......and their right to abuse their bodies as they see fit

[Long Duck Dong]

I think that we do own our bodies. If we do not own our bodies then who is in control of what happens to our body while we are alive if not us? The indigenous belief is that we use with permission other creatures' bodies. A person needs to ask permission of the spirit of an animal to use the body of that animal for food. This belief acknowledges an ownership concept that each living thing has control and ownership of their body.


the key difference is the words, ownership and possession..... I may own a building yet I do not have to live in it.... but if I do, I am in possession of the building... but possession is not ownership

I am in possession of the human body I inhabit... but I lack ownership over it as I do not have the ability to trade it, sell it, rent it out, lease it out to another tenant....... I may allow the usage ( short or long term ) of it as a body but not as a dwelling......

we use, with permission a animals body for food, tools clothing etc......and they vacate the body
and that is why the indigenous people do not speak of ownership of the land in the way that other groups do...... they make take possession of a area of land for a time, but they do not have the power of ownership......

[darkeyes]

by that argument, you are stating that it is your right to commit suicide and end your own life as you see fit......

that is something I agree with...... so by that token, people should respect your right to take your own life and end the existence of your body as a living entity...

however society doesn't see it that way and often, nor do most of the people that have the * your body is your body therefore your choice * stance

now if I can point out what you said about a couple of your friends and the way they use their bodies ( for sex and drugs etc ), you have no right to stop them as its their bodies and they have the freedom to do so as they see fit....... yet people will argue they are abusing their bodies and destroying themselves...... and that the purchase of narcotics is a illegal act....

therefore, by not taking action to stop them, you can be seen as condoning their actions and condoning the actions of drug abuse and sexual abuse.....

its a purely legal and logical argument and yes, its twisting things to fit the scenerio...... but unfortunately its true.....

your stance works in regards to your own body and is something I agree with.... but it challenges your own statements and opinions in regards to the rights of others with their own bodies......and their right to abuse their bodies as they see fit

Yes.. it is my right in law to take my own life if that is my wish. It is not yet my legal right to assist anyone else to do so but that is an argument which is currently being fought over the issue of euthenasia.. and if I ever so wish end my life, I will do it too.. but I love life far too much to even think of that these days..but I am a depressive, and every few years seem to get a bad bout of the miseries (a very light term for a very serious condition of the mind), and who knows what depths I will sink to during such a bout of despair.. but so far even at my lowest point, I have always been able to somehow use logic and rationale to keep me from taking that fatal and stupid step..

Many in society see it as you say society does.. but at least as many see it in a similar light to me... the fact that is not illegal to attempt suicide in my country actually places serious doubt on your claim.. and I think the vast majority would agree with me that our bodies are our own and that we do with them as we fit.. that it is not for anyone else to decide for us how we use our bodies.. you have a point regarding certain aspects of how we use our bodies.. I do have no right whatsoever to stop them from doing what they will, yet if my friends or anyone else do something which I believe is causing them or others some harm, then it is my obligation as a friend or simply as a compassionate human being to try and persuade them to change their ways and begin to heal themselves.. use of narcotics is a major issue and have and would try and help, but when it comes to sex, I would very rarely interfere.. but even with matters of sex sometimes there are issues (ie an abusive relationship) where I think I can be of help.. but I do not dictate.. I have not that right.. I will help whenever I can and go to the enth degree in furtherance of that aim. That society places restrictions on use of narcotics, and even to some degree how we use sex or alcohol and I understand why, yet often simply think it is doing more harm than good in its interference.. that, by being a "nanny state" as some would see it, or as I prefer to call it, a bloody short sighted repressive one, it is but compounding the problem of narcotics, alcohol abuse or for instance, underage sex...and it certainly is not helping when it comes to the question of prostitution..

In the end though Duckie.. it does not challenge my statements regarding others and how they use their bodies.. in the end it is their responsibitility and their choice.. they own their bodies and how they treat them is ultimately their affair.. what I can do I will do to try and persuade them to do otherwise when I see them harming themselves... and do all I can to help them through should I succeed... but in the end.. being their bodies, I have no right to impose my will, my standards and my morality upon them.. yet if I see their actions harming or potentially doing harm to others, that is quite another matter, for that I could not stand aside and allow to pass without acting..

I choose a way to live and to use my body.. in some ways I have risked it over the years by a goodly amount of promiscuity since I was a very young teen, and by guzzling copious quantities of alcohol.. I used to smoke ciggies, and still have the occasional spliff.. these were the choices of a young girl/woman and in the main I don't regret them.. but the point is they were my choices.. legal ones in the main but not always.. but my choices to inflict on my body what I chose to inflict.. and guess what? A fucking joyous, frantabulous time I've had and wouldnt have missed very much of it for the world... I am a bit more grown up now.. and dont live anywhere near the wild lifestyle of even a couple of years ago.. but my body is my body.. mine to do with as I will... in accord with my sense of what I want of it and my sense of morality.. and everyone else, so long as they harm no other person, has that very same right...

I don't insist on, or even ask people to agree with me.. its how I think and feel... I have many lovely things which belong to me.. I have many lovely things in my life which will never belong to me.. my family, friends, Kate and our kids... they are mine yet I dont own them.. for truly I own but one thing, two possibly... my body and my mind...

[Long Duck Dong]

I am not challenging your stance that its your right to do what you want with your body.......

what I am saying is its your right, but your rights do not supersede the legal ruling of your country

its a bit like the gay cruise area thread I posted.... and how people are using terms like homophobic / anti gay statements ..... and believing it is their right to have sex when and how they feel like it and the fact its illegal, doesn't apply.... in their eyes, rights supersede legal law......

so once again, I am not arguing for or against prostitution..... cos I have noticed the same pattern again and again, the attitude that * my rights make my actions right and any legal stance doesn't apply to my actions *

and that is the same type of thinking people are starting to apply to relationships and marriage.... its my body, my right.... therefore my partner has no right to say no to me going and fucking others as their desire infringes on my rights and ownership over my body.....

but if its your body, your rights, your choices, then why do we lack so much control over our own bodies if we own them....... as ownership should give us that right...... where as possession removes the control over how our body works, while retaining the ability to improve ( exercise ) or damage ( abuse ) our bodies as we so choose

[darkeyes]

I am not challenging your stance that its your right to do what you want with your body.......

what I am saying is its your right, but your rights do not supersede the legal ruling of your country

its a bit like the gay cruise area thread I posted.... and how people are using terms like homophobic / anti gay statements ..... and believing it is their right to have sex when and how they feel like it and the fact its illegal, doesn't apply.... in their eyes, rights supersede legal law......

so once again, I am not arguing for or against prostitution..... cos I have noticed the same pattern again and again, the attitude that * my rights make my actions right and any legal stance doesn't apply to my actions *

and that is the same type of thinking people are starting to apply to relationships and marriage.... its my body, my right.... therefore my partner has no right to say no to me going and fucking others as their desire infringes on my rights and ownership over my body.....

but if its your body, your rights, your choices, then why do we lack so much control over our own bodies if we own them....... as ownership should give us that right...... where as possession removes the control over how our body works, while retaining the ability to improve ( exercise ) or damage ( abuse ) our bodies as we so choose

I don't demur from the view that any laws I have broken, I had no legal right to do so.. and I hhave broken the law.. probably in a million and one ways almost every day of my life, such is the complexity and mystery of the law to the vast majority of people.. I have broken it deliberately also, by speeding, crossing roads where I shouldnt, having sex where and when I shouldnt, and at ages 14 and 15 with whom shouldnt, I have and do use cannibis on occasion, smoked ciggies at age 12, been out drinking late in pubs and gone clubbing from age 15, demonstated illegally, skived off train and bus fares when I was skint. Some but not all of these were the folly of childhood and adolescence, but law breaking just the same. Yet I consider myself essentially law abiding, but if caught being naughty I would hold my hands up and say "ok m'lud I did the deed" and take my punishment..

Yet as Bumble says, "the law is an ass", or it can be and often is.. and I even agree with those who say I cannot pick and choose which laws to obey and which not to.. yet like most of us to some extent, I do just that vis a vis how I drive a car or use soft drugs for instance.. yet sometimes the law is such an ass, and so repressive that there is easily justification for challenging and even breaking it.. certainly bringing me into conflict with at the very least.. no one for instance condemns the citizens of Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Pinochet's Chile, or the old eastern bloc countries or China for breaking many of their oppressive laws.. and nor should they.. in fact there was encouragement from the west just to do exactly that.. and it was exactly that which brought down the regimes of eastern Europe, of Portugal and of Chille, of Argentina.. similarly any law which deprives me of my basic human rights in my own country I would happily break.. sometimes we have to stand up and be counted and that brings us into conflict with the law of the land.. and very often we have to break the worst of law and indeed I would argue, have a moral obligation so to do... and as with any action there are consequences..and I accept that these may not always be favourable to me...

What people do within their own relationships is their affair.. whether or not they treat their partner honestly and properly or cheat behind their back is also their affair.. I once paid the price for that and it was almost too much for me to bear... I learned the hard way Duckie, to deal with my partner respectfully and honestly, and nothing is done without the agreement of the other..

There are certain things about our body we are unable to have very little control over.. illness and disease and ultimately death are sadly things we are just going to have to face.. what little control we have over these things we do most of us.. whether too improve or not our body's state of being is our choice.. in those areas we do have control, my point is, and always shall be, that it is up to us and no one else how we exercise that control.. the final say is in our court.. no one elses.. because of human interraction and just getting along in life, and having respect for those around us, we do discuss, or at least should, our options and how best to proceed.. this is especially true with those we love most.. it makes our life easier and more pleasant and less full of strife.. but in the end.. we are the final arbiter of what we do, and how we live, and how we use our own bodies..

[Long Duck Dong]

fran.... this is the reality of what is going on in nz........

Desperate-turn-to-sex-work (http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/north-shore-times/4206501/Desperate-turn-to-sex-work)

this is a side of prostitution that is overlooked...... in a country where its legal..... and this is a form of forced prostitution.... legal forced prostitution...

no work available, no help from the government, no way to borrow the money...... so they do the only thing left they can do......

all the rights of prostitutes do not matter, all the protection doesn't matter.... what matters is a person becomes something that they may have never wanted to do..... sell themselves just to make ends matter......

there is a big difference between choosing to sell your body for money.... and having to sell your body for money when other options are denied to you

[darkeyes]

fran.... this is the reality of what is going on in nz........

Desperate-turn-to-sex-work (http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/north-shore-times/4206501/Desperate-turn-to-sex-work)

this is a side of prostitution that is overlooked...... in a country where its legal..... and this is a form of forced prostitution.... legal forced prostitution...

no work available, no help from the government, no way to borrow the money...... so they do the only thing left they can do......

all the rights of prostitutes do not matter, all the protection doesn't matter.... what matters is a person becomes something that they may have never wanted to do..... sell themselves just to make ends matter......

there is a big difference between choosing to sell your body for money.... and having to sell your body for money when other options are denied to you

Something similar is happening here Duckie.. as unemployment rises, money gets tighter and prices rise sadly so many will enter a life of which they have no idea the reality.. and it could get worse before long as the present government cuts benefits to millions of people who are sick, unemployed, in education or in reciept of housing benefit.

I am unsure of whether I agree about the difference between choosing to sell our bodies, and having to because of a lack of option available.. many who have entered it now entered prostitution for exactly those reasons.. they chose to enter it still, certainly often out of desperation. Yet even in good economic times many still enter it out of deperation, for not everyone can make ends meet even then. What we are seeing is more of it..and we will see far more of it before the economy picks up again. During economic hard times more people do many things they would prefer not to. Take menial jobs with crap pay, thieve, deal in narcotics, emigrate if they can. Some enter the world of prostitution. It should not be I agree, but it is sadly the way of the world in which we live.

I simply cannot see how having prostitution illegal helps anyone.. it is bad enough where it is legal.. and what is shitty about that is that it need not and should not be so.. and keeping or making it illegal only turns more of us into criminals than need be the case.