Ethics of Prostitution

@New Mysterianism,

New Mysterianism;84144 wrote:

"and your point is?" strikes me as a bit flippant and dismissive. You expressed some incredulity about your argumentative inconsistencies and asked for proof, so I took some pains to dig up your previous posts and show you where. If you aren't particularly interested in evaluating the reasons in support of your argument, or want to persist in circularity and hidden criteria (the moving-target fallacy), I won't pursue the matter further.

Im sorry?
I actually don't understand your point, let me rephrase,
You're point is? (Sorry im still not getting it, sorry for being ignorant).
Thanks!

@Caroline,

Caroline;84141 wrote:

We've established that legalisation has benefits and that the person has a right to chose, what we are arguing about is the damage it can do to a person and is it ethical in principle and I say no and for reasons I have stated in previous posts.

I honestly can't see what would be unethical about it. It's selling a service for money, no different than any other job. Sex is just something that two or more people do for fun. Sometimes lust and love are involved but they aren't needed.

@Khethil,

Yes but my point is Shadowdragon that is not what sex is for, money is man made, our sex wasn't put on this planet to sell for money, as money is man made it is not nature, sex is nature.

@Khethil,

Why does it's source matter? There are many things that are natural and wouldn't be considered ethical (such as killing the weak members of the pack for example).

@Caroline,

Caroline;84119 wrote:

There are, who told you that?

I have talked to a prostitute who said that she enjoyed her job and have read and seen interviews of prostitutes who said that they enjoyed their jobs.

Caroline;84154 wrote:

our sex wasn't put on this planet to sell for money

"Put on this planet"? Put there by whom? Is this whole thing just Christian dogmatism? Is there any point in trying to get you to explain yourself with even the slightest clarity?

@Shadow Dragon,

Shadow Dragon;84155 wrote:

Why does it's source matter? There are many things that are natural and wouldn't be considered ethical (such as killing the weak members of the pack for example).

Indeed, it would be disastrous if we took "nature" as our ethical guide. Predation is quite natural.

@Theages,

Theages;84156 wrote:

I have talked to a prostitute who said that she enjoyed her job and have read and seen interviews of prostitutes who said that they enjoyed their jobs.

One prostitute? i lived with three and they were a wreck, I mean destroyed!

Theages;84156 wrote:

"Put on this planet"? Put there by whom? Is this whole thing just Christian dogmatism? Is there any point in trying to get you to explain yourself with even the slightest clarity?

Who said I was a Christian, I don't know who put us on this planet or how, do you?
Please don't get personal, it is not very becoming.

@Caroline,

Caroline;84158 wrote:

One prostitute? i lived with three and they were a wreck, I mean destroyed!

Completely irrelevant. You made a universal claim. A single counterexample is enough to refute a universal claim. Ergo, your universal claim is refuted and false.

With this in mind, I'll say what I said earlier: Prostitution can involve pleasure and lust, which according to you is what sex is "about". So how then is prostitution unethical?

Quote:

Who said I was a Christian, I don't know who put us on this planet or how, do you?

No, I certainly do not have that knowledge. That being the case, it would be pretty absurd of me to make claims about what anything was put on this planet "for". I'm sorry to see that your ignorance hasn't prevented you from doing the same.

@Khethil,

Well that's your opinion and I believe it's based on false evidence. I have tried to express my views in a dignified and respectful manner but I'm getting nowhere with certain members and for that I'm staying out of this thread, thank you and goodnight.
And to answer your questions Theage, well I've already explained, anyone can see that, thank you.

@Caroline,

Caroline;84166 wrote:

Well that's your opinion and I believe it's based on false evidence.

"False evidence": Her experience is not borne out universally, so I must be a liar.

@Theages,

Caroline, have you lived with a prostitute in Nevada who worked legally? It seems very dubious that the two situations would be comparable. Prostitutes who work in a black market can't form a union, they can't demand fair treatment from their pimps, they cannot be guaranteed safety.

I think that the fact of the matter is that speaking of the psychological side of things is pure speculation for any of us. You may have lived with prostitutes in a shelter, but no one working at the Moonlite Bunny Ranch is below upper middle class. I would say that it is closer to being a porn star than anything(in fact many of the prostitutes at the Bunny Ranch are porn stars.

@Khethil,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krumple
To some people dating is just the legal way for prostitution.

And this, in no way shape or form, means that said people are correct.

Correct is a very relative term you are using here and it implies you have some other basis for it. From my point of view, if both or all individuals involved are okay with it, then how is it not correct? This is where your argument doesn't make any sense to me. You say it is not correct but you don't give any basis for why you think it is not correct for them. So I must assume you are using some religious basis for your reasoning. If that is not the case then my argument still holds because correct or not correct have not been explained.

I have already supplied my explanation of what correct is for me. But it does not hold up when used for your argument.

@Caroline,

Caroline;84141 wrote:

We've established that legalisation has benefits and that the person has a right to chose, what we are arguing about is the damage it can do to a person and is it ethical in principle and I say no and for reasons I have stated in previous posts.

Caroline: I think what people are 'trying' to argue is that were the entire social matrix, not just legalization, were changed there would be much less damage. Much of the emotional and psychologica trauma anyone suffers is because their action are contrary to an internalized ideology. It creates an unfixable dissonance internally. Legalization would simply be the first step to the transformation of attitudes about prostitution and sexuality. This would likely take a few generations to completely rid the ideological superorganism of the stigma, but it could happen. Given that proper regulatory and safety standards were implemented, much of the emotional/psychological damage currently suffered by prostitutes and for that matter "easy" women would dissipate.

@Khethil,

Yeah I agree, with both of you but have you seen the state of the crack whores down the back of the street Zetic? It's not ally bunny girls??? That wasn't my point which I've made in previous posts.
Thanks

---------- Post added 08-18-2009 at 06:32 PM ----------

I'm really not interested in partaking in this thread any further. I wouldn't bother picking points with my posts anymore because i'm not coming back. Thanks

@Caroline,

To clarify my position, I am in fact suggesting the possibility that the Bunny Ranch could be closer to the norm (if prostitution were universally legalized and regulated) than the current life of the nightwalker, crack addicted or no. In no way am I asserting that the Bunny Ranch is the current norm.

Bearing that in mind, I think that it is ethical to legalize prostitution. Whether engaging in prostitution or paying for sex is ethical in general begs the question: 'What is general about the circumstance?' you cannot appeal to specific circumstances simply because they are commonplace, any possible circumstance is fair game. So what is generally true about the situation? Whatever negatives that still hold in the best possible case and whatever positives still hold in the worst. I think that is an empty set. Prostitution is to broad to have sensible moral status, unless one is simply appalled by the act of paying for sex. That is as valid as any moral stance, I simply do not share the sentiment and so I disagree.

@Theages,

Theages;84156 wrote:

I have talked to a prostitute who said that she enjoyed her job and have read and seen interviews of prostitutes who said that they enjoyed their jobs.

So would you be willing to assert that the majority of prostitutes do it as a voluntary career choice, i.e. they're following their "calling" just as some are called to the priesthood or to the arts?

Or do you think it's more likely that they have chosen it for lack of any other way to support themselves?

---------- Post added 08-18-2009 at 09:44 PM ----------

Theages;84164 wrote:

I'm sorry to see that your ignorance hasn't prevented you from doing the same.

THEAGES -- you had better find a more congenial way of expressing yourself here.

@Khethil,

Quote:

Yeah I agree, with both of you but have you seen the state of the crack whores down the back of the street Zetic? It's not ally bunny girls???

Is this the condition because prostitution is illegal there?

In Nevada, the only place where prostitution is legal in the US, it is far different than your typical urban city prostitute. Why? Because the conditions of illegal business makes all the rules go out the window. Of course the women can be treated badly, what other option do they have, but if it were legitimized business, this could never happen. Places where prostitution is legal, you won't find the cracked out "gutter tramp".

@Krumple,

Krumple;84221 wrote:

Is this the condition because prostitution is illegal there?

In Nevada, the only place where prostitution is legal in the US, it is far different than your typical urban city prostitute.

Places where prostitution is legal, you won't find the cracked out "gutter tramp".

If you've ever actually been to Las Vegas you'd probably think otherwise. Never in any city in the United States have I seen illegal street prostitution more visible and more pitiable than around the "Strip" in Las Vegas. I used to spend a lot of time in NYC, I've lived in Boston, and I've spent lots of time in Chicago, San Francisco, and Washington DC, and nothing even remotely comes close to what I've seen in Las Vegas.

Explain that please.

@Khethil,

Quote:

If you've ever actually been to Las Vegas you'd probably think otherwise. Never in any city in the United States have I seen illegal street prostitution more visible and more pitiable than around the "Strip" in Las Vegas. I used to spend a lot of time in NYC, I've lived in Boston, and I've spent lots of time in Chicago, San Francisco, and Washington DC, and nothing even remotely comes close to what I've seen in Las Vegas.

Explain that please.

Simple, bottle necking. Since it is one of the few places where it is "acceptable" it causes a massive influx of prostitutes all struggling for "work". If it were more wide spread, the scene in Vegas would diminish. It's simple supply economics. In those other cities, you can't be so "out in the open" or you'll end up in cuffs, so it's like the cat's out of the bag in Vegas.

@Krumple,

Krumple;84228 wrote:

Simple, bottle necking. Since it is one of the few places where it is "acceptable" it causes a massive influx of prostitutes all struggling for "work". If it were more wide spread, the scene in Vegas would diminish. It's simple supply economics. In those other cities, you can't be so "out in the open" or you'll end up in cuffs, so it's like the cat's out of the bag in Vegas.

That makes sense. One would expect to see all the visible elements of prostitution (from drug-addicted streetwalkers to professional escorts) more pronounced in the one place where it is legalized.

Philosophy Forum

Ethics of Prostitution

Quick Links

My Account

able2know