Comments on: DEAN ON PROSTITUTION

By: Mithras

Mithras — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

First, Dean Esmay must live in some kind of sheltered suburban world where he's never actually run into actual prostitutes. His opinion about prostitutes being "predators" is just ludicrious. But, as Dean's post makes clear, the argument that "nobody is hurt by this" is untrue. Fewer people would be hurt by it if it were legal.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Mithras,

Explain.

And I don't disagree on the second part. I think it should be legal; that doesn't make it a good thing, though.

By: Steven

Steven — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Yup on the Dean/Dean problem. Even though you noted that the info was from Dean Esmay's blog, I still thought it was about Howard Dean, as in Esmay is commenting on Dean. I did catch on after a few lines, however, as I pondered what in the world the Good Doctor was doing quoting Heinlein.

By: Mithras

Mithras — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

James-
Most of the street hookers I see in Philadelphia look and behave like drug addicts. These are people who - whether because of addiction, or otherwise - have to do work outside of the regular economy. From what I've read, even the high-price prostitutes who don't work the streets don't make much money, so I can only imagine what the street prostitutes make after paying their pimps. In the meantime, they're in constant danger of being attacked by customers, other prostitutes or their pimps, or the police. To say that these people - women and men - are predators is to attribute a level of calculation and an amount of personal autonomy to them that doesn't exist.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Mithras,

Dean says as much in his post. He's just saying that, as an industry, prostitution exists because of desperate, lonely men.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

I agree with Mithras's comments, as well as thew view that prostitution should be legalized. These women aren't "predators"; their personal autonomy is, as Mithras points out, largely lacking. These aren't happy-go-lucky professionals, they are usually desperate, down-and-out women. Making prostitution illegal adds a criminal element that hurts these women -- violence is added to the equation, as are threats and a constant fear of incarceration. Interestingly, the women's movement is divided on the issue. I do think the fact that women are choosing to be prostitutes is indicative of underlying social problems, but that doesn't mean the state should make it illegal. I would be interested to hear an explanation on why prostitution should remain illegal from a women's movement POV; is there an aspect to this debate that we are missing? Lisa

By: Eddie Thomas

Eddie Thomas — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Is it correct to say that the demand is really high, or is it just persistent?

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

ET,

I haven't done any surveys or seen the numbers, so I'm not sure. Certainly, the demand for the base service is almost universal. The willingness to expend capital in the pursuit of this resource is also nearly universal, at least among single males between the ages of, say, 13 and 60. How this translates into a direct exchange of money for said service, especially given the quality of supplier involved, is unknown to me. Presumably, the fear of arrest and public humiliation is also a barrier under present circumstances.

By: Mark Hasty

Mark Hasty — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Is prostitution the only case of the government making it illegal to sell something it's perfectly legal to give away?

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Mark,

There are other examples that come to mind: Babies (one can give them up for adoption with no problem but just try to sell for crack money and people get all up in arms), body organs (kidneys for transplant, e.g.), and various types of intellectual property (movies, music, etc.--although giving them away in mass is apparently a problem now).

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Let's take two examples:

1. Richard hears that the new girl in accounting is "easy". He goes over and chats her up and asks her out on a date. He takes her to drinks, dinner, a nightclub, etc. spending $150 for the evening. They go back to her place and have a good time. Richard goes home and never calls her back.

2. The next week Richard is feeling frisky and finds a "provider" on-line who is relatively close. He goes over, pays her $150 and has a good time.

There is a legal difference between the two, but is there a moral difference?

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

In the first example, "they" have a good time. In the second, "he" does.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

But both girls are compensated for their effort in a way that has value to them. Ms. Easy gets a night on the town (maybe she enjoyed the sack, maybe she faked). The provider gets the monetary compenstation.

By: Little Miss Attila

Little Miss Attila — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Four times out of five Ms. Accounting did fake it.

Both girls grew up without fathers. The difference is, Girl #2 doesn't have to put up with it if she gets another call from this guy who was just using her anyway.

Lot of women out there with few skills. And we don't have the upper-body strength to hang drywall.

By: Andy Reddson

Andy Reddson — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

The longer we pretend to our prudish pretentions, the more harm we will do. The will ALWAYS be a sex industry, for well or ill. To continue to treat it as a "bad thing" is to force those who practice these businesses underground, leading, inevitably, to a lifetime of abuse.

The only emanciption possible for these slaves is to end this double ended abuse- Punish them for their work, AND allow them to be punished by those they work FOR.