Originally Posted by ger12

Out of interest can you give some examples of the type of jobs you mean?

Some dangerous jobs: fishing, diving, work in the military, mining, jobs that involve working at a height, construction work, etc.

But lots more jobs carry risks or are unhealthy e.g. shift work is generally accepted as unhealthy.

MariaMcN,
you prolific immensely self righteous poster you, I am calling you out now!

ANSWER THE 2 ?s, I POSED TO YOU, PLEASE!

Originally Posted by PeeOKneel

MariaMcN,
you prolific immensely self righteous poster you, I am calling you out now!

ANSWER THE 2 ?s, I POSED TO YOU, PLEASE!

She's entitled to be as self righteous as she likes. But when she starts telling me and other women that she knows better than us what is and what is not harmful for us there is a problem. When she tells us that she has somehow been imbued with this 'inside information' that other women are not privy to, its a really big problem. If they don't want to engage in transactional sex or possibly any other kind of sex outside of marriage, let them live their lives this way. Don't tell me how to live mine.

There are people who sell sex, who choose to do so and who dont feel violated or raped. Arguably, they provide a necessary service. Very arguably, it is nobody's business what they do as long as they affect anyone else and everyone is happy.

Let us save our energy and our outrage for the millions of people who are in situations of forced labour and slavery worldwide. Don't lets needlessly criminalize mostly men on this doomed moral crusade.

Originally Posted by MariaMcN

I don't think there's much stigma. There's almost more stigma now attached to being against regulated prostitution. Argue against decriminalisation and you risk being accused, as I was on the other prostitution thread, of being a moralising religious fundamentalist.

Women who 'choose' to prostitute themselves are typically vulnerable, damaged women with few real choices. For many, they prostitute themselves out of necessity rather than choice. I would like to see those women (or indeed men) helped to get proper non-degrading jobs that don't expose them to bodily and psychological harm.

What about prostitutes,probably the majority, attracted to the huge potential earnings in prostitution?

Originally Posted by MariaMcN

They don't sell the use and violation of their most intimate bodily parts all the time. There is no comparison whatsoever between prostitution and other forms of work. The 'payer' pays to violate the 'payee'. It is inherently exploitative and degrading and we as a society need to protect those who would be exploited in this way.

The payee is exploiting the payer for his money,violating his wallet! Do we need to protect the payer's wallet? Offering the illusion of real sex is also a violation of the payer!

Originally Posted by yobosayo

I see the nitwits are at it again. You nitwits might want to read up on the experience of your Euro mates in the Netherlands. Specially, the number and % of trafficked women both before and after decriminalization. You should find that the number and % of trafficked women went through the roof (as it were) following decriminalization. Isn't hard to understand why. And if you nitwits would use the cerebral cortex that Deity so graciously provided you with, you'd see why. Tell me, oh nitwits, which gender is more likely to be willing to engage in sex at the drop of a hat, women or men? And so there's more men wanting to have sex than there are willing female participants, and that's why prostitution exists in the first instance, why it's overwhelmingly male john and female prostitute, and why trafficking of women will go through the roof. And so, in conclusion, you not only appear to be incredibly immoral, you also appear to be just plain stupid as well.

Prostitution has been legal in Amsterdam and presumably in other places in the Netherlands forever.So how far back do your stats go to support the claim that decriminalisation led to increased trafficking of involuntary prostitutes? Are trafficking stats distinguished from pimping stats where pimps act like travel agents and finance prostitutes in return for fees to be repaid?

Originally Posted by MariaMcN

You could be 'for' prostitution without being involved in it in anyway. As such there would be no risk attached to voicing your support. If prostitution users feel shame, it's deserved. If they think what they do is perfectly legitimate, they shouldn't be in any way embarrassed coming forward.

Historically in Japan,prostitution was not regarded as degrading and Thailand is very tolerant of it. Germany is also tolerant,as German women engaged in industrial scale prostitution with allied armies to keep their families fed in the years after WWII.

Originally Posted by pragmaticapproach

It would be impossible to prosecute, how could it be proven that it was the clients intention to purchase sexual services? Technically you could have legal brothels that make the punters sign a disclaimer stating that they are paying for the "prostitutes time and companionship and anything else that occurs is purely coincidental".

The charge can be arbitrary,designed to embarrass rather than convict. An acquaintance in Canada stopped his car and lowered the window to speak to a prostitute,a cop decoy. According to his lawyer,he had barely begun to speak when the cop charged him with soliciting.

Anonymous submissions can be made: https://www.facebook.com/turnofftheb...83700881648326

Originally Posted by afns1

Anonymous submissions can be made: https://www.facebook.com/turnofftheb...83700881648326

Submit this forum discussion?