LibriumArcana.Games

Well, I just remembered lurking over a discussion about porn. See, someone claimed that porn is immoral while comparing it with prostitution. Basically his "reasoning" is like this: since prostitution is immoral, and porn serves the same function as prostitution (sexual gratification), then porn is immoral as well.

Well while his "argument" against porn is pretty much ridiculous, it stirred my curiousity though. Is prostitution really immoral like he claimed? I dunno, but I think prostitution is amoral (neutral) instead of immoral (for instance, a married man is cheating his wife if he books a hooker, but for single man it should be no problem). But what do you think? What do you think about the morality of prostitution?

I never did understand the harping on prostitution. Yes, it is wrong if the man (or even woman, hell, there are gigolos and lesbian prostitutes out there) is married, but otherwise, what's so evil about it?

Why are the cops so out to get prostitutes and men who want to buy one? Hell, I might buy one if I had the money and wasn't afraid of picking up a cop in disguise (yes, I watch COPS too much).

Now, the whole thing with pimps that basically own the prostitutes and treat them like complete shit (common in the inner-city, IIRC), that IS wrong. Very wrong. But I frankly don't see anything morally wrong with the basic practice of prostitution.

I completly agree with Jon. Prostitution itself is not wrong at all - lying and abuse, which sadly go with it many times, are both wrong, but not prostuition at all.

Ra wrote:I never did understand the harping on prostitution. Yes, it is wrong if the man (or even woman, hell, there are gigolos and lesbian prostitutes out there) is married, but otherwise, what's so evil about it?

See, that's my question as well. Is there actually something inherently evil about prostitution? To me, it is nothing more than a fair trade where I purchase sexual services from the provider. Is there anything evil about it? I don't think so.

Ra wrote:Now, the whole thing with pimps that basically own the prostitutes and treat them like complete shit (common in the inner-city, IIRC), that IS wrong. Very wrong. But I frankly don't see anything morally wrong with the basic practice of prostitution.

Not to mention the costumers sometimes treat them like shit as well. Now that is very wrong. I mean, if you buy chocolate from a convenience store, you should never be rude to the storekeeper, shouldn't you?

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:See, that's my question as well. Is there actually something inherently evil about prostitution? To me, it is nothing more than a fair trade where I purchase sexual services from the provider. Is there anything evil about it? I don't think so.

Indeed. It's basic commerce. What the problem is, people who read some 3,000 year old book then made laws influenced by it.

Not to mention the costumers sometimes treat them like shit as well. Now that is very wrong. I mean, if you buy chocolate from a convenience store, you surely won't be rude to the storekeeper, will you?

Agreed. I mean, it is a basic "trade" thing going on, but at least when I buy something I smile and thank the clerk. I'd also be respectful to the escort. People who don't have even that modicum of decency disgust me.

3d17: BTW, shouldn't this go in Philosophy?

Ra wrote:Agreed. I mean, it is a basic "trade" thing going on, but at least when I buy something I smile and thank the clerk. I'd also be respectful to the escort. People who don't have even that modicum of decency disgust me.

Yup. Most prostitutes are being treated badly to the point that they were actually surprised because I've been nice to them. Mind you, it was a quite luxurious massage brothel, so imagine what happens to street hookers.

I guess what's really immoral is not prostitution itself, but the way people treat prostitutes.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Ra wrote:Agreed. I mean, it is a basic "trade" thing going on, but at least when I buy something I smile and thank the clerk. I'd also be respectful to the escort. People who don't have even that modicum of decency disgust me.

Yup. Most prostitutes are being treated badly to the point that they were actually surprised because I've been nice to them. Mind you, it was a quite luxurious massage brothel, so imagine what happens to street hookers.

I guess what's really immoral is not prostitution itself, but the way people treat prostitutes.

The biggest reason for that is ironically, that it's illegal. Because these women are often forced into it and have no legal recourse, they can be treated this way. They are in a position where they cannot really demand proper treatment or even basic human dignity.

You don't see these sorts of problems in developed countries within areas that have legalised prositution. There the simple fact that they have legal recourse changes the whole nature of the business.

I wouldn't ever call prositution savory or a nice career. Neither would I say the same about porn. But if a consenting adult of sound mind wishes to, I don't think it should be illegal.

IIRC, isn't prostitution legal around Vegas, as long as the prostitutes and their "company" are licensed? I would think that, yes, they probably would get treated better in that circumstance. Hell, they might have a union or some shit.

I think mainly it's about taxes. Prostitutes don't have to pay taxes on their income. Unless of course it's a registered business, like Ra mentioned. Look at Hidi Fliess. She was running a escort service (which in essence can or can't be along the same lines.) And the only reason she got busted was because she cheated on her taxes.

Here's some things to think about:

~Some woman sell themselves to support families. (Not all the time but it happens. How many exotic dancers (again not excatly the same but) are single mothers?)

~What do you call strip/gentalman's clubs? They are offering sexual gratification for money. But they pay taxes.

~And someone please tell me what the hell an engagement ring is? You're (in theory) buying that woman.

People say prostitution is demeaning to women, but there are male prostitutes too.

See, prostitution should be legal because at least if it was legal it would be supervised. People are going to buy and sell prostitutes whether it's legal or not, so making it illegal just makes it easier for seedier people to get involved and also makes the need for health regulations a great one. Prostitutes nowadays spread sexually transmitted diseases more often than the average two people having sex; if it was legal and there was some sort of standard, this could be avoided.

For example, in some European nations you have to be STD tested regularly in order to keep up your 'license' to practice as a prostitute.

Caz wrote:People say prostitution is demeaning to women, but there are male prostitutes too.

See, prostitution should be legal because at least if it was legal it would be supervised. People are going to buy and sell prostitutes whether it's legal or not, so making it illegal just makes it easier for seedier people to get involved and also makes the need for health regulations a great one. Prostitutes nowadays spread sexually transmitted diseases more often than the average two people having sex; if it was legal and there was some sort of standard, this could be avoided.

We think alike!

Caz wrote:For example, in some European nations you have to be STD tested regularly in order to keep up your 'license' to practice as a prostitute.

That's smart.

Indeed! They also get things like government healthcare benefits and free coffee/beds at some hotels. After all, they bring business!

Ra wrote:IIRC, isn't prostitution legal around Vegas, as long as the prostitutes and their "company" are licensed? I would think that, yes, they probably would get treated better in that circumstance. Hell, they might have a union or some shit.

Kinda. In several Nevada counties (which doesn't include Clarck county, the county Vegas is in) it is indeed legal and heavily liscensed and regulated (mandatory weekly disease checks, that kind of thing). And rather expensive. But yes, leaglizing and regulating out take a lot of the violence and seediness out of it.

And this is more of a P&T topic.

Wrong as in immoral, or wrong as in should become illegal?

I think there is a difference between knowing something is immoral, and making something illegal. You cant just look at the sex act and payment in and of itself. You have to look at the whole picture of what is going on before you can make a moral judgment.

You need to ask yourself a few fundamental questions. Chief among these is "WHy the hell is this woman a prostitute?" Face it, not many people says "I want to be a whore when I grow up" So before you pay the woman, you need to consider whether or not she is a prostitute of her own free will, or if some outside factor forced her into it.

If it is the latter, I would go on a limb and say that what you are doing is almost morally equivalent to raping the girl, then tossing money at her as she leaves.

However, PROVIDED she is a prostitute because she really wants to be and PROVIDED she is not being subjugated by a pimp, PROVIDED she or her john his not spreading sexually transmitted diseases and PROVIDED there is no adultery involved, prostitution is not inherently immoral

Now on to legality. I think that if prostitution is made legal, it needs to be regulated HEAVILY.
Here are the list or rules and caveats

1) Nothing even resembeling a pimp. To do this, prostitutes must work in a designated brothel and live seperatly or MAYBE in small groups. It must be staffed entirely by one gender, and what can be construed as management, cannot be armed (the employees however, would be encouraged to be)

2) Background checks on Johns. They dont have to be extensive, just a search through a public sex offender database would suffice. Also, records of all johns must be kept, including name, address, and phone number, taken down in the whore's personal log book, and submitted to management for records once a week.

3) Condom use for all sex acts other than hand-jobs is mandatory. And STD tests for all employees are mandatory once a week. In the event of disease transmittance, the prostituytes John Records are pulled and every person on the list going back as far as 8 months is contacted and informed that they may be infected.

Comrade Tortoise wrote:You need to ask yourself a few fundamental questions. Chief among these is "WHy the hell is this woman a prostitute?"

And a valid answer might be that it can be a lucrative business, and she wanted the money. Just the same as you can ask me "why the hell is this guy a tech support rep?"

Face it, not many people says "I want to be a whore when I grow up"

And many people take jobs they really don't want to do just for the money to pay the bills. Are these jobs unethical too?

And many people take jobs they really don't want to do just for the money to pay the bills. Are these jobs unethical too?

But prostitution isnt like any other job. It is a job in which your right to bodily integrity is violated if you are unwilling to do it. If someone is forced into that by some outside force, be it economic or a gun to her head, it is unethical. In most other professions, like, say, being a tex support rep, your rights are not violated. You are not in any real risk of pregnancy or disease, and your personal ethics are not violated.

A prostitute IS in a large amount of risk, and in all likelyhood, she feels dirty when she comes home from work. So damn right under those circumstances it is unethical.

Now, if she is one of those people that has no problem having sex for money and enjoys her job, then it is not unethical

To use another example:

If person Y is kicked out of their home and has no applicable skills, and has to resort to prostitution in order to survive (and this does happen, more than you might think) then that person is in an unethical situation, and it would be unethical for person Z to have sex with that person in exchange for money, because person Y is not consenting of their own free will, but rather under significant duress.

Comrade Tortoise wrote:

And many people take jobs they really don't want to do just for the money to pay the bills. Are these jobs unethical too?

But prostitution isnt like any other job. It is a job in which your right to bodily integrity is violated if you are unwilling to do it. If someone is forced into that by some outside force, be it economic or a gun to her head, it is unethical. In most other professions, like, say, being a tex support rep, your rights are not violated. You are not in any real risk of pregnancy or disease, and your personal ethics are not violated.

On the other hand, if a tech support guy is answering phones with a gun to his head, knowing if he doesn't answer a phone, he gets his brains blown out, then that job is unethical, as well. I don't see how you can extend the fact that direct coercion to do any sort of work is unethical, including prostitution, to stating prostitution is unethical.

Hmm...

A Delicate Subject I'd say...

It all depends on circumstances.

If it were legalized, and had restrictions, and was organized by legitimate organizations, it'd be okay.

As it currently exists, in the USA and the UK, it is unethical. Immoral? No, it's only sex, sex is a natural function, it's like stating that eating is immoral.

Surlethe wrote:

Comrade Tortoise wrote:

And many people take jobs they really don't want to do just for the money to pay the bills. Are these jobs unethical too?

But prostitution isnt like any other job. It is a job in which your right to bodily integrity is violated if you are unwilling to do it. If someone is forced into that by some outside force, be it economic or a gun to her head, it is unethical. In most other professions, like, say, being a tex support rep, your rights are not violated. You are not in any real risk of pregnancy or disease, and your personal ethics are not violated.

On the other hand, if a tech support guy is answering phones with a gun to his head, knowing if he doesn't answer a phone, he gets his brains blown out, then that job is unethical, as well. I don't see how you can extend the fact that direct coercion to do any sort of work is unethical, including prostitution, to stating prostitution is unethical.

Strawman, I gave the caveat that prostitution is OK if there is no coercion, direct or INDIRECT. But the chances are, even if prostitution is legalized and controlled, the girl is still, deep down inside, unwilling to do the work. She was probably forced into that line of work (which few sane people would go into voluntarily) by some outside pressure.

SO while prostitution is not INHERENTLY unethical and immoral, it is both, in a good number of cases. based upon the circumstances of the prostitute.

Dakarne wrote:As it currently exists, in the USA and the UK, it is unethical. Immoral? No, it's only sex, sex is a natural function, it's like stating that eating is immoral.

Immoral? That depends on what one's moral code is, and so you'd need to hash out differences between moral codes to justify that statement.

Immoral? That depends on what one's moral code is, and so you'd need to hash out differences between moral codes to justify that statement.

Well, it's immoral if a person's "moral code" is based on some 3,000 year old book written by mysogynistic scribes. "Moral code" is such a loose term that any answer to the OP becomes a non-answer. There are people whose "moral code" would be to murder prostitutes (example: Jack the Ripper).

Is prostiution unethical? Yeah, especially in its current form. But quite frankly, I see the situation with the government as going about the problem in the wrong way, as has been stated by several others. Rather than helping, they're only making the situation worse by going after prostitutes and clinging to laws set forth by an arcaic book. My point is that the current situation is the result of unethical practices by both sides; the pimps and the police. It's the result of a broke system based on something whose moral and ethical ideals must truly be put into question.

Unfortunately that will never happen as long as we have a White House, Congress, and Supreme Court under the control of fundie Republicans. But enough political ranting.

Immoral? That depends on what one's moral code is, and so you'd need to hash out differences between moral codes to justify that statement.

Well, my moral code is based upon the laws of biology...

Sex is natural. Sex is actually good for the species. (unlike Violence) and consensual sex is not at all immoral with MY MORAL CODE.

Ra wrote:

Immoral? That depends on what one's moral code is, and so you'd need to hash out differences between moral codes to justify that statement.

Well, it's immoral if a person's "moral code" is based on some 3,000 year old book written by mysogynistic scribes. "Moral code" is such a loose term that any answer to the OP becomes a non-answer. There are people whose "moral code" would be to murder prostitutes (example: Jack the Ripper).

Um, a little bit nitpick, Jon, but I guess the more accurate number is 2,000 instead of 3,000.