Calls for paying for sex to be outlawed

Recently the French parliament voted to outlaw the buying of sex. Selling sex will not be illegal, only the buyer will be punished

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35982929

This seems highly illogical as the proponents are advocating these buyer laws based on specious arguments; they argue that prostitution results from human trafficking, that it involves underage women and that it is inherently patriarchal.

Human trafficking and underage prostitution are already illegal in the UK, as are pimping. It is an undeniable fact that there are many women (and men!) who prefer to do sex work than to work in a canned meat factory or a supermarket checkout earning minimum wage.

Many of these people make an active choice, and it is interesting that if you listen to sex workers themselves they oppose these laws and say they will make things more dangerous for them. Also, they claim that prostitution is inherently misogynistic but this is nonsensical because there are many prostitution transactions that don't involve any women at all (where a man buys sex from a man).

Finally, it makes no sense to outlaw the buying of sex but not outlaw pornography; otherwise the easy way to get around the sex buyer law is to simply take a video camera along with you when you see a prostitute thus you are "making pornography". I directly asked some of the advocates of this law about that, but they claimed "Prostitution is always exploitative but pornography isn't". This is silly, every one of their specious arguments they make against prostitution could also be made against pornography. But they realise how bad it looks to call for outlawing pornography

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

RhaegoTarg

But that's how most of us students make our money?

Shietttt

Reply 2

Tomasio

women just need to become less frigid!
then no man will have a reason to pay for it.....
can't have it both ways really

Reply 3

BeastOfSyracuse

Original post by Tomasio

women just need to become less frigid!
then no man will have a reason to pay for it.....

That's a pretty foul comment. It's creepy in more ways than one

That attitude probably isn't particularly attractive to women, thus contributing to your perception that they are "frigid"

Reply 4

username1204031

We know for a fact that outlawing prostitution makes sex workers far, far more vulnerable.

It's time we start basing our policy on evidence and telling all these idiots to **** off.

Reply 5

Stiff Little Fingers

Original post by JordanL_

We know for a fact that outlawing prostitution makes sex workers far, far more vulnerable.

It's time we start basing our policy on evidence and telling all these idiots to **** off.

Do we? The thought process behind it (easier to track and regulate if it's not forced underground) sounds reasonable, but if you (quite rightly) want to have evidence based policy, the evidence is needed first.

Reply 6

Davij038

(just to clarify I'm a militant atheist)

I'm in two minds on this. I'm against it on principle- it dehumanise people into a commodity (I'm also against porn for this reason) and I worry when this trend will stop. I think society is overly sexualised and this trend needs to stop. Watching MTV music videos is essentially soft core pornography these days and it's only getting worse.

Then again, much like banning abortion, stopping it will only make it so much worse for the people involved.

In the end I think it's a necessary evil: another sad result of capitalism :frown:

Reply 7

PurplePixie96

*puts on fedora and adopts "bro" attitude*

Yeah but why should men pay for something that they should get for free when they want it?

Back to reality, it's ridiculous to outlaw sex work, it protects NO ONE. The sex workers are going to be put in more danger now because buyers could force them into dangerous situations or assault them. Buyers are going to suffer punishment. If it were legal then it could be monitored and both the sex worker and buyer would be protected.

Who does sex work harm exactly? If a person wishes to use his/her body in that manner then props to them. If a person wants to pay for sex, that's their choice.

Reply 8

anosmianAcrimony

Original post by RhaegoTarg

But that's how most of us students make our money?

Shietttt

You make most of your money by paying for sex? I think not. I suggest a reread.

Reply 9

anosmianAcrimony

Original post by RhaegoTarg

But that's how most of us students make our money?

Shietttt

Original post by JordanL_

We know for a fact that outlawing prostitution makes sex workers far, far more vulnerable.

It's time we start basing our policy on evidence and telling all these idiots to **** off.

Original post by PurplePixie96

A lot of you guys seem to have misread the proposal in question. Prostitution - selling sex - is not what is being outlawed here - only buying sex would be outlawed. This puts more power into the hands of sex workers, because if a buyer attempts to put them into a dangerous situation or assaults them, the sex worker can go to the police with impunity and have the buyer arrested. The buyer, on the other hand, no longer has that weapon - they can't say to the sex worker, "If you report what I've just done to the police, you'll be arrested as a prostitute."

Reply 10

Milzime

Original post by Tomasio

women just need to become less frigid!
then no man will have a reason to pay for it.....
can't have it both ways really

Reply 11

ChaoticButterfly

It's probably like drugs. Banning it just makes it worse.

Reply 12

BeastOfSyracuse

Original post by PurplePixie96

Excellent comment, I completely agree.

In fact, sex in exchange for money is the implicit transaction in many marriages (when you really get to the base of it). There are many relationships where a younger woman goes with an older man where it is not nominally prostitution, but the transaction is understood by both sides and the man has to put the woman up in a flat, give her money, buy her jewellery etc. It seems odd that you would outlaw two consenting adults who simply desire to make the terms of the transaction explicit.

There are already laws against human trafficking, enslavement and underage prostitution and they should be enforce vigorously. And in the modern age of the internet, many prostitutes work for themselves not for a pimp; they advertise through websites and work from home or go to the client's house or a hotel. They keep their earnings and in that case they simply prefer that work to perhaps a minimum wage job. Why should we take away their agency?

Unfortunately I think many puritanical middle-class feminists prefer to take sex workers' voice away and deny them their right to speak on their own behalf. They assume that sex workers need these all-knowing, wise middle-class feminists to swoop down and save them. It also really reminds me of the 19th century temperance movement; middle-class women with nothing to do joined anti-alcohol leagues and claimed that rising wages allowed the working classes too spend too much time in the pub getting drunk. These middle-class do-gooders assumed that only they could truly see the working class's best interests. This is the same mentality as these people who are now saying only they know sex workers' best interests.

There are also many people who are reliant on sex workers for human intimacy. For example, some people with disabilities have written online about how being able to pay a sex worker for the first time in their life gave them an opportunity to experience sexual intimacy. Should that be taken away from them? The mindset and impulses behind this anti-sex work movement is frightening and fascistic, and must be opposed

Reply 13

BeastOfSyracuse

Original post by anosmianAcrimony

So basically you are saying that sex workers will be safer if you put blackmail into the mix? You are saying that you want to prohibit buying sex to make sex workers' working conditions in the selling of sex safer? That is insane.

Prohibiting the buying of sex means many legitimate and law-fearing citizens who are probably no danger to prostitutes will be put off buying it. The sort of people who are dangerous don't care about the law anyway; why would they care about a law that has a two year prison sentence (buying sex) to deter them from a crime that has a 15 year sentence (rape) if they are willing to rape anyway?

Sex workers in Sweden said that it drove down demand by about a third so you had the same amount of prostitutes chasing less clients which forced the price down and made their lives more precarious, the sex workers said often they now felt more impelled to agree to condomless sex because of the reduce in demand they had less bargaining power. It means you are driving the transaction underground which is always going to be a bad idea for helping people and making their lives safer and healthier.

The buyer, on the other hand, no longer has that weapon - they can't say to the sex worker, "If you report what I've just done to the police, you'll be arrested as a prostitute."

Err, they couldn't do that anyway because sex work wasn't illegal in France before this law and it's not illegal in the UK where these laws are being proposed.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 14

BeastOfSyracuse

Original post by anosmianAcrimony

Also, your position is completely dishonest. You are purporting to advocate for this law in order to help prostitutes have more leverage and a safer working environment in which to sell sex. That is entirely disingenuous; this law is to deter and reduce prostitution on the alleged basis that it is a negative and exploitative act.

If you really wanted to make the working lives of sex workers safer then there are much better ways to do it than to make one party to the transaction a criminal.

Reply 15

Zarek

It is a message to men that having sex with barely adult girls often under very questionable circumstances can be wrong and might just get you in to trouble. I'm sure there was some intelligent thought behind this law and its enforcement in France.

Reply 16

M14B

Original post by BeastOfSyracuse

That's a pretty foul comment. It's creepy in more ways than one

That attitude probably isn't particularly attractive to women, thus contributing to your perception that they are "frigid"

I agree with you
:redface:

Reply 17

BeastOfSyracuse

Original post by Zarek

That's an entirely specious argument; you are identifying the circumstance you personally find most repulsive and then generalising that to the entire field of sex work.

You call them "barely adult". First, there are sex workers of all ages including elderly ladies. Second, either they're adult or they're not. There is an age of consent, and if it is valid for a man to sleep with a young woman at the age of consent without money, how does the addition of money make her age relevant? Either it is legitimate or it is not. But the fact money is involved is irrelevant. Third, how would you police such a ludicrous law? Would it not be illegal for a young woman to have an older boyfriend where there is the implicit understanding that he put her up in the flat, give her spending money, etc? That is sex in exchange for money.

In addition, your comment is parochial and heteronormative. There are many sex work transactions that involve no women at all. So how does this law involve them? Why should they be punished so that you can sleep at night knowing that no young women are enduring the monstrous nightmare of being paid £150 for an hour's work?

Finally, do you propose to make pornography illegal? If not, you are being inconsistent and advocating a law with a huge hole in it. It also seems illogical that you appear to assume there must be intelligent thought behind the law because... why? Because it's a law?

Reply 18

anosmianAcrimony

Original post by BeastOfSyracuse

It doesn't make me dishonest or disingenuous to like the prospect of a new law for different reasons than those for which it is actually being enacted.

Original post by BeastOfSyracuse

If you really wanted to make the working lives of sex workers safer then there are much better ways to do it than to make one party to the transaction a criminal.

It occurs to me that there are also worse ways. I can like the prospect of a new law while simultaneously acknowledging that there are probably more effective ways to accomplish the goals I want to see done - I'm allowed to praise steps in the right direction without denouncing them for not being giant leaps.

Reply 19

Zarek

[QUOTE=BeastOfSyracuse;64164207]That's an entirely specious argument; you are identifying the circumstance you personally find most repulsive and then generalising that to the entire field of sex work.

You call them "barely adult". First, there are sex workers of all ages including elderly ladies. Second, either they're adult or they're not. There is an age of consent, and if it is valid for a man to sleep with a young woman at the age of consent without money, how does the addition of money make her age relevant? Either it is legitimate or it is not. But the fact money is involved is irrelevant. Third, how would you police such a ludicrous law? Would it not be illegal for a young woman to have an older boyfriend where there is the implicit understanding that he put her up in the flat, give her spending money, etc? That is sex in exchange for money.

In addition, your comment is parochial and heteronormative. There are many sex work transactions that involve no women at all. So how does this law involve them? Why should they be punished so that you can sleep at night knowing that no young women are enduring the monstrous nightmare of being paid £150 for an hour's work?

Finally, do you propose to make pornography illegal? If not, you are being inconsistent and advocating a law with a huge hole in it. It also seems illogical that you appear to assume there must be intelligent thought behind the law because... why? Because it's a law?
So, some laws can provide a message and deterrent even if enforcement is not straight forward or common. And yes, you are right, there does appear to be questionable activity behind a lot of pornography, about which society might also take a view.