.

All sides are represented on that debate page. Personally, I don't trust anyone making the case for commodifying it. Putting the product before the person- and the government coffers benefitting. Something really stinks about that. Legalization isn't just about safety, it's about profit. If it were about safety we'd be trying to phase out prostitution and change minds about it's ongoing legitimacy because it's a business founded on abuse that exploits the abused.

Stats from health services in Glasgow Scotland:

http://www.equalitiesinhealth.org/public_html/Prostitution.html

Kimmio, I think that is a nw record...8 posts in a row.  

You were posting all through the night.  I am worried about you.  You have said that you are off wor, and not feeling well, possibly deprssed.  Please ensure you are talking to folks.  From here, with your posts, your random thoughts, it does appear that you may be off-balance.

Sincerely, now? I slept several hours yesterday, daytime, and only a few intermittent hours last night/ this morning. Physical health issues of my partner and I both, combined with personal financial stress. Yes, we have people. Thanks. I'm fine. Just having a week. This is giving me something worthwhile to think about. Maybe we should get jobs in brothels? We're housepoor, behind on our bills and the rent's too high. (bad joke- you couldn't pay me a million dollars to do that)

Off balance, about this issue in particular? No. You are, imo. Because the abuse endured is last up for your consideration. My point of view comes from not just wishes for prostitutes' safety in the short term, but long term hope for health and well being, and full equality of women in society. From a feminist pov, I think that trumps 'individual choice' of the very, very few women who go into it eyes wide open, with full consent and any sort of self-determination- but they get in the press. I sincerely believe we can't get there, to equality, by commodifying a business so rooted in abuse. I think you and lastepoint, Bette and chansen are off base. I'm in a more vulnerable position here, for having exposed some of my emotional vulnerabilities, but I still think you're wrong. None of you have explained how you can defend the inherent abuse in sex work in favour of pleasing the 'customers'. And it really bothers me because I think you're compassionate people, but this has me thrown for a loop and ready to give up on WC or any reincarnations of it. That's how strongly I feel. It's disappointing. One of the most disappointing discussions I've had here. Can't support a place that supports institutionalized abuse and inequality of women, especially when a few of the prominent people here defending it are other women- and you cut me down for speaking up about the harsh realities. You're defenses are all about freedom of sexual expression, even taking digs at my own- but the abused prostitute does not have that freedom. None of them are working from that place. I would be just as committed if it were 1800's and you were defending slavery- or any other marginalized, oppressed, abused group in favour of the 'needs' of the abuser.


I think actually my points are quite logical, and the links quite credible and thought provoking (and in the case of the blog stardust posted, heart wrenching) if you take the time to read them instead of being snippy with me because you've made your mind up and my posts are too any words to read. I'd like to see some stats and a bit of effort put into this by others on the thread backing up their points of view. Yeah. They're a bit all over the place, because it's a big issue that can't be solved with a few taking points. And I find myself in a position to be quite defensive about things that I shouldn't be. But they're not random. It's all relevant. From the personal, to the broader social implications of legalization.

For me, Kimmio's passionate refusal of legalization brings forward some important considerations. Perhaps because of my immersion experience in the lived experience of survival sex workers in East Vancouver.

I want to be clear that this community of exploited and oppressed persons included male as well as female sex workers.

I also want to be clear that the exploitation of persons by the means of money is not limited to the realm of sex. Our whole socioeconomic order is founded on the principle of money for service. Everyone of us is implicated on one side of the equation or the other. Sometimes both.

Here is a defining statement of what it is that we have learned to consider normal:

"The value, or worth of a man (person), is as of all other things, his price; that is to say, so much as would be given for the use of his power: and therefore is not absolute; but a thing dependant on the need or judgement of another." 

This is from the enlightened mind of Thomas Hobbes, an early advocate of the new world order we now inhabit; based not on what ought to be but on what is. That is, not according to Socratic or Aristotelian philosophy, but according to the empirical data obtained by observation and measurement.

Kimmio proposes that there ought to be no legitimisation of persons buying the use of other persons. This is consistent with the messianic vision of a world without exploitation or oppression. A vision abhorred and refused by those who are seduced and used by the will to power at work at the instinctual level of human being.

Reading for the heart of Kimmio's passionate refusal of easy accommodation, this question is brought to the foreground for me: What follows where every aspect of being in the world is commodified?

George

In the mythologic language of the New Testament's Revelation: "The traders will cry and carry on because the bottom dropped out of business, no more market for their goods: gold, silver, precious gems, pearls; fabrics of fine linen, purple, silk, scarlet; perfumed wood and vessels of ivory, precious woods, bronze, iron, and marble; cinnamon and spice, incense, myrrh, and frankincense; wine and oil, flour and wheat; cattle, sheep, horses, and chariots. And slaves—their terrible traffic in human lives."

Has anyone heard of the Merseyside Model?  It's named for an area in the UK that demonstrates how police have come with a model for protecting sex workers from crimes, such as rape and abuse.

http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2013/08/why_crimes_agai

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24520849

While we and the Canadian government are busy trying to work this all out, it seems to me that the above model would help ensure more safety for sex workers and prevent much of the rape and abuse that is part of the risk involved.

It astounds me that these women are not taken seriously by police when they report a crime. Abuse is abuse. Rape is rape, no matter who is involved and the police forces also need to learn this in order to enforce it. Attitudes need to be adjusted on criminal behaviour against ANY woman within our protective services.

Well, sort of. Human economic systems are a variation of persons buying the use of other person's labour. Kimmio confines it to the exploitation of female sex workers, and her proposal to correct this, admittedly often dismal, situation, is to attempt a blanket suppression of demand. All anyone is saying is that, practically, in the world as it exists today, this will not work, and any criminalization of prostitution simply drives it underground, where there are fewer protections for sex workers.

I get that in the Kindom the lion will lie with the kid, but in the real world, how do we get there?

Legalization provides no guarantees that the most grievous abuse will not still occur underground, after hours, behind closed doors- but that other less violent but still harmful, demeaning traumatic, exploitative practices will be mainstreamed. Adding traumatic insult to soul depleting injury. How can a sex worker trust that she can go to the police with an 'attempted' assault? How many attempted sexual assaults are an acceptable work hazard? Whose word would they take- the respected businessman, or the woman who has sex for a living? The abuse won't stop unless the men who buy are deterred first and foremost, and we move away from legitimising prostitution altogether. If it is legal and opened up to the mainstream marketplace, woman as object (and it is mainly women), will still be property for the most personal use and exploitation, the derrogatory words and unwelcome touches will still demean and terrify, the woman-still nobody but an instrument for sexual fantasy by someone, by many, who could care less about who she is. Inequality, with no regard for the abuse and degradation that lands people in sex work, eroticised and commodified. It's already happening.

Read about the Mereyside Model that waterfall posted about.

I don't confine it to female sex works- the sex trade consists of mainly female sex workers, and looking at it through a feminist lens because women have been looking at what to do about this for years- helps exploited men in the sex trade too. And George is right, this is a horrible example of what happens, thinking we can commodify everything under the sun without consequence. We need, IMO, to back away from looking at life that way.

umm,as a note:  people couldn't purchase sex if people didn't sell it.  

You will always have multiple levels of demand: from violent/ugly to normal/acceptable

You will always have multiple levels of supply:  from ugly/diseased to normal/acceptable

The challenge is to ensure that the sellers and buyers are adequately protected and the exchange is acceptable.  If you do, then you can approach the violent/ugly and ugly /diseased and give care to both sets, and also interventions.  You can also address root cause to ensure that people who enter as buyers or sellers are doing so in the best possible circumstances.

Kimmio, there are many many shades in this one.  You presume items about my motivatin or approach which are incorrect.  

No. Not long term. There are no shades, IMO, worth legitimizing it as a business, for the risks. I think it's an inherently abusive 'trade' and I am not alone in that view by far. The statistics speak for themselves. The 13 yr old girls are not all of a sudden going to stop being prostituted and replaced by worldly older women if it's legalized. And those 13 year old girls who are in it for years, don't magically turn 18 and make healthy well informed decision If we mistakenly expect that, we condone the dark side of it.

The points you make now are different from what you've been saying, which is, it's just like any other job and some people enjoy it therefore everyone else should but out of it. Which is the point of view I am adamantly against.

Note back: People (very young people) got sold, coerced, beaten, raped, submitted, into it so it could be purchased.

Kimmio, I have been making the same points from the moment that I entered this discussion. 

You asked me, "Can you imagine enjoying someting? Can you imagine doing it for a living?"

You went on to talk about sexual needs, my own hang ups- suggested that I don't know that slavery involves ownership of other people- and how you think sex can and should be able to be sold as a commodity. You ignored the links I posted that legitimately support my opinion, by reputable sites and went after me instead. You never addressed my concerns about the early indoctrination/ abuse issue, stats to that effect, and how prostitution magnifies the trauma over time. You just said, many jobs, like firefighters, carry risk. I get it but I totally disagree- and find that angle very cold.

Pinga, this "job" of prostitution has a mortality rate of 10 to 40 times above the average.  60 to 80% of sex workers experience regular physical and sexual abuse.

Prostitution as a "job" is incompatible with the dignity and safety that other professions enjoy.

Also saying the "demand" for sex will never disappear really paints a poor picture of what men are capable of doesn't it?  Are we saying that men can't use their brains and that only their sex organs think for them? Men are capable of being reeducated about prostituion. It has been a proven fact that when prostitution is not readily available or legal that the average man will rarely use the services of a prostitute. Societies have changed and they can again.

In Germany, where prostitution is legal, only 44 persons have registered as "professional sex workers" out of 400,000.

In the Sneep-case, all of the 100 women involved were in legal, tax paying and state sanctioned brothels. Nevada also has a very high rate of human trafficking.

Waterfall, I can imagine times in my life, when if prostitution was legal, that I may have availed myself of the service.  You maybe can't, but, I surely can.  I am not a man. 

The current situation regarding prostitution and risk is in part because of how society has placed prostitution.  It occurs in the fringes, in the dark alleys, away from lights and safety.  It is relegated to those who have no other options providing the service, or because they have already been abused , not seeing other options.  Those who might consider it a valid service and be willing to offer it if paid well enough are less likely to due to the nature of safety .

So, we are in the mess we are in.  

My point is, that unless we choose to change it, prostitution will remain, for ever and ever, due to supply and demand, and it will remain as dangerous as it is today.

But you lived without it, didn't you? It's not an essential 'service'. It's commidifyibg fantasy using another human being as a sex tool. That's not essential.

Let me guess, you've seen Pretty Woman 100 times and all "johns" are like Richard Gere.

Prostitution needs to stop being acceptable just because it's been around forever. So has murder but there are laws.

Yeah, I don't think people aren't choosing it as a career because it's not legal for purchase. Show me stats, Pinga. I think people are forced into it regardless and that's how it's boomed.

Waterfall, no.  I have sat with people who have had a family member murdered as a prostitute.  I understand the dark of prostitution.  I am saying, we need ot make it safer.

We don't make it safer by attracting more 'buyers', and mainstreaming it.

And besides, the issue still stands that the majority begin at age 13-14. The majority don't just 'sign up' when they turn 18 or 19. The 'customers' need counselling and re-education at minimum. The women need options for getting out. And in the meantime we should look at laws such as the Mereyside model.

I undestand where you are coming from, but......read this, it's interesting. I hadn't realized that Sweden no longer legalizes prostitution.

http://sisyphe.org/spip.php?article1424

Amen.

Waterfall, read the CBC's review of european laws, including the comments on the impact of the law in Sweden.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/prostitution-laws-europeans-debate-whether-...

I support Sweden's work to help anyone out of the busienss, and the legalization of prostitution, but as long as the buyer is prosecuted, there will be an incentive to go underground, and if you combine it with increasing the amoutn of folks charged, then, they are going to work even more to go underground.  

Please note the difference in the source and age of the aricles.

1.  Sisyphe's was written one year after the swedish law, barely time to analyse the impacts, and is from a journal / women's justice centre.

2.  cbc's is written 14 years after sweden's law , with lots of opportunity for analysis, and is from a reputable source

What about the Mereyside Laws? We need a way to deter the men from buying. Deter the business from proliferating. We can't do that by having 'Happy Hour' at brothels. Something needs to be done to educate people that prostitution is a women's issue, not a man's prerogative- and it is, in fact, violence against women. And most start when they are girls. It's indefensible as a 'business'. We need to phase it out. Like waterfall said, society has phased out longstanding barbaric or inhumane practices before. We can do it with this, too.

Yes, nothing is perfect. The crazy johns remain and the others are scared off, but the crazy ones were always there.

  http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/prostitution-laws-what-are-the-nordic-and-n...

I'm glad we're debating both sides. It's good to know.

How is it better, Waterfall?  By pushing women more and more into the shadows they become more at risk.   Do you concur that prostitution will always be with us? Prohibition never stopped alchohol consumption, nor has it stopped prostitution anywhere.  (Well, some Islamist countries maysay it is, but that is a whole 'nother set of issues)

Note:  The new zealand model appears to be more about my approach, and is also what some sex workers would prefer, recognizing the danger of the nordic model or anything which charges those who are purchasing service.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sex-workers-fear-new-prostitution-laws-wil...

I'm saying that reducing the number of women/men that do become prostitutes will obviously lessen the risk.

Do I believe prostitution will always be with us? Probably, only because there will always be those who think the law doesn't apply to them. And pimps know that there will always be women that have been abused to prey on. But I do believe that we are capable of reducing this form of slavery significantly.

Reducing the number who become prostitutes, along with the incentive to purchase services. That means educating men that prostitution is violence against women. I recently read that New Zealand has a high rate of domestic abuse. I wonder if attitudes about women there have anything to do with it. If you don't educate men about violence against women generally, violence against women of all forms stays in the shadows. This includes prostitution.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/5332717/NZ-worst-for-domestic-violence-UN-...

Waterfall, hwo do you protect women?  There will always be people seeking and those willing to service.

 It is nto about if the "law" applies to them. Your mind set is focussed on middle-class norms, rather than survival. Our laws are broken, our minimum wage is too low.  We have broken systems.  You are right, the laws do not apply to them, for the laws have never protected the fringes of society. It is much easier to drive them underground and hope that they go away. Instead, we can hope to coach them out of the shadows, provide places to earn their money legally, and then work on root cause.

Here are some previous threads for perusal: from 2006, 2007, 2009 and others

just put the following in your google search:  site:www.wondercafe.ca prostitution

What about fining the buyers and requiring them to go through a program? Or If there are recognized brothels, do like casinos and keep tabs on problem gamblers? Johns in this case. Charging only those who commit assault, obviously (the problem is it's all abuse)? Put the money into education/ re-education? What about expecting them to go through a program before receiving service? Anyone registered at a brothel has to go through a comprehensive 'orientation session'- like they make people do before receiving welfare? So, they can do it- but only after they've participated- a deterrent. Keep tabs on the repeat customers. If the johns need to be screened anyway this should be a requirement. I know Pinga's ignoring me now. s'aright.

Or, the Mereyside model? It seems to be catching the bad johns.

Any comments on the possible correlation between domestic abuse and legalized prostitution in NZ? There may be no direct correlation, but it shows that abuse against women is still going to be a hidden problem.Attitudes about women is what comes to mind. Men's attitudes and behaviour generally seems to be the root problem to focus on. Women won't be safe until men behave safely. Men won't behave safely if they don't recognize all forms of violence against women. I think the Swedish model, the Icelandic model look best- with improvements along the way. Attitudes about women need to change.

Smokers are subject to more deterrents (public service campaigns, education, sussation programs, public bans, fines, medications,counselling) than johns and prostitues are among the most abused women, even before they enter it, in the world. They're the ones most harmed. Whereas smokers harm themselves- the tobacco doesn't get hurt. Second hand smoke is the residual effect on others around. There is that with prostitution and healthy communities, too. A residual effect- on equality, on families. Rev John brought that up earlier- smoking. Where are the deterrents for johns? It seems crazy to me. If anything, there are no deterrents. It's being promoted by the porn industry and Hollywood.

...improve police training and task forces regarding violence against women. Sometimes, they're part of the problem, because their focus has always been on the prostitutes as the problem. It needs to shift. And go after johns. And better education in schools, so boys learn to respect women's rights- learn what that means. Something needs to change. Attitudes have to change. Legalization won't change it I don't think. The violence won't go away, and sexist attitudes will get worse, not better. That does not leave women safer in the long run.

I would just like to see more laws in place that protect the women and not the pimps. I don't have all the answers and obviously no one does.

In Canada exchanging money for sex has always been legal since the early 19th century. The law prohibited brothels and living off the profits of prostituion. (not sure if that means pimps or the women themselves) This last part is what the supreme court is finding unconstitutional. If they change that I would assume we will have brothels in Canada and eventually possibly alot of them. Whether that will look like Germany, New Zealand, Australia or the Nordic model I don't know. This opens the question also, where will these brothels be located if they are allowed in Canada? Where do you think would be suitable? Would a brothel be safer in your neighbourhood, downtown or somewhere else?

Waterfall, I too would like to see better protection, have brothels be licensed with specific rules, shucks, make them like the LCBO.  Can you imagine that?  There will always be people who are high risk yet still are prostituting.  Let them name it and accept high risk customers, coz they aren't high risk to each other.  (ie, if you are HIV positive  anda prostitute, then it is probable you would have sex with HIV positive clients.  

Brothels would have to abide by zoning laws, as do any other business.  Most business' are not allowed in residential neighbourhoods due to traffic.  

I suppose the worst case scenarios would see border cities like Niagara Falls, Windsor, etc....become meccas for anyone that wants a legal prostitute. That landscape doesn't thrill me and neither does woman being advertised to be used. But you already know my opinion on that and I know yours. Increased criminal activity will follow I'm sure, just as it did the casinos.

It will create sex tourism in places like Vancouver, a major international port city- this will create competing underground markets- which will also open the door to more trafficking. If clients are unable to be 'served' legally (sex offenders, violent offenders, criminals/ gangsters dodging monitoring, people on STD registries), it will regardless- create an underground market anyway- more minors, more trafficked foreign women, with foreign criminal activity, organized crime. More trafficked women, period. Here, first nations women are trafficked. I think I just read somewhere, this scenario is the case for Amsterdam.

What bothers me about just discussing this as a 'supply and demand' issue- discussing the mundane, like it's just licensing laws- is that we are still ignoring the profound emotional scars created by women going into it, i mean what gets them there- and the scarring and dissociation/ perpetuated trauma the 'work' perpetuates. It's like asking a vet with PTSD to go back to a war zone. If you screen for mental health and addiction issues of sex workers, there would be negligibly few to hire (again, we're back to underground markets). And if they hire those few 'fresh hires' (while the rest serve the underground market), and screened them 6 months after that, I am willing to bet, I would guarantee, they'd have mental health issues. You are looking at 'staffing' a business with damaged people, and doing more emotional damage to them- this is extremely exploitative- perpetuated abuse. Slavery, in fact- a person become slave to the trauma that's made them sick. And if this is a legitimate business- to profit, there will be no reason for that to stop. It's not in the brothel owners best interest to phase this out. There's no incentive anywhere to phase it out.

So, those of you 'for' it- are still not willing to aknowledge that prostitution itself, is violence against women. Despite the evidence.

Hi BetteTheRed...

One decision at a time. Being critically conscious and pressing for an alternative imagination of what it is that constitutes the "real world" offers a good start point.

Will we buy and sell in the realized Kindom (which I look for on earth and not in some after death heaven)? My position would be informed by the Exodus practice of gathering daily bread. The general principle will be something like: "From each according to ability and to each according to need".

But this takes us away from the topic being discussed. On topic, I am committed wholly to decriminalization, not just of prostition but of all human distortion based on economic constraint, but deeply sceptical of legalization (commodification).

George

If we legalitimize prostitution as a business model, we do not honour this:

http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2013/3/joint-statement-by-heads-o...

Dear sweet Kimmio

Your intentions are good but prostitution is here to stay in Toronto at least. The city totally thrives on it. It doesn't matter if its legal or illegal.  I remember sitting at our Second Cup and picking up a small  Toronto newspaper ( "Now" may have been its name) with ads , pictures, and phone numbers  of girls to call. They were right smack in my area.   I was rather shocked.

 I live in a fairly good area on the outskirts of  North Toronto. We have lots of condos and high rise apts.  Nobody knows their neighbors  or takes an interest in other people's business, what they are doing. The city closed some  sleazy bars on the Yonge St. strip and along the Lakeshore  so the hookers changed their locations. The law doesn't care, they look the other way. Its very much in the open all over the city.

This is only a small sampling of links. If the post isn't suitable for the WC it may be removed. No problem. I don't think I have "Now" listed below. 

That's why I think vigorous attention needs to be given to educating boys and men, and girls and women who've capitulated to the dominant attitudes of male dominated culture without realizing- educating over the long term that prostitution is violence against women. It's so ingrained, that this is 'the oldest profession' that that has become a culturally accepted meme. What gets ignored is that it is a profession that has only been able to stay in business because of cultural attitudes that 'men have their needs', 'boys will be boys' and it is a 'woman's place' to serve them- no matter how harmful this is to the personal and broader health and equality of women. If women were never sacrificed to the gods, sold, coerced, trafficked, raped, beaten and forced, poverty exploited, into it to keep it going, and men actually respected women's rights to their person, I do not think prostitution would be a lucrative business. We can change. It will take time, and will, but it's possible. As for will, I also think women and girls need education that prostitution is violence against women. It does no good to have women arguing against the long term health and equality of women.