The inner world of a prostitute

[jab]

Two years ago I moved to Copenhagen. Denmark is a country where prostitution has been fully legalised since 1999. As a result it's become completely normalised. About the same time I moved over I made friends with one such sex worker. I met her in a bar and asked her what she did and she just told me frankly with zero shame. Which seems to be how it works here. Danes are extremely relaxed about it. Over time we've grown to become quite close friends. This Easter she organised a getaway in a country cabin for her friends, most of which also were prostitutes, and invited me.

It was interesting to get a peak into the inner workings of the prostitute's minds. It was the first time I was surrounded by prostitutes who were off the clock, relaxing and just having fun. As well as the others who were their friends, both men and women.

The girl who invited me (my friend) has got an incredibly sharp eye for reading people. Ie, a "people person". This was typical for all of the prostitutes. They were all four steps ahead of where things were going in conversation. Their bodies were incredibly relaxed. I do a lot of power lifting, so have gotten and given a lot of massages. I've never comes across athletic people this damn relaxed in their bodies. I'm not sure what the significance is. But being tense is associated with having stressful jobs. Clearly they didn't feel their jobs were stressful. Which surprised me.

They discussed sex a lot. They were all well read on the psychology of sex and were extremely knowledgeable. Philosophy and such. They discussed how to handle various clients just like I would do in my job (in IT). It was so matter of fact and obvious, I don't understand why I found it surprising.

One of them had a career as an successful accountant. Pulling in tonnes of cash. But was miserable. Went to a tantra course where her sexuality was awakened and found it impossible to go back to her accounting job. She found it soul destroying. So switched career to become a prostitute. Which she finds fulfilling. Albeit, worse paid. But she thought it was worth it.

My friend is a trained massage therapist, with her own practice (still active and is her job when she's on her period). She's still the go to girl for bodybuilders who want a seriously good masseuse. But now has a shortage of hours because she has another preferred profession, prostitution.

It was similar stories for all the girls. None of them were forced into this. It was a career they switched to for various and sensible reasons. They all have jobs to go back to if this doesn't work out.

They also made me realise that it's a very hard job. Just being a hot girl isn't good enough. This shit is hard. They're basically professional psychologists, just with no formal education. Men who have erectile dysfunction turn to prostitutes, rather than psychologists to help them out (obviously) and these girls know exactly how to fix it. It makes me realise how stupid it is that prostitution is ever illegal anywhere. I mean... how else is a psychologist supposed to cure something like this unless they can sleep with the client/patient. We live in a very stupid world. Prostitutes don't get nearly enough respect. They deserve the respect any other qualified job gets. It is not a no skill job.

Anyhoo... I just thought I'd share this peek into a world few ever get to see.

I'm not really arguing for anything. It's not that kind of thread. I'm just sharing.

Other than that people who think trafficking will go up if we legalised prostitution are retarded. Of course it won't. It didn't in Denmark. It went down. Of course.

are none of your prostitute acquaintances women?

 

[Toni]

I'd like to hear more about how a legal and regulated system would have more tools to help them identify those aspects of the industry that they don't already have. Can you give specific examples?

Seems obvious to me. If police are not wasting time going after consenting adults, there will be more resources available to go after sex slavery etc. Toronto is doing this. Some police in the US may have the same approach, but some won't.

There is also the point that if it's legal and well regulated, even licensed, then the illegal stuff will stand out more and not be able to hide as easily. Yes, police are today can go to the equivalents of Backpage and quickly find some women working as prostitutes. But how exactly are they to tell who is engaging in unwilling, coerced or sex slavery activity?

It was already cited (and not contradicted) that prostitutes report only about 26% of the rapes they experience. According to the DOJ, the general population only reports about 20% of rapes committed so as much as I understand the logic, it doesn't seem that this would really improve if prostitution were to be regarded as merely another career path, presumably for girls and women.

How does the DOJ get these numbers? If it isn't reported how do they know it happened?

Police are not now wasting time going after consenting adults anywhere that I am aware of. They do occasionally organize sting operations that target underage prostitution.

If you are interested in the DOJ methodology, please do what I did and google.

 

[Toni]

We already covered both of those. And yes, they are your red herrings. As I wrote above, the onus should be on you if you want to restrict people's freedoms and limit their income source possibilities. I say you need a good reason to justify making it illegal to buy sexual services. You haven't provided any other than vague hand waving about trafficking, and then haven't responded when people point out that studies on "trafficking" often include willingly moving to work in an industry as "trafficking".

I've had a lot going on IRL and must have missed where you have covered how legalization makes it easier or more logistically possible or more palatable to go after illegal/forced/trafficked prostitution. Could you please point out to me where that was done, aside from mere assertions that it is so?

That's the model Canada has adopted now too. It is a very stupid model. An industry where its legal to sell but illegal to buy doesn't make the sellers any safer. They still need to keep on the down low, and now they have the added fear of customers thinking they may blackmail them. You claim to have read widely on this topic, but have you read the Bedford decision? I've raised it in every thread on this topic and never has there been a response. It rendered the old prostitution laws unconstitutional because of how they endangered the sex workers. This nordic model doesn't make them any safer.

I've read the Bedford decision--or about it. Not the legal briefs.

Can you explain how it fails to make prostitutes safer?

But more than that, I am in favor of genuine economic reform that provides better alternatives for all women (and for men, too).

As am I, and probably moreso than you. I want universal basic income now, or at least an attempt for it, instead of naysayers who drone on how it can't be done or how the political parties won't allow it to happen.... that's not a reason not to try.

Oh, FFS, it's not a competition.

And btw, it won't happen without the engagement and buy in of political parties.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There is zero reason to not go after sex slavery now and there is zero reason to believe that legalization will magically make it 'easier' or more logistically possible or more palatable. That's a red herring.

I am in favor of the Swedish model where the prostitutes are not considered criminals but the customers and pimps are.

But more than that, I am in favor of genuine economic reform that provides better alternatives for all women (and for men, too).

I don't see anyone who doesn't think we should go after sex slavery. Where we disagree is the best way to do this--history shows us that attempting to stamp out prostitution does not work so we should approach it like we should approach drugs--harm reduction.

What I hear from those who believe that prostitution should be legalized is that it would make it easier to go after sex trafficking/slavery. I understand that reasoning but it doesn’t seem to be born out in reality.

Are you saying that we need to work harder to eliminate sex trafficking/slavery regardless of whether prostitution is legalized? Because I can agree with that.

I definitely agree with stomping on sex slavery.

Sex "trafficking" is a term so misused that it's not very meaningful anymore. The anti-prostitution forces include any movement of prostitutes as trafficking, whether or not it's actually sex slavery or simply seeking opportunities. (Not even considering that some prostitutes tour.) The actual evil will be covered under sex slavery, I don't think "trafficking" warrants attention. Whether you move a sex slave or not is irrelevant.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It was already cited (and not contradicted) that prostitutes report only about 26% of the rapes they experience. According to the DOJ, the general population only reports about 20% of rapes committed so as much as I understand the logic, it doesn't seem that this would really improve if prostitution were to be regarded as merely another career path, presumably for girls and women.

How does the DOJ get these numbers? If it isn't reported how do they know it happened?

Presumably the National Crime Victimization Survey. Compare the "have you ever been raped" answers to the number of reported rapes. I would expect a bit of undercount of actual rapes this way, though, as the NCVS is going to pretty much miss the homeless and prison populations, both of which would be expected to have higher rates of victimization.

 

[ronburgundy]

I know there are women who are forced into doing sex work, but from what I've read, those are the minority and legalizing sex work hasn't increased sex trafficking. It's decreased it by a small percentage.

I've read the opposite about legalization decreasing forced prostitution--that it increases sex trafficking/forced prostitution. This is the primary reason that I am opposed to legalization.

So, there are three simultaneously operating opposing factors of legalization on the market.
1. Legalization expands the market by increasing demand and bringing new customers into the marketplace.Many people only become willing to seek out sex workers if it is legal, plus the reduced stigma under legalization also increases willing customers. More demand means more profit potential and incentive for traffickers to bring workers into that market.
2. Legalization increases the number of sex work suppliers who are not involved in illegal trafficking, thus it provides existing customers with more alternatives to choose non trafficked workers. This would shrink the illegal trafficking market.
3. Legal non-trafficked workers have both motive and means to help identify and prosecute trafficked workers. This would allow more efficient targeting against trafficking. This factor would cause a reduction in trafficking, but also have the ironic effect of an increase in the amount of reported/identified trafficking.

Reports of the effects of legalization seem to ignore this third factor, thus they wrongly infer that an local increase of reported trafficking following legalization means a real increase in trafficking, when it could reflect an increase in effective law enforcement due to legalization and thus an actual decrease in trafficking.

Also, just as with problematic stats on illegal guns following region gun law changes, local increase in illegal aspects of the market may only reflect the directional flow of the trafficking in pursuit of a customer base rather than the actual net quantity of forced sex work.

One thing is for certain, legalization makes sex work far better and less dangerous for those women who are in the profession willingly. There is no plausible scenario where it would not. It allows them to not only work within but with law enforcement to protect themselves, plus it adds many non-criminal less dangerous people to their customer base of the sort only willing to engage in the exchange if it is legal and consensual. For the same reasons, it given workers being trafficked far more opportunity and means to seek assistance in escaping the illegal sex trade.

I would feel differently, as well, if numerous sources had not cited 15 (one or two a little older or a little younger but mostly 15) as being the average age that a prostitute begins sex work. .

But that age is directly a product of the trade being illegal. Legal prostitution means that minimum ages can be set and enforced, with legal prostitution being a massive asset in that enforcement. When the entire trade is criminalized making all involved criminals, then enforcing age minimums is impossible and a moot point.

 

[Toni]

So, there are three simultaneously operating opposing factors of legalization on the market.
1. Legalization expands the market by increasing demand and bringing new customers into the marketplace.Many people only become willing to seek out sex workers if it is legal, plus the reduced stigma under legalization also increases willing customers. More demand means more profit potential and incentive for traffickers to bring workers into that market.
2. Legalization increases the number of sex work suppliers who are not involved in illegal trafficking, thus it provides existing customers with more alternatives to choose non trafficked workers. This would shrink the illegal trafficking market.
3. Legal non-trafficked workers have both motive and means to help identify and prosecute trafficked workers. This would allow more efficient targeting against trafficking. This factor would cause a reduction in trafficking, but also have the ironic effect of an increase in the amount of reported/identified trafficking.

Reports of the effects of legalization seem to ignore this third factor, thus they wrongly infer that an local increase of reported trafficking following legalization means a real increase in trafficking, when it could reflect an increase in effective law enforcement due to legalization and thus an actual decrease in trafficking.

Also, just as with problematic stats on illegal guns following region gun law changes, local increase in illegal aspects of the market may only reflect the directional flow of the trafficking in pursuit of a customer base rather than the actual net quantity of forced sex work.

One thing is for certain, legalization makes sex work far better and less dangerous for those women who are in the profession willingly. There is no plausible scenario where it would not. It allows them to not only work within but with law enforcement to protect themselves, plus it adds many non-criminal less dangerous people to their customer base of the sort only willing to engage in the exchange if it is legal and consensual. For the same reasons, it given workers being trafficked far more opportunity and means to seek assistance in escaping the illegal sex trade.

I would feel differently, as well, if numerous sources had not cited 15 (one or two a little older or a little younger but mostly 15) as being the average age that a prostitute begins sex work. .

But that age is directly a product of the trade being illegal. Legal prostitution means that minimum ages can be set and enforced, with legal prostitution being a massive asset in that enforcement. When the entire trade is criminalized making all involved criminals, then enforcing age minimums is impossible and a moot point.

People keep saying that legalization makes sex work less dangerous but there is no evidence that I've seen that this is so. I truly do recognize the logic but it doesn't seem to be born out.

What seems to happen is that the idea that girls and women (and sometimes boys) can be purchased for sex at will by men (usually) who wish to do so is normalized. Instead of increasing the number of willing participants, it does seem to increase demand for sex workers yet does little to make the work more palatable or less dangerous to the actual sex workers.

I'd be delighted to read statistics that show that sex workers experience less violence where sex work is legal.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc-n852sv3E[/youtube]

Here's a good TED talk for you, by a prostitute, about what laws she feels are best for the industry. She reviews the different systems around the world and how it works in reality from the point of view of the sex workers.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This is about FOSTA rather than legalization but it shows the harm the government is doing:

http://titsandsass.com/on-the-death-of-backpage/

The loss of Backpage revealed SESTA as the trafficker’s wet dream it was. Within hours of the seizure, there were reports of pimps messaging workers, hoping to capitalize on our desperate need to find alternative ways to reach clients.

 

[DrZoidberg]

are none of your prostitute acquaintances women?

Nearly all the prostitutes I met and hung out with were women. Only a couple were men.

 

[DrZoidberg]

So, there are three simultaneously operating opposing factors of legalization on the market.
1. Legalization expands the market by increasing demand and bringing new customers into the marketplace.Many people only become willing to seek out sex workers if it is legal, plus the reduced stigma under legalization also increases willing customers. More demand means more profit potential and incentive for traffickers to bring workers into that market.
2. Legalization increases the number of sex work suppliers who are not involved in illegal trafficking, thus it provides existing customers with more alternatives to choose non trafficked workers. This would shrink the illegal trafficking market.
3. Legal non-trafficked workers have both motive and means to help identify and prosecute trafficked workers. This would allow more efficient targeting against trafficking. This factor would cause a reduction in trafficking, but also have the ironic effect of an increase in the amount of reported/identified trafficking.

Reports of the effects of legalization seem to ignore this third factor, thus they wrongly infer that an local increase of reported trafficking following legalization means a real increase in trafficking, when it could reflect an increase in effective law enforcement due to legalization and thus an actual decrease in trafficking.

Also, just as with problematic stats on illegal guns following region gun law changes, local increase in illegal aspects of the market may only reflect the directional flow of the trafficking in pursuit of a customer base rather than the actual net quantity of forced sex work.

One thing is for certain, legalization makes sex work far better and less dangerous for those women who are in the profession willingly. There is no plausible scenario where it would not. It allows them to not only work within but with law enforcement to protect themselves, plus it adds many non-criminal less dangerous people to their customer base of the sort only willing to engage in the exchange if it is legal and consensual. For the same reasons, it given workers being trafficked far more opportunity and means to seek assistance in escaping the illegal sex trade.

I would feel differently, as well, if numerous sources had not cited 15 (one or two a little older or a little younger but mostly 15) as being the average age that a prostitute begins sex work. .

But that age is directly a product of the trade being illegal. Legal prostitution means that minimum ages can be set and enforced, with legal prostitution being a massive asset in that enforcement. When the entire trade is criminalized making all involved criminals, then enforcing age minimums is impossible and a moot point.

People keep saying that legalization makes sex work less dangerous but there is no evidence that I've seen that this is so. I truly do recognize the logic but it doesn't seem to be born out.

What seems to happen is that the idea that girls and women (and sometimes boys) can be purchased for sex at will by men (usually) who wish to do so is normalized. Instead of increasing the number of willing participants, it does seem to increase demand for sex workers yet does little to make the work more palatable or less dangerous to the actual sex workers.

I'd be delighted to read statistics that show that sex workers experience less violence where sex work is legal.

Because much of the studies are made for the "rescue industry", and often in financed by them, and they are all moralistic organisations with a goal to destroy prostitution on pure moral grounds. If you listen to what these people have to say about harmless stuff like pornography, it's clear that these people are lunatics. A lot of the studies are weak and often bullshit. It's very hard to get financing for a study, if the goal of the study isn't to destroy prostitution. But there are good quality studies. Loads of them by this point.

I bring up Laura Augustin again. She does meta studies and critiques of study. That's her bread and butter. She's also a proper researcher, and a great place to start. She's not pro-prostitution. She doesn't have a horse in the race. She only cares about what is true. Which of course has put her on a collision course with the "rescue industry". Because the opponents of prostitution generally don't care about what is true.

https://www.lauraagustin.com/

A big problem with these anti-prostitution lobbies is that they control all political institutions in all countries. Lots of people are against prostitution, for reasons that have nothing to do with protecting women. Most people have decided in advance that prostitution harms women, is pure evil and that's where their thinking stops. Even in Holland, Denmark and Germany most people are against prostitution. But these countries are extremely liberal and it's hard to pass laws that take away people's personal freedoms. Which is the only reason it's legal in these countries. Politicians don't want to look like they are for prostitution. It would damage their image. So nobody is going to take the fight.

Bottom line, it's extremely hard to find studies that aren't complete garbage. Not because they don't exist. But because the rescue industry continually spams out bullshit studies that drowns out anything else. And since readers of newspapers are mostly against prostitution, and people generally just want their beliefs re-enforced, these are the only studies covered. People don't want to read about that sexuality is complicated, or isn't a sacred bond between people.

The same people usually have no problem with pornography. But we used to have the same debate about pornography. That just went away. Odd, isn't it?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The same people usually have no problem with pornography. But we used to have the same debate about pornography. That just went away. Odd, isn't it?

Same with homosexuality. I am old enough to remember having to stay in the closet and to have read numerous "studies" that showed homosexuality as harmful to society and that it was a mental disorder.

 

[DrZoidberg]

The same people usually have no problem with pornography. But we used to have the same debate about pornography. That just went away. Odd, isn't it?

Same with homosexuality. I am old enough to remember having to stay in the closet and to have read numerous "studies" that showed homosexuality as harmful to society and that it was a mental disorder.

Yup. Those against legalised prostitution are on the wrong side of history. I think it won't be long until those will also be called "Hitler" on forums, just like we treat homophobes today. Up to now the moralists have successfully managed to silence and ignore the voice prostitutes. But that's hard to do on the Internet

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

No doubt about it. All nuance will continue to be lost. Did you watch the video I posted above? She outlines the problems with each anti-prostitution system very well. None of them favour the women actually working in the industry and only in New Zealand did government actually listen to the sex workers.

 

[Derec]

It makes me realise how stupid it is that prostitution is ever illegal anywhere. I mean... how else is a psychologist supposed to cure something like this unless they can sleep with the client/patient. We live in a very stupid world. Prostitutes don't get nearly enough respect. They deserve the respect any other qualified job gets. It is not a no skill job.

Exactly. Sex work should not only be legal, but also destigmatized. We should not be looking down on prostitutes nor their clients.

 

[Derec]

I've read the opposite about legalization decreasing forced prostitution--that it increases sex trafficking/forced prostitution.

We've already explained it to you. The anti-sex work groups promulgating such claims use a definition of "trafficking" that counts every sex worker who moves as "trafficking victim" no matter the circumstances. It's deeply dishonest.

This is the primary reason that I am opposed to legalization. I would feel differently, as well, if numerous sources had not cited 15 (one or two a little older or a little younger but mostly 15) as being the average age that a prostitute begins sex work. At 15, we don't allow people to operate motor vehicles or perform other dangerous tasks. 15 year olds are not mature enough nor do they have the legal status that allows them to effectively advocate for themselves.

Nobody is advocating that 15 year olds should be allowed to be sex workers. But that does not mean existence of underage hookers (and I doubt that is the average age of entering the profession) should mean that sex work in general should be criminalized. It also does not mean that every 15 or 16 year old who turns tricks is forced into it by a third party. So while those girls should still not be allowed to start sex work until they turn 18, it does not mean that they are victims either. If a 15 year old takes out her parents' car out for a spin, we don't think that's right but neither do we assume she was forced into it either. I think you especially tend to conflate these things.

I very much understand and have a great deal of sympathy for those who are handicapped and otherwise would not be able to have a sexual relationship. On the other hand, I know a number of people with handicaps, some significant, who manage to have a good sex life without a prostitute. Of course this is extremely individual.

You "understand" so much that you want to see us jailed.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

We've already explained it to you. The anti-sex work groups promulgating such claims use a definition of "trafficking" that counts every sex worker who moves as "trafficking victim" no matter the circumstances. It's deeply dishonest.

A point we seem to have to raise over and over but it just won't get through.

 

[Derec]

Moreover, legalization seems to normalize the idea that girls and women can be purchased to be used for sex whenever a male wishes to do so,

Wrong. It normalizes the idea that women (and men) can be contracted to provide a service if the client and provider can agree on services and the price.
And what exactly is wrong with that idea? It's the basis of all commerce.

It is the language like this that you are fond of that makes me believe trafficking/forced prostitution is not your primary issue, but that you have a deeper seated problem with sex work in principle.

that it is the right of males to have access to females whenever they want. As long as you throw some cash at them, the girls and women themselves do not matter.

Of course they matter. They can agree to the price or not. If no agreement is reached, no transaction takes place.

From what I have read, legalization increases rather than decreases illegal prostitution and trafficking. Instead it being like a WalMart out competing all the local businesses, it is more like, one bar seems to make it seem like a great location to put a second bar. Or same thing with Starbucks.

And what's wrong with Starbucks? Except that baristas are not treated as "trafficking victims" if they move to take the job. And neither is their job stigmatized by moralizing busybodies from the right and left.
Imagine if we lived in a world where it's considered immoral to drink coffee made by somebody you paid for the service ...

Hint: if a 15 year old girl is offering herself over the internet, it's probably a 40 year old law enforcement agent.

Kind of defeats your point about there supposedly being so many 15 year old sex workers that we must ban sex work offered by 25 year old consensual hookers....

 

[Derec]

I'm not talking about spending thousands for a high-end escort to treat you like royalty, I'm talking about most people's experiences.

You do not need to pay thousands of dollars for that. I've been with $150/h sex workers who are very personable and don't quickly usher you out after you've cum. In fact, often the sessions went a bit longer than an hour with no demand for extra payment.

 

[Derec]

And the observation regarding the fact that money--i.e., being paid--is itself an inherently coercive act and that it's a safe bet none of the prostitutes would be doing the same thing to any of their clients if it were not the fact that they were being paid. Which tends to blow the whole "they love having sex" rationalization out of the water. I'm sure they do, but that's not the question.

If you consider 'being paid' an 'inherently coercive act', that blows up the entire idea of commerce out of water. Are you 'coercing' an electrician to fix your wiring by offering money? I am sure he or she would hardly do it for free.

But of course you, Toni and other prohibitionists do not see electricians, plumbers, beauticians, etc. that way. Only sex workers. And that explains all your arguments against sex work.