DERAIL - Swedish Prostitution

[DrZoidberg]

Every source I've seen indicates that more than 80% of prostitutes are not in the trade because they wish to be. If it were such a desirable trade, there would be no sex trafficking. Unfortunately, sex trafficking is a significant problem all over the world, including where sex work is legal.

That's a non-argument. You seem to have this bizarre notion that the majority of people joyfully skip to work each morning. No, shit they'd rather not have to have sex with strangers to make a living. But they don't need to enjoy it to be willing participants. It only needs to be a bit less annoying than their second best option to make money for it to be a rational choice to do willingly. Prostitution has one major perk. They don't have to put in many hours to earn a weeks wage for regular jobs.

 

[fromderinside]

Just in case no one has asked, how great is parenting in Sweden? Have they eliminated all child sexual and other physical abuse? Given the trend of data being revealed here I'm thinking nope.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Just in case no one has asked, how great is parenting in Sweden? Have they eliminated all child sexual and other physical abuse? Given the trend of data being revealed here I'm thinking nope.

How would you even measure such a thing? But I think Sweden is suffering from the same problem as the rest of the west. Helicopter parenting protecting their children from everything, including allowing them to grow the fuck up.

But physical abuse of children is super super super taboo. Way more than in let's say, England. If anybody saw a parent spank their child they'd call the police at once. But of course it happens. And sexual abuse of children seems to be pretty universal for our species. Not that everybody does it. But it is taboo everywhere. But still happens in every country. I doubt anybody has reliable numbers on prevalence.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Sarcasm?

The war on drugs in Sweden is about as effective in Sweden as elsewhere and brings with it this kind of crime

False. Sweden is doing it right. When they have a social issue, they go after those causing harm, and treat those affected as the victims.

Heroin - It is illegal, but while the drug dealers are arrested for dealing illegal drugs, the users are treated as victims... they receive counseling, housing, medical assistance, and job placement.

Nope. It's the complete opposite. Swedish drug enforcement is a complete disaster. We have among the highest mortality rates in Europe for our addicts. We do not treat addicts as sick people. We treat them as criminals who just need to be punished really harshly until they stop. Getting into rehab is absurdly hard. Preventative care to help people before they develop serious addictions is non-existent. I can go on for days about this. It's a total joke. Every other country in Europe is better. Romanian drug prevention is doing a better job.

Sweden is good for many things. This is something we should feel shame about. We're doing it all wrong and the statistics show it. It is slowly slowly getting better. At least we're now allowing addicts to get hold of clean needles. A bit late though, since they now all have AIDS and Hepatitus C. Well done Sweden. Better late than never though.

Prostitution - it is illegal, but the prostitutes are not arrested, they get free counseling and work placement. The 'Johns' are arrested.

Also false. Immediately after prostitution became legalised (it's legal to sell, not buy) prostitutes formed a union. It turns out that prostitutes rarely are victims are verbal and have no problems arguing their case. Making the johns only illegal makes the life of prostitutes incredibly dangerous. Before they could get all the details from the john. Today johns won't meet them unless they can stay anonymous. Before they could share information about bad johns between them. Now they can't as effectively.

Also turns out that most prostitutes prefer whoring than other jobs so aren't interested in counseling and work placement. Sweden has a well developed social welfare system. Nobody needs to be a prostitute here. That's been the case since the 1940's. We still have prostitutes.

Whether or not trafficking happens is hotly debated. Chances are that all trafficking numbers are bullshit. A major reason to suspect that is that most prostitutes are happy about being prostitutes. And now when they're legal they're not hiding anymore. It makes no sense why a John would pay to fuck an enslaved prostitute and not a voluntary prostitute. We can ask them. But this turned out to be extremely embarrassing for the feminists who pushed this through, since the prostutitues aren't playing the victim role the feminists have given them. Awkward. So they've been completely silenced in the press. Nobody interviews them.

If you don't believe me, here's the link to the Swedish prostitutes union. They're primarily fighting for getting prostitution completely legalised and treated as any other job.

http://www.rosealliance.se/sv/om-oss/

So the "Swedish model" has been an absolute disaster and it's bizarre how the Swedish feminists keep trying to push it. It's just morally wrong and wicked. When it comes to this they really disgust me. They clearly have no care in the world for these women they're trying to "protect". They're not. All they've done is make the lives of prostitutes needlessly more dangerous.

So you really picked the two Swedish legal models that have turned out to be a disaster in every way.

This was mentioned in one of the abortion threads a while ago. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who was scratching my head thinking "What the fuck sense does that make?"

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Living in one of the hubs for human trafficking I can tell you it's real, it happens, and it is a huge problem here in the west.

So then perhaps you could explain to me why trafficking is worth it for the traffickers? It's the financial model I wonder about. Trafficking is very expensive compared to just being a pimp. The winnings have to be massive to make the risk of getting caught worth it.

How's trafficking in Nevada? A problem their to?

The basic problem is finding enough workers at the low end of the spectrum. They resort to trafficking because not enough are willing.

As for Nevada I do not know how bad the issue is. I haven't encountered any numbers I consider credible.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm guessing that most prostitutes are drug addicts. Addiction is a different kind of thing in that it reduces a person's ability to make rational decisions in their own best interest. I think if someone wanted to engage in trafficking, getting their prostitutes addicted to drugs would greatly help to keep them compliant.

I've seen a Swedish study (ten years old now). In that study 95% of all prostitutes (at the time of doing the study) were university students. Not motivated by addiction. It's a job well suited to combine with studies. Also, Rose Alliance members (the sex workers union of Sweden) also question that image. They were also not illegal aliens.

I think the drug addict prostitutes, while real, isn't the main group of prostitutes. I think it's been heavily promoted as the main image of prostitutes because feminists wants to see all prostitutes as victims. If they're helpless victims of addiction we are justified to ignore what they say and we can treat them as children.

It is remarkable that the prostitutes themselves do not have a voice in the prostitution legalisation debate.

- - - Updated - - -

And if you think my views are crazy. Amnesty International shares them.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...research-on-protection-of-sex-workers-rights/

I don't think we have good data one way or another.

At the higher end I think there's little doubt that it's pretty much entirely voluntary. At the low end there's considerable indication that a decent amount is not voluntary. What that translates to overall, though, seems to be buried in people trying to push their position rather than seeking the truth.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I see this alot and have wondered about it, along with the claim all exotic dancers were sexually abused as children. Unfortunately a great many have been, but not more when compared to the public at large. I think it is a way to subliminally shame them.

The problem with that is that everybody has something traumatic they can point to. I remember the biggest study they'd ever done in Sweden on sexual crime. They asked every 18 year old in all of Sweden if they'd ever been the victim of a sexual assault. 100% said they had been. Sweden is a very safe country in genreal. If "our" women report this then how common is it in other countries? My guess is that all women have at some point been the victim of sexual assault.

The hard part isn't finding the trauma that led to the behaviour. But rather explaining why the women who turned out fine turned out fine.

I saw a similar study on people who'd been seriously sexually molested as children by a guardian. Same thing there. The molested children who grew up with mental problems, blamed the molestation. But adults who had been molested as children were no more mentally ill than people who hadn't been. The numbers were identical. It seemed to have no measurable effect.

Or understanding that most sexual "assault" is fairly minor and isn't going to warp someone.

 

[J842P]

I've seen a Swedish study (ten years old now). In that study 95% of all prostitutes (at the time of doing the study) were university students. Not motivated by addiction. It's a job well suited to combine with studies. Also, Rose Alliance members (the sex workers union of Sweden) also question that image. They were also not illegal aliens.

I think the drug addict prostitutes, while real, isn't the main group of prostitutes. I think it's been heavily promoted as the main image of prostitutes because feminists wants to see all prostitutes as victims. If they're helpless victims of addiction we are justified to ignore what they say and we can treat them as children.

It is remarkable that the prostitutes themselves do not have a voice in the prostitution legalisation debate.

- - - Updated - - -

And if you think my views are crazy. Amnesty International shares them.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...research-on-protection-of-sex-workers-rights/

I don't think we have good data one way or another.

At the higher end I think there's little doubt that it's pretty much entirely voluntary. At the low end there's considerable indication that a decent amount is not voluntary. What that translates to overall, though, seems to be buried in people trying to push their position rather than seeking the truth.

Yeah, I agree. At even the medium end, you have prostitutes charging 200-300 dollars an hour. Do that a couple times a day a few days per week and you are making a pretty good living. There had been a recent spat of documentaries on prostitutes on Netflix, and the high end ones apparently charge well over 1000 dollars an hour. Also, prostitutes who specialize in kink related stuff are usually also extremely well paid. These women often have graduate degrees and regular office jobs, and they do it because they are genuinely into the bdsm culture. I can't think of any non-evil reason to ban that.

 

[ZiprHead]

Damn, I guess I've discovered I can't afford a prostitute.

 

[Toni]

Every source I've seen indicates that more than 80% of prostitutes are not in the trade because they wish to be. If it were such a desirable trade, there would be no sex trafficking. Unfortunately, sex trafficking is a significant problem all over the world, including where sex work is legal.

Ya, legalizing prostitution won't stop sex trafficking, mainly because there will likely always be more willing customers than providers and legalization will raise the price and there will always be a segment of the customer base who wants to save money on discounted options without caring about why it is that these women are discounted.

However, keeping the industry illegal doesn't help to solve the problem and has the entire thing run by a criminal element and makes it more dangerous for the women involved because nobody in the industry wants police involved in what's going on. Having a legal, regulated segment of the industry where the women are protected and the men can be sure they're finding a willing partner will allow the police to focus on the abuse and exploitation in the industry without the need to criminalize consensual sex at the same time.

Except...that it doesn't work that way. I mean, logically, you would think that it would: legalization would make it easier/safer for the sex workers--who no one but me seems willing to acknowledge are not necessarily female. Or adult. Much less willing.

I'd like to believe that, but the reality is that wherever sex work is legal, there is right along beside it plenty of illegal human trafficking. Supply will not meet demand. Partly because there will always be some demand for what is too violent, too young, just plain too forced. Let's face it: there are some people who really just get off on the fact that they are engaged in something illegal. And some people who really get off on knowing, however much they deny it out loud, that the sex worker isn't actually willing, isn't doing it for his or her own pleasure but because he or she has no other choice, and that lack of choice is enforced, rather brutally. There is a certain power in being able to plunk down some cash or whatever and demand what you want without having to care even a little how the other person feels about it. Or if they feel anything at all.

No amount of legalization or justification will change that. Violence will always be part of the trade because for some portion of clientele, that's part of the allure: lack of pleasure for the person you paid for, forcing them to pretend pleasure and worse: client's pleasure in the pain they cause.

 

[Toni]

Every source I've seen indicates that more than 80% of prostitutes are not in the trade because they wish to be. If it were such a desirable trade, there would be no sex trafficking. Unfortunately, sex trafficking is a significant problem all over the world, including where sex work is legal.

That's a non-argument. You seem to have this bizarre notion that the majority of people joyfully skip to work each morning. No, shit they'd rather not have to have sex with strangers to make a living. But they don't need to enjoy it to be willing participants. It only needs to be a bit less annoying than their second best option to make money for it to be a rational choice to do willingly. Prostitution has one major perk. They don't have to put in many hours to earn a weeks wage for regular jobs.

Prostitution, even where it is legal, carries a lot more cons than most work. Even where legal, prostitutes face a great deal of exploitation, not to mention robbery and the the threat of physical violence and are at high risk for sexually transmitted infections. Even with condoms, which have a failure rate > 0, which is especially important given the number of different sex partners a sex worker will have. Of course, there is always the economic pressure of knowing you can earn more by being willing to forgo the condom....

I think the 'only needs to be a bit less annoying than their second best option to make money' is quite an underestimate of the forces that drive and keep sex workers in the trade.

Most sex workers begin before they are of legal age and before they have other legal means to support themselves. Many have been sexually and otherwise abused.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ya, legalizing prostitution won't stop sex trafficking, mainly because there will likely always be more willing customers than providers and legalization will raise the price and there will always be a segment of the customer base who wants to save money on discounted options without caring about why it is that these women are discounted.

However, keeping the industry illegal doesn't help to solve the problem and has the entire thing run by a criminal element and makes it more dangerous for the women involved because nobody in the industry wants police involved in what's going on. Having a legal, regulated segment of the industry where the women are protected and the men can be sure they're finding a willing partner will allow the police to focus on the abuse and exploitation in the industry without the need to criminalize consensual sex at the same time.

Except...that it doesn't work that way. I mean, logically, you would think that it would: legalization would make it easier/safer for the sex workers--who no one but me seems willing to acknowledge are not necessarily female. Or adult. Much less willing.

I'd like to believe that, but the reality is that wherever sex work is legal, there is right along beside it plenty of illegal human trafficking. Supply will not meet demand. Partly because there will always be some demand for what is too violent, too young, just plain too forced. Let's face it: there are some people who really just get off on the fact that they are engaged in something illegal. And some people who really get off on knowing, however much they deny it out loud, that the sex worker isn't actually willing, isn't doing it for his or her own pleasure but because he or she has no other choice, and that lack of choice is enforced, rather brutally. There is a certain power in being able to plunk down some cash or whatever and demand what you want without having to care even a little how the other person feels about it. Or if they feel anything at all.

No amount of legalization or justification will change that. Violence will always be part of the trade because for some portion of clientele, that's part of the allure: lack of pleasure for the person you paid for, forcing them to pretend pleasure and worse: client's pleasure in the pain they cause.

Right, that's what I said. I don't know why you said it doesn't work that way and then made the same point that I did.

The question is how to minimize all of that as much as possible. You want as few sex slaves raped as possible. You want the women and men who work in the industry to be as safe as possible. Do you think that keeping the industry illegal is the most effective way to do that?

I do not think that. Legalizing and regulating the industry creates a framework that protects a segment of the industry by making it a lot safer and a lot more difficult to exploit and harm the workers inside that segment. Say, for the sake of argument, that you're correct about the numbers and 80% of the people in the industry are not in it by choice and are exploited sex slaves, so they would fall through the cracks of the regulations and remain exploited and the legalization would only have a positive effect for 20% of the prostitutes. You're still creating a positive effect for one in five sex workers and allowing law enforcement to better focus its limited resources away from this segment and towards the people who are actually being exploited instead of not being able to deal with as many of them since the authorities are also busy arresting and charging adults who are having consensual sex. It's a net plus which makes things better.

Legalization does not solve the inherent problems in the prostitution industry. It does, however, make those problems less and allow the same amount of resources to focus more on the actual problems.

 

[Toni]

Except...that it doesn't work that way. I mean, logically, you would think that it would: legalization would make it easier/safer for the sex workers--who no one but me seems willing to acknowledge are not necessarily female. Or adult. Much less willing.

I'd like to believe that, but the reality is that wherever sex work is legal, there is right along beside it plenty of illegal human trafficking. Supply will not meet demand. Partly because there will always be some demand for what is too violent, too young, just plain too forced. Let's face it: there are some people who really just get off on the fact that they are engaged in something illegal. And some people who really get off on knowing, however much they deny it out loud, that the sex worker isn't actually willing, isn't doing it for his or her own pleasure but because he or she has no other choice, and that lack of choice is enforced, rather brutally. There is a certain power in being able to plunk down some cash or whatever and demand what you want without having to care even a little how the other person feels about it. Or if they feel anything at all.

No amount of legalization or justification will change that. Violence will always be part of the trade because for some portion of clientele, that's part of the allure: lack of pleasure for the person you paid for, forcing them to pretend pleasure and worse: client's pleasure in the pain they cause.

Right, that's what I said. I don't know why you said it doesn't work that way and then made the same point that I did.

The question is how to minimize all of that as much as possible. You want as few sex slaves raped as possible. You want the women and men who work in the industry to be as safe as possible. Do you think that keeping the industry illegal is the most effective way to do that?

I do not think that. Legalizing and regulating the industry creates a framework that protects a segment of the industry by making it a lot safer and a lot more difficult to exploit and harm the workers inside that segment. Say, for the sake of argument, that you're correct about the numbers and 80% of the people in the industry are not in it by choice and are exploited sex slaves, so they would fall through the cracks of the regulations and remain exploited and the legalization would only have a positive effect for 20% of the prostitutes. You're still creating a positive effect for one in five sex workers and allowing law enforcement to better focus its limited resources away from this segment and towards the people who are actually being exploited instead of not being able to deal with as many of them since the authorities are also busy arresting and charging adults who are having consensual sex. It's a net plus which makes things better.

Legalization does not solve the inherent problems in the prostitution industry. It does, however, make those problems less and allow the same amount of resources to focus more on the actual problems.

I disagree that it reduces the severity of the problems as a whole. I also think we disagree as to what the actual problems are.

I don't actually think there is a way to make sex work safer except to reduce demand. I wish that I did but reducing demand for paid sex is at least as hard as reducing demand for drugs and excess alcohol: probably never going to happen.

Statistics do not back up your claim that legalizing it makes the industry safer. Sure, some sex workers might be (marginally) safer--maybe they don't get beaten up or raped or murdered as often but they are still as exposed to sexually transmitted infections (testing only protects clients since no one is suggesting that clients have to be tested on the spot to demonstrate a clean bill of health, even if tests existed to catch new, acute infections (I have some expertise in this area so I can say with assurance: such tests do not exist--earliest possible date to catch an HIV infection is 10 days post infection during which 10 days the patient is highly infectious--and 10 days is the very, very earliest that SOME infections are caught) but that seems to be more than offset by an increased demand for illegal sex trade, including trafficked victims. So far, no one seems to have actually reduced overall harm to sex workers as a group.

My 2 bit guess is that it is because we are willing to accept that a certain segment of society is somehow entitled to get their jollies from hurting other people as long as they pay them...something and as long as we can pretend that the sex workers are doing it as a rational choice and not because they have no other job skills, often because they are too young to have any legit job skills at all or because they are too damaged and traumatized by their youth spent as sex workers to have any realistic ambition to do much else.

IMO, your view is a romanticized vision of choices sex workers have never had in their lives and that sex work will never afford them.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I don't think we have good data one way or another.

At the higher end I think there's little doubt that it's pretty much entirely voluntary. At the low end there's considerable indication that a decent amount is not voluntary. What that translates to overall, though, seems to be buried in people trying to push their position rather than seeking the truth.

We have one very strong piece of good data. All prostitutes are for a legalisation. Even though that might open the market and give them more of a competition, they all think that it still be worth it for them.

 

[DrZoidberg]

That's a non-argument. You seem to have this bizarre notion that the majority of people joyfully skip to work each morning. No, shit they'd rather not have to have sex with strangers to make a living. But they don't need to enjoy it to be willing participants. It only needs to be a bit less annoying than their second best option to make money for it to be a rational choice to do willingly. Prostitution has one major perk. They don't have to put in many hours to earn a weeks wage for regular jobs.

Prostitution, even where it is legal, carries a lot more cons than most work. Even where legal, prostitutes face a great deal of exploitation, not to mention robbery and the the threat of physical violence and are at high risk for sexually transmitted infections. Even with condoms, which have a failure rate > 0, which is especially important given the number of different sex partners a sex worker will have. Of course, there is always the economic pressure of knowing you can earn more by being willing to forgo the condom....

I think the 'only needs to be a bit less annoying than their second best option to make money' is quite an underestimate of the forces that drive and keep sex workers in the trade.

Most sex workers begin before they are of legal age and before they have other legal means to support themselves. Many have been sexually and otherwise abused.

I think you're just pulling all this out your ass. Any sources for any of that?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Latest news on trafficking in my city:
http://www.kare11.com/news/crime/se...ghlights-important-hotel-initiative/413490185

A criminal complaint says the investigation that led to the charges began February 15, when a member of the Human Trafficking Unit became aware of a large-scale prostitution operation operating out of an apartment in St. Louis Park. Officers executing a search warrant found two females inside the apartment who did not speak English. The apartment had two bedrooms which contained only a bed and a nightstand stocked with condoms and sexual aids. There were used condoms discovered in garbage cans.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Latest news on trafficking in my city:
http://www.kare11.com/news/crime/se...ghlights-important-hotel-initiative/413490185

A criminal complaint says the investigation that led to the charges began February 15, when a member of the Human Trafficking Unit became aware of a large-scale prostitution operation operating out of an apartment in St. Louis Park. Officers executing a search warrant found two females inside the apartment who did not speak English. The apartment had two bedrooms which contained only a bed and a nightstand stocked with condoms and sexual aids. There were used condoms discovered in garbage cans.

The problem with trafficking is that trafficking and non-trafficking prostitution will superficially look the same. It is completely dependent on what the prostitutes say to the police. But after they've been raided and the brothel shut down the prostitutes have zero incentive to say they were willing prostitutes. If they do they are criminals and risk jail time, and/or fines. If they on the other hand say they were forced into it they will be treated as victims and might even get to benefit from damages.

That article gave the reader no information which allowed me to understand if this really is trafficking or not. Also, it's the question of newsworthiness. A woman travelling to a country to work a season as a prostitute and has the bad luck of working when it's raided is not news.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Latest news on trafficking in my city:
http://www.kare11.com/news/crime/se...ghlights-important-hotel-initiative/413490185

The problem with trafficking is that trafficking and non-trafficking prostitution will superficially look the same. It is completely dependent on what the prostitutes say to the police. But after they've been raided and the brothel shut down the prostitutes have zero incentive to say they were willing prostitutes. If they do they are criminals and risk jail time, and/or fines. If they on the other hand say they were forced into it they will be treated as victims and might even get to benefit from damages.

That article gave the reader no information which allowed me to understand if this really is trafficking or not. Also, it's the question of newsworthiness. A woman travelling to a country to work a season as a prostitute and has the bad luck of working when it's raided is not news.

Because, as somehow I keep needing to say, human trafficking is a problem here in my city we have police training and procedures here that grant immunity to trafficked individuals. Yes they can say they were trafficked, but how do these women know to say that? They are in a strange land, don't speak the language, and saying they are trafficked will place their traffickers in risk of major jail time. So it makes no sense for the pimps to have them tell the police they have been trafficked because the pimps will face about 10 years in jail...

 

[Toni]

Prostitution, even where it is legal, carries a lot more cons than most work. Even where legal, prostitutes face a great deal of exploitation, not to mention robbery and the the threat of physical violence and are at high risk for sexually transmitted infections. Even with condoms, which have a failure rate > 0, which is especially important given the number of different sex partners a sex worker will have. Of course, there is always the economic pressure of knowing you can earn more by being willing to forgo the condom....

I think the 'only needs to be a bit less annoying than their second best option to make money' is quite an underestimate of the forces that drive and keep sex workers in the trade.

Most sex workers begin before they are of legal age and before they have other legal means to support themselves. Many have been sexually and otherwise abused.

I think you're just pulling all this out your ass. Any sources for any of that?

I think you must have multiple assholes from which you pull your 'information.' How about you sharing your sources?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I disagree that it reduces the severity of the problems as a whole. I also think we disagree as to what the actual problems are.

I think we agree what the problems are. I just think we disagree about the solutions.

I don't actually think there is a way to make sex work safer except to reduce demand. I wish that I did but reducing demand for paid sex is at least as hard as reducing demand for drugs and excess alcohol: probably never going to happen.

And that's where I have a problem with your solution. While reducing the demand is a nice theoretical solution, it's not a practical one. This means that a solution needs to take into account that this won't really happen. It's like having safe injection sites and needle exchanges for drug users. It would be better to just have people not use drugs in the first place, but since they're going to be doing so, the question is what can be done to make it as safe and secure as possible.

Statistics do not back up your claim that legalizing it makes the industry safer. Sure, some sex workers might be (marginally) safer--maybe they don't get beaten up or raped or murdered as often but they are still as exposed to sexually transmitted infections (testing only protects clients since no one is suggesting that clients have to be tested on the spot to demonstrate a clean bill of health, even if tests existed to catch new, acute infections (I have some expertise in this area so I can say with assurance: such tests do not exist--earliest possible date to catch an HIV infection is 10 days post infection during which 10 days the patient is highly infectious--and 10 days is the very, very earliest that SOME infections are caught) but that seems to be more than offset by an increased demand for illegal sex trade, including trafficked victims. So far, no one seems to have actually reduced overall harm to sex workers as a group.

Well, I think that any solution which includes the phrase "they don't get beaten up or raped or murdered as often" is a majorly positive solution. I'm not aware of any solution that keeps prostitution criminalized which includes that phrase, therefore decriminalization is the solution I favour.

You're correct that prostitutes have a higher risk of STDs et al than workers in other industries have. Similarly, boxers and football players have a higher risk of concussions and other physical injuries. If banning boxing and football isn't a viable solution, the next best thing is to have organizations and structures in place to educate the workers about these risks and have procedures in place to minimize them and proper medical services to deal with them when they happen. It's the same with prostitutes and STDs. A legal and regulated industry can have these organizations and procedures in effect to a much better extent than an underground one run by criminals can. It's the second best solution, but since the best solution of getting rid of prostitution entirely isn't viable, it's the optimal choice.

My 2 bit guess is that it is because we are willing to accept that a certain segment of society is somehow entitled to get their jollies from hurting other people as long as they pay them...something and as long as we can pretend that the sex workers are doing it as a rational choice and not because they have no other job skills, often because they are too young to have any legit job skills at all or because they are too damaged and traumatized by their youth spent as sex workers to have any realistic ambition to do much else.

IMO, your view is a romanticized vision of choices sex workers have never had in their lives and that sex work will never afford them.

Regardless of why they're doing it, the fact is that they are doing it. Since you agree that they're not going to just stop and nobody will be prostitutes anymore, the issue to deal with is how to make their job as safe and secure as possible. I do not see what you put in place to help ensure that in a better way than a legalized and regulated framework would.