Is it racist for a prostitute to reject black men?

[Sabine Grant]

Whether or not it is racist is a matter of definition. But, black men are routinely discriminated against in the escort world because blacks are many times more likely to lack the ability to pay, many times more likely to be violent, many times more likely to carry STDs, and many times more likely to attract law enforcement. There is no doubt--discriminating against blacks is a smart business move for escorts in predominantly-white environments.

In the "escort world" ? Are you kidding me! Escort services in my home town Cannes on the French Riviera operate a triage system based on the established WEALTH of potential clients. If you *think* that the diversity of international conventions and events hosted on the French Riviera does not draw participants of diverse ethnicity, you are sorely mistaken.

OK, seems about right. Is prostitution legal or unenforced in Cannes?

You said "escort world". Escort agencies are legal. Prostitution is not. The difference being that escort agencies do not expect their employees to give a "happy ending" to their clients. Whereas by the very nature of prostitution, it directly implies sexual services.

While that is true, the term escort has become a euphemized term for prostitution, although, I hear legitimate (i.e. non-sexual) escorts exist.

They not only exist but it is a thriving business in areas holding conventions and international events like the Cannes Film Festival. Mind you that such escorts are classy males and females. Escort agencies are very selective about their employees. However, some of those escorts are going to make a couple of thousand Euros "under the table" when agreeing to giving a "happy ending" .Cops will not go after escorts. Because their clients are super wealthy, well connected and will pull some weight. It would be a waste of time.

 

[Sabine Grant]

You said "escort world". Escort agencies are legal. Prostitution is not. The difference being that escort agencies do not expect their employees to give a "happy ending" to their clients. Whereas by the very nature of prostitution, it directly implies sexual services.

You do know that all the people working at escort agencies are prostitutes, right? The disclaimers about how sexual services aren't part of deal are for legal reasons and not actually related to what they're offering.

And somehow Tom, you would be more informed about escort agencies in my home town, Cannes, than I am? How many of those male and female escort agencies employees have you socialized with on the French Riviera? I already know the answer : none. I also already know and have observed in this thread that somehow you would be more informed about Dutch laws while you refer to "Holland" (try The Netherlands instead if you intend to pause as so knowledgeable about Dutch laws) than dystopian is.

What is next? You having more knowledge than I do about the restrictions escort agencies place on their employees in France?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

You said "escort world". Escort agencies are legal. Prostitution is not. The difference being that escort agencies do not expect their employees to give a "happy ending" to their clients. Whereas by the very nature of prostitution, it directly implies sexual services.

You do know that all the people working at escort agencies are prostitutes, right? The disclaimers about how sexual services aren't part of deal are for legal reasons and not actually related to what they're offering.

And somehow Tom, you would be more informed about escort agencies in my home town, Cannes, than I am? How many of those male and female escort agencies employees have you socialized with on the French Riviera? I already know the answer : none. I also already know and have observed in this thread that somehow you would be more informed about Dutch laws while you refer to "Holland" (try The Netherlands instead if you intend to pause as so knowledgeable about Dutch laws) than dystopian is.

What is next? You having more knowledge than I do about the restrictions escort agencies place on their employees in France?

Over here, that line's just a legal disclaimer that prostitution agencies put up. Perhaps terms have different meanings in different parts of the world. Do you have any links to these escort agencies so I can see what you're talking about?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

which ones?

I am not trying to be funny, I am sincerely asking. Been a little hectic here. I will be running a poetry camp for two weeks in July (yes for two weeks you all will have to struggle on without me although I might still some time to go to the coffee shop in town and check on y'all) and I have some preparations still to do.

If two businesses publically advertise themselves as:

Private Dining Club
NO BLACK MEN ALLOWED
Come and eat in a racially pure environment

and

Private Escort Club
NO BLACK MEN ALLOWED
Come and fuck in a racially pure environment

Then I have the same problem with both of them and I feel that the government should have the same problem with both of them (assuming, of course, that the prostitution has been legalized).

How do you feel about each of them?

To begin, private clubs don't advertise. If they did, they wouldn't be private.

How do I feel about their existence? I don't.

I have attended attended functions at private clubs, not ones that restricted admittance to only white people obviously, but there are other private clubs and I have been to a few. Nothing special. Bunch of bougie people in clothes that cost too much money trying to convince each other that they are really cool and interesting. They really weren't.

Do I approve or encourage racial exclusion? No. I feel that there really are only so many really fantastic people in the world and to exclude any of them from my life based solely on something as arbitrary and ultimately meaningless as skin color is the height if stupidity.

But not everybody is me and if you want to be stupid, you have the right to be stupid. And as long as you break no laws and cause no harm to others, then be stupid.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

which ones?

I am not trying to be funny, I am sincerely asking. Been a little hectic here. I will be running a poetry camp for two weeks in July (yes for two weeks you all will have to struggle on without me although I might still some time to go to the coffee shop in town and check on y'all) and I have some preparations still to do.

If two businesses publically advertise themselves as:

Private Dining Club
NO BLACK MEN ALLOWED
Come and eat in a racially pure environment

and

Private Escort Club
NO BLACK MEN ALLOWED
Come and fuck in a racially pure environment

Then I have the same problem with both of them and I feel that the government should have the same problem with both of them (assuming, of course, that the prostitution has been legalized).

How do you feel about each of them?

To begin, private clubs don't advertise. If they did, they wouldn't be private.

How do I feel about their existence? I don't.

I have attended attended functions at private clubs, not ones that restricted admittance to only white people obviously, but there are other private clubs and I have been to a few. Nothing special. Bunch of bougie people in clothes that cost too much money trying to convince each other that they are really cool and interesting. They really weren't.

Do I approve or encourage racial exclusion? No. I feel that there really are only so many really fantastic people in the world and to exclude any of them from my life based solely on something as arbitrary and ultimately meaningless as skin color is the height if stupidity.

But not everybody is me and if you want to be stupid, you have the right to be stupid. And as long as you break no laws and cause no harm to others, then be stupid.

Fine, replace it with public club. The thread is about explicit advertising of racial exclusion in their services. It's also about the fact that doing that is breaking laws and that the reason for those laws is that racial discrimination is a harmful thing.

You're saying (if I understand your position properly - please tell me if I'm wrong) that you have no problem with the escort advertising this way because the racial kink is a valid business model. Do you have a similar lack of a problem with restaurants publically advertising in a similar way?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

which ones?

I am not trying to be funny, I am sincerely asking. Been a little hectic here. I will be running a poetry camp for two weeks in July (yes for two weeks you all will have to struggle on without me although I might still some time to go to the coffee shop in town and check on y'all) and I have some preparations still to do.

If two businesses publically advertise themselves as:

Private Dining Club
NO BLACK MEN ALLOWED
Come and eat in a racially pure environment

and

Private Escort Club
NO BLACK MEN ALLOWED
Come and fuck in a racially pure environment

Then I have the same problem with both of them and I feel that the government should have the same problem with both of them (assuming, of course, that the prostitution has been legalized).

How do you feel about each of them?

To begin, private clubs don't advertise. If they did, they wouldn't be private.

How do I feel about their existence? I don't.

I have attended attended functions at private clubs, not ones that restricted admittance to only white people obviously, but there are other private clubs and I have been to a few. Nothing special. Bunch of bougie people in clothes that cost too much money trying to convince each other that they are really cool and interesting. They really weren't.

Do I approve or encourage racial exclusion? No. I feel that there really are only so many really fantastic people in the world and to exclude any of them from my life based solely on something as arbitrary and ultimately meaningless as skin color is the height if stupidity.

But not everybody is me and if you want to be stupid, you have the right to be stupid. And as long as you break no laws and cause no harm to others, then be stupid.

Fine, replace it with public club. The thread is about explicit advertising of racial exclusion in their services. It's also about the fact that doing that is breaking laws and that the reason for those laws is that racial discrimination is a harmful thing.

sex, be it for money or love or love of money is not the same as selling dinners or train tickets. And laws in every country recognize this. That's why rape is. Not the same as breaking and entering. If a sex worker wants sell a particular kink to a particular cliental, due to the nature of what s/he is selling, s/he should be allowed to sell said kink provided it is lawful, done with the consent of all parties involved and hurts no one outside the transaction.

Maybe it is an American thing, but what consenting adults do in private so long as no one gets hurt and laws aren't broken just isn't any of my damn business.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Actually, that is not the case; you can't force a restaurant to serve anyone regardless of race; all you can do is force them to come up with a different (but lawful) pretext to refuse service.

I agree that it is a bit of a waste of time to make bigots reject customers piecemeal; but that is the way the law works, and I can't see an obvious solution other than to repeal anti-discrimination law in its entirety.

And that piecemeal rejection bit I think causes more harm than permitting discrimination in moderation.

When the ad says "no black men" the black man is out a few seconds reading it. Reject piecemeal and you get the very thing mentioned in the post from the prostitute above--wasting time & gas driving there.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

sex, be it for money or love or love of money is not the same as selling dinners or train tickets. And laws in every country recognize this. That's why rape is. Not the same as breaking and entering. If a sex worker wants sell a particular kink to a particular cliental, due to the nature of what s/he is selling, s/he should be allowed to sell said kink provided it is lawful, done with the consent of all parties involved and hurts no one outside the transaction.

Maybe it is an American thing, but what consenting adults do in private so long as no one gets hurt and laws aren't broken just isn't any of my damn business.

I agree with the last statement. However, business transactions are different things. If you're going to sell sex as a legal business, you need to follow the rules and regulations of that business. If someone offers you more money to have sex without a condom, you say no because the health and safety regulations for the industry would forbid that and if you did that with a client before the job got legalized or you like doing it with guys you meet privately, you need to not do it while on the clock. It's no different than it being ok to not wash your hands when you cook at home but you need to do it when you're cooking in a restaurant.

It's the same with following anti-discrimination laws. You are conducting business and that business cannot exclude customers along racial lines. The nature of the business does not change that and business plans which are at odds with that are the same as business plans which publically advertise dining without any black men around. They're not allowed.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Actually, that is not the case; you can't force a restaurant to serve anyone regardless of race; all you can do is force them to come up with a different (but lawful) pretext to refuse service.

I agree that it is a bit of a waste of time to make bigots reject customers piecemeal; but that is the way the law works, and I can't see an obvious solution other than to repeal anti-discrimination law in its entirety.

And that piecemeal rejection bit I think causes more harm than permitting discrimination in moderation.

When the ad says "no black men" the black man is out a few seconds reading it. Reject piecemeal and you get the very thing mentioned in the post from the prostitute above--wasting time & gas driving there.

But that's the same for every single other business that's going to find a stealth way to exclude based on discriminatory lines. If there's a restaurant that just "happens" to continuously find reasons to not let black customers dine there, any black person will waste their time going there. That doesn't mean that "White Power Diner. No Black Men Allowed" is a legitimate sign for them to put on their window.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

sex, be it for money or love or love of money is not the same as selling dinners or train tickets. And laws in every country recognize this. That's why rape is. Not the same as breaking and entering. If a sex worker wants sell a particular kink to a particular cliental, due to the nature of what s/he is selling, s/he should be allowed to sell said kink provided it is lawful, done with the consent of all parties involved and hurts no one outside the transaction.

Maybe it is an American thing, but what consenting adults do in private so long as no one gets hurt and laws aren't broken just isn't any of my damn business.

I agree with the last statement. However, business transactions are different things. If you're going to sell sex as a legal business, you need to follow the rules and regulations of that business. If someone offers you more money to have sex without a condom, you say no because the health and safety regulations for the industry would forbid that and if you did that with a client before the job got legalized or you like doing it with guys you meet privately, you need to not do it while on the clock. It's no different than it being ok to not wash your hands when you cook at home but you need to do it when you're cooking in a restaurant.

It's the same with following anti-discrimination laws. You are conducting business and that business cannot exclude customers along racial lines. The nature of the business does not change that and business plans which are at odds with that are the same as business plans which publically advertise dining without any black men around. They're not allowed.

but sex is different. It's an exchange of bodily fluid. It can possibly lead to pregnancy. And it isn't anyone business who or why so long as it's legal and safe. You can't hire a man to be a ladies room attendent and no matter how you dress it up you simply can't expect a person to legally be required to fuck someone s/he doesnt want to. Business or no business, you can't legally expect that because to do so is to expect rape which is most definitely illegal.

A doctor refusing a patient is not the same as a hooker refusing a John. There is no law against healing people, there are plenty of laws against fucking someone against a person's will. You can't equate the sex trade with other work.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

but sex is different. It's an exchange of bodily fluid. It can possibly lead to pregnancy. And it isn't anyone business who or why so long as it's legal and safe. You can't hire a man to be a ladies room attendent and no matter how you dress it up you simply can't expect a person to legally be required to fuck someone s/he doesnt want to. Business or no business, you can't legally expect that because to do so is to expect rape which is most definitely illegal.

A doctor refusing a patient is not the same as a hooker refusing a John. There is no law against healing people, there are plenty of laws against fucking someone against a person's will. You can't equate the sex trade with other work.

But there is zero discussion about anybody wanting to force anybody to have sex against their will. She doesn't have to fuck anybody she doesn't want to. Seriously, this is like a broken record. How is it possible to be 200 posts into this thread and think that there is a single person advocating anything that is in any way related to rape? She can always say no. There is no "other side" in the rape argument present.

What she can't do is explicitly and publically discriminate based on race. Just like every other business can't.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

but sex is different. It's an exchange of bodily fluid. It can possibly lead to pregnancy. And it isn't anyone business who or why so long as it's legal and safe. You can't hire a man to be a ladies room attendent and no matter how you dress it up you simply can't expect a person to legally be required to fuck someone s/he doesnt want to. Business or no business, you can't legally expect that because to do so is to expect rape which is most definitely illegal.

A doctor refusing a patient is not the same as a hooker refusing a John. There is no law against healing people, there are plenty of laws against fucking someone against a person's will. You can't equate the sex trade with other work.

But there is zero discussion about anybody wanting to force anybody to have sex against their will. She doesn't have to fuck anybody she doesn't want to. Seriously, this is like a broken record. How is it possible to be 200 posts into this thread and think that there is a single person advocating anything that is in any way related to rape? She can always say no. There is no "other side" in the rape argument present.

What she can't do is explicitly and publically discriminate based on race. Just like every other business can't.

actually she can because the sex trade isn't like any other business. Matter of fact, she gets to discriminate period because of the unique nature of sex. Take this to its logical conclusion. Hooker turns down black John. Black John presses charges. The court then has to find for the John and jail the hooker for not having sex with a man against her will.

That would be problematic.

 

[bilby]

but sex is different. It's an exchange of bodily fluid. It can possibly lead to pregnancy. And it isn't anyone business who or why so long as it's legal and safe. You can't hire a man to be a ladies room attendent and no matter how you dress it up you simply can't expect a person to legally be required to fuck someone s/he doesnt want to. Business or no business, you can't legally expect that because to do so is to expect rape which is most definitely illegal.

A doctor refusing a patient is not the same as a hooker refusing a John. There is no law against healing people, there are plenty of laws against fucking someone against a person's will. You can't equate the sex trade with other work.

But there is zero discussion about anybody wanting to force anybody to have sex against their will. She doesn't have to fuck anybody she doesn't want to. Seriously, this is like a broken record. How is it possible to be 200 posts into this thread and think that there is a single person advocating anything that is in any way related to rape? She can always say no. There is no "other side" in the rape argument present.

What she can't do is explicitly and publically discriminate based on race. Just like every other business can't.

actually she can because the sex trade isn't like any other business. Matter of fact, she gets to discriminate period because of the unique nature of sex. Take this to its logical conclusion. Hooker turns down black John. Black John presses charges. The court then has to find for the John and jail the hooker for not having sex with a man against her will.

That would be problematic.

No, it wouldn't be problematic at all; the court can only find for the John if he can show that the reason he was turned down was his race alone, and that there was no other reason.

Proof could take the form of prejudicial advertisements, that say 'No blacks'; or a court might accept statistical evidence - if she was approached by 80 white and 60 black men over the course of three months, and rejected five whites and every single one of the blacks, that could be considered sufficient grounds to fine her. Note however that the fine would be for unlawful prejudicial discrimination, not for not having sex with a man against her will.

The offence is saying 'I have never met you, but have already decided to refuse service to you, solely based on your membership of a particular race'. That is unlawful.

There is no legal offence committed if a hooker says 'Now that I have met you, I choose not to do business with you'.

Anti-discrimination law protects identified classes of people from universal discrimination. There is nothing about such laws that gives any class of people the right to demand service as individuals; the law only prohibits the denial of service to that class of people SOLELY on the basis of their membership of that class.

 

[dystopian]

Such things may exist in America, but they are illegal in the civilised world.

Uhm, name me one country (civilized or otherwise) where restricted private clubs are illegal? You won't find any.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So Tom, then suppose a black John does the necessary investigation to show that the hooker has turned down every single potential black customer? Investigations, reports, etc., all the things used to show a business is turning down every single black applicant while claiming that the applicants weren't qualified.

It has happened that businesses that didn't have a written policy of discrimination were found to be discriminating by practice.

So if a black John can establish a pattern, can he then take the hooker to court for refusing him based on an established pattern of discrimination?

 

[Sabine Grant]

You said "escort world". Escort agencies are legal. Prostitution is not. The difference being that escort agencies do not expect their employees to give a "happy ending" to their clients. Whereas by the very nature of prostitution, it directly implies sexual services.

You do know that all the people working at escort agencies are prostitutes, right? The disclaimers about how sexual services aren't part of deal are for legal reasons and not actually related to what they're offering.

And somehow Tom, you would be more informed about escort agencies in my home town, Cannes, than I am? How many of those male and female escort agencies employees have you socialized with on the French Riviera? I already know the answer : none. I also already know and have observed in this thread that somehow you would be more informed about Dutch laws while you refer to "Holland" (try The Netherlands instead if you intend to pause as so knowledgeable about Dutch laws) than dystopian is.

What is next? You having more knowledge than I do about the restrictions escort agencies place on their employees in France?

Over here, that line's just a legal disclaimer that prostitution agencies put up. Perhaps terms have different meanings in different parts of the world. Do you have any links to these escort agencies so I can see what you're talking about?

What is it exactly you want? A listing of escort agencies in Cannes and the French Riviera where you can consult their website with content regarding conditions and restrictions applying to the expectations placed on their male and female employees? You stated that " all the people working at escort agencies are prostitutes". I am maintaining that such agencies designated in my "neck of the woods" as "Agences d'Escortes" place restrictions on their male and female employees where sexual services are not part of their contract. If some of those
employees decide to make extra Euros by adding sexual services, it is OUTSIDE of their contract with the agency.

None of the escorts I socialized with in Cannes were into prostitution, meaning they provided luxurious style companionship escorting their clients to various events and would attend parties. If a wealthy dude wants a prostitute, he is going to find them hanging out in top notch night clubs and lounge of luxurious hotels on the Riviera. As an aside, wealthy dude will not be picking up streetwalkers.

My central point was in response to apostate's using the terms "escort world" while assuming that the reason why an ad stated " no Black males" was based on a series of negative stereotyping of Black males while he applied it to the "escort world". That is NOT the case regarding escorts in my "neck of the woods". The selection is based on the established wealth of potential clients and when it comes to my home town, worldwide known for hosting large conventions and festivals, it means an international participation representative of wealthy potential clients which certainly does not exclude folks of Black ethnicity.

The main reason why those escort agencies do NOT want their employees to provide sexual services is not because of the illegal aspect of prostitution but because they know they would get in serious trouble with local organized crime which controls the supply of prostitutes dedicated to attracting wealthy clients, the very prostitutes found hanging out in the lounge of luxurious hotels and top notch night clubs.

 

[Sabine Grant]

It's the same with prostitutes. If they're using their body as a business transaction, then different rules apply than if they pick up some guy in a bar. This is no way forces them to have sex with black men but there are legal consequences to doing so which will impact their ability to run their business in such an overtly racist manner.

You couldn't imagine a scenario where a black guy sues a prostitute for not having sex with him and having the judge side with the black guy saying she must serve him? How would that not be forcing her to have sex with a black guy?

Non, Ksen, anyone familiar with the limited powers of the executive, legislative and judiciary bodies in Western democracies would not conceive of such scenario. Let me explain: a member of the Judiciary body issuing a court order compelling the respondent (prostitute) to "serve" the plaintiff would result in institutionalizing sex between 2 parties where one is NOT consenting. Might as well institutionalize rape. That would never happen.

That the Judge decides to rule in favor of the plaintiff with ordering financial damages to be paid by the respondent (prostitute) to the plaintiff, that would be more plausible. However, since such case has yet to be tested in a US court of law, I would anticipate that if such case were to pop up, the ACLU would get involved and secure a solid defense for the respondent on the basis that she has a right to privacy and the State should not intervene in matters involving disputes between legal adults regarding sexual activities. Unless it is a case where sexual activities have taken place and it becomes a criminal matter such as one party claiming that they were intentionally infected with an STD or a sexual assault/rape occurred.

Keep in mind that CONSENT from both parties is where the line is drawn. No Court of Law would reverse such important drawn line by compelling any party to have sex without their consent.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Over here, that line's just a legal disclaimer that prostitution agencies put up. Perhaps terms have different meanings in different parts of the world. Do you have any links to these escort agencies so I can see what you're talking about?

What is it exactly you want? A listing of escort agencies in Cannes and the French Riviera where you can consult their website with content regarding conditions and restrictions applying to the expectations placed on their male and female employees? You stated that " all the people working at escort agencies are prostitutes". I am maintaining that such agencies designated in my "neck of the woods" as "Agences d'Escortes" place restrictions on their male and female employees where sexual services are not part of their contract. If some of those
employees decide to make extra Euros by adding sexual services, it is OUTSIDE of their contract with the agency.

None of the escorts I socialized with in Cannes were into prostitution, meaning they provided luxurious style companionship escorting their clients to various events and would attend parties. If a wealthy dude wants a prostitute, he is going to find them hanging out in top notch night clubs and lounge of luxurious hotels on the Riviera. As an aside, wealthy dude will not be picking up streetwalkers.

Ya, that's what I'm asking about. If you google "Escort Agency Cannes", you get a long list of prostitution companies which call themselves escort agencies. The same results come for "Agences d'Escortes Cannes" from Google France. It seems a valid usage of the term and I couldn't find any alternate usages of the term. The sites with disclaimers were the same as prostitution sites with disclaimers here who then had a bunch of prostitutes advertising. Interestingly, you also get this thread. We're right above Lena, who uses large bold text to announce that she does anal because she apparently really, really wants people to know that. I see that making my comment a valid assumption on my part which didn't warrant any type of snitty response. Now, admittedly, I didn't click on every single link that got returned, but every one that I did was a prostitution agency.

If I were a rich businessman visiting Cannes and I wanted to hire women from companies like your friend's and wasn't interested in prostitutes, how would I find them? My google-fu has failed me on that and my search for escort agencies in Cannes only gets a bunch of prostitutes. Would I need to use Bing?

My central point was in response to apostate's using the terms "escort world" while assuming that the reason why an ad stated " no Black males" was based on a series of negative stereotyping of Black males while he applied it to the "escort world". That is NOT the case regarding escorts in my "neck of the woods". The selection is based on the established wealth of potential clients and when it comes to my home town, worldwide known for hosting large conventions and festivals, it means an international participation representative of wealthy potential clients which certainly does not exclude folks of Black ethnicity.

I don't see the relevance of this. If only one out of a thousand legally operating prostitutes in Cannes want to explicitly advertise that black men aren't allowed as opposed to one out of five legally operating prostitutes in Alabama who want to advertise that because anti-black racism is almost non-existent within the industry over there, the individual cases would be the exact same issue regardless of how rare or common the issue might be.

 

[doubtingt]

What about gender discrimination by prostitutes? If they cannot discriminate by race, then they should not be allowed to by gender. Should all prostitutes be forced to give male and female clients equal consideration? Isn't having clients of all one gender strong evidence of discrimination warranting jail for the prostitue?

For that matter, what about age discrimination or even drug using clients?
You can make and argument that discrimination restrictions should be limited to innate traits, but that only covers the legal question and not the moral one. Objectively, having sex with black men greatly increases risk of STD exposure, just like having sex with drug users does, yet not all members of either group has an STD. So, why is it more immoral to refuse all black clients than to refuse all drug using clients? Both are acts of prejudice, and both are also rational acts that reduce objective threats to oneself.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

What about gender discrimination by prostitutes? If they cannot discriminate by race, then they should not be allowed to by gender. Should all prostitutes be forced to give male and female clients equal consideration? Isn't having clients of all one gender strong evidence of discrimination warranting jail for the prostitue?

For that matter, what about age discrimination or even drug using clients?
You can make and argument that discrimination restrictions should be limited to innate traits, but that only covers the legal question and not the moral one. Objectively, having sex with black men greatly increases risk of STD exposure, just like having sex with drug users does, yet not all members of either group has an STD. So, why is it more immoral to refuse all black clients than to refuse all drug using clients? Both are acts of prejudice, and both are also rational acts that reduce objective threats to oneself.

Well, that's like saying that it's cool to not hire a black person because there's a higher risk of him being a thief. Do you think that's a valid and legal decision on the part of a company? Why or why not?

There's no problem not accepting a client due to his activities but there is a problem not accepting a client because of his race.