• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Split Legalized Prostitution split from GOP: The party of idiots

To notify a split thread.
Really. So in Australia there is no illegal sex trafficking?
Er... That's not what I said. It's not even particularly relevant to what I said.

Perhaps a less emotionally charged analogy would help:

In Queensland, it is not a crime for terminally ill patients who have followed the correct procedures to arrange for a doctor to kill them. In such situations, neither the doctor nor the patient is comitting a crime; Killing someone in Queensland, in these specific circumstances, is not "A victimless crime", because it is not a crime at all.

To respond to the above paragraph with:

"Really. So in Queensland there are no murders?", would be to tragically and irrationally miss the point.

Of course there are still crimes. That doesn't in any way imply that non-criminal acts are "victimless crimes". :rolleyesa:
 
Really. So in Australia there is no illegal sex trafficking?
Er... That's not what I said. It's not even particularly relevant to what I said.

Perhaps a less emotionally charged analogy would help:

In Queensland, it is not a crime for terminally ill patients who have followed the correct procedures to arrange for a doctor to kill them. In such situations, neither the doctor nor the patient is comitting a crime; Killing someone in Queensland, in these specific circumstances, is not "A victimless crime", because it is not a crime at all.

To respond to the above paragraph with:

"Really. So in Queensland there are no murders?", would be to tragically and irrationally miss the point.

Of course there are still crimes. That doesn't in any way imply that non-criminal acts are "victimless crimes". :rolleyesa:
Disregarding the whole assisted suicide comparison, the FACT is that where prostitution is legalized OR decriminalized, it does NOT eliminate illegal human trafficking for sex work.
 
Really. So in Australia there is no illegal sex trafficking?
Er... That's not what I said. It's not even particularly relevant to what I said.

Perhaps a less emotionally charged analogy would help:

In Queensland, it is not a crime for terminally ill patients who have followed the correct procedures to arrange for a doctor to kill them. In such situations, neither the doctor nor the patient is comitting a crime; Killing someone in Queensland, in these specific circumstances, is not "A victimless crime", because it is not a crime at all.

To respond to the above paragraph with:

"Really. So in Queensland there are no murders?", would be to tragically and irrationally miss the point.

Of course there are still crimes. That doesn't in any way imply that non-criminal acts are "victimless crimes". :rolleyesa:
Disregarding the whole assisted suicide comparison, the FACT is that where prostitution is legalized OR decriminalized, it does NOT eliminate illegal human trafficking for sex work.
And legalized assisted death doesn't eliminate homicide; Nor does legalized cannibis eliminate heroin overdoses, nor legalized alcohol sales eliminate organised crime.

But as no sane person would expect them to, it's really not a problem.
 
Disregarding the whole assisted suicide comparison,
In other words, missing bilby's point entirely, ...
the FACT is that where prostitution is legalized OR decriminalized, it does NOT eliminate illegal human trafficking for sex work.
Why do you think it would have to eliminate "illegal human trafficking for sex work" entirely for it to be positive?
Prohibition hardly eliminates "illegal human trafficking for sex work" either, but it additionally has other negative effects.
 
Disregarding the whole assisted suicide comparison,
In other words, missing bilby's point entirely.
the FACT is that where prostitution is legalized OR decriminalized, it does NOT eliminate illegal human trafficking for sex work.
Why do you think it would have to eliminate "illegal human trafficking for sex work" entirely for it to be positive?
Prohibition hardly eliminates "illegal human trafficking for sex work" either, but it additionally has other negative effects.
I didn’t miss Bilbys point.

I don’t think you quite realize the human suffering that sex trafficking causes, the toll it takes on its victims. It is in essence a kind of slavery where you are repeatedly raped.

Just sit that with you for a while.

Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
 
Really. So in Australia there is no illegal sex trafficking?
From your link, there is a lot of different kinds of illegal trafficking in Australia.
AFP said:
The 2022/23 financial year data represents an increase of 46 reports compared to the 2021/22 financial year. In the 12 months of the 2022/23 financial year, the AFP received:

90 reports of forced marriage;
90 reports of trafficking (inclusive of entry, exit and child trafficking);
73 reports of sexual exploitation;
43 reports of forced labour;
18 reports of debt bondage;
16 reports of domestic servitude;
6 reports of deceptive recruitment; and
4 reports of slavery.
If there is forced marriage, should all marriage be outlawed?
If there is forced labour, should all labour be outlawed?
If there is debt bondage, should loans be outlawed?
If there is domestic servitude, should all domestic work (maids and such) be outlawed?
You get the point.

Your position is special pleading for sexual services only. Why?

By the way, 73 reports of sexual exploitation compared to how many total sex workers? The denominator is always important for these analyses.
 
I didn’t miss Bilbys point.
Oh, I think you did.
I don’t think you quite realize the human suffering that sex trafficking causes, the toll it takes on its victims. It is in essence a kind of slavery where you are repeatedly raped.
I do not doubt that legitimate "sex trafficking" (although anti-sex work groups usually lump all sex work as "sex trafficking") is traumatizing.
But that does not mean all sex work should be outlawed any more than existence of abusive practices in other industries should lead to the entire industries being outlawed.
To swing back to bilby's example - getting murdered is even more damaging. But that has little to do with assisted suicide, and banning the latter will not reduce the former.
Just sit that with you for a while.
For what purpose, other than appeal to emotion.
"Forcing people, including children, into sex work is horrible, so we must ban consensual adult sex work. And if you disagree, you obviously approve of sex trafficking. Won't somebody please think of the children?"
Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
No, it does not. Persecuting consenting adults does not help actual trafficking victims, including children. If anything, it diverts law enforcement resources from actual problems.
 
Disregarding the whole assisted suicide comparison,
In other words, missing bilby's point entirely.
the FACT is that where prostitution is legalized OR decriminalized, it does NOT eliminate illegal human trafficking for sex work.
Why do you think it would have to eliminate "illegal human trafficking for sex work" entirely for it to be positive?
Prohibition hardly eliminates "illegal human trafficking for sex work" either, but it additionally has other negative effects.
I didn’t miss Bilbys point.

I don’t think you quite realize the human suffering that sex trafficking causes, the toll it takes on its victims. It is in essence a kind of slavery where you are repeatedly raped.

Just sit that with you for a while.

Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
Did you read any of the links I posted yesterday? Did you read that most sex workers either enjoy their work or prefer it over other options? Of course, nothing will ever be perfect and women are frequently exploited in many ways, all over the world. But, I think I'd rather be a sex worker than a woman in a country like Afghanistan, where every bit of freedom is denied to women, so making it sound as if legalizing or at the very least decriminalizing sex work won't help the women who choose this type of work is madness.

Women all over the world, including feminist groups are trying to organize to protect the women who are sex workers, by providing safer environments for them. As a woman, I'd like to see other women be free to choose what type of work they do. Organizations formed and led by women are helping those in sex work.
 
https://journalofethics.ama-assn.or...ng-through-sex-work-decriminalization/2017-01

In order to decrease human trafficking, health care workers should support the full decriminalization of prostitution. Similar to trafficking in other forms of labor, preventing trafficking in the sex trade requires addressing the different forms of marginalization that create vulnerable communities. By removing punitive laws that prevent reporting of exploitation and abuse, decriminalization allows sex workers to work more safely, thereby reducing marginalization and vulnerability. Decriminalization can also help destigmatize sex work and help resist political, social, and cultural marginalization of sex workers.

Introduction​

In August 2016, Amnesty International, while maintaining and reaffirming its strong condemnation of human trafficking, released a model policy that calls upon countries to decriminalize the sex trade in order to better protect the health and human rights of sex workers [1]. As Amnesty explains in the policy, decriminalization is the shift from “catch-all offences that criminalize most or all aspects of sex work,” including laws that target noncoercive third parties who purchase or facilitate sex work, to “laws and policies that provide protection for sex workers from acts of exploitation and abuse” [2]. The policy has been supported by the World Health Organization, UNAIDS, the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women (GAATW), Human Rights Watch, Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, Freedom Network USA, and numerous other organizations that focus on vulnerable populations, including victims of human trafficking [3, 4]. Most importantly, it is a policy overwhelmingly supported by those trading sex—the community impacted by these laws and policies [5].

In contrast, organizations that view decriminalization as granting permission and impunity to would-be exploiters have criticized the policy, despite its insistence that anti-trafficking and physical and sexual assault laws be maintained or established [1]. These criticisms, however, fail to engage in a nuanced conversation of sex work as it relates to exploitation, poverty, discrimination, worker rights, and human trafficking [6]. More importantly, research shows the opposite to be true—that it is criminalization that creates conditions of impunity and enhances sex workers’ vulnerabilities to violence and exploitation, including trafficking.
Some have the opposing view, but I think it's relevant that organizations like the ACLU and Amnesty International etc. are trying to help make sex work decriminalized to help those who choose this work. As other links I've posted mention, it's not just sex workers who are often "trafficked" to do this type of work. There are people in farming, meat packing etc. who are falsely promised a better life and then are exploited for their labor. Nobody should be exploited for their labor, but all workers, regardless of their type of work should be protected. I don't view sex work as immoral and based on years of reading how women in this type of work feel about their work, I strongly support legalization with regulations, including access to health care etc.
 
Disregarding the whole assisted suicide comparison,
In other words, missing bilby's point entirely.
the FACT is that where prostitution is legalized OR decriminalized, it does NOT eliminate illegal human trafficking for sex work.
Why do you think it would have to eliminate "illegal human trafficking for sex work" entirely for it to be positive?
Prohibition hardly eliminates "illegal human trafficking for sex work" either, but it additionally has other negative effects.
I didn’t miss Bilbys point.

I don’t think you quite realize the human suffering that sex trafficking causes, the toll it takes on its victims. It is in essence a kind of slavery where you are repeatedly raped.

Just sit that with you for a while.

Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
Did you read any of the links I posted yesterday? Did you read that most sex workers either enjoy their work or prefer it over other options? Of course, nothing will ever be perfect and women are frequently exploited in many ways, all over the world. But, I think I'd rather be a sex worker than a woman in a country like Afghanistan, where every bit of freedom is denied to women, so making it sound as if legalizing or at the very least decriminalizing sex work won't help the women who choose this type of work is madness.

Women all over the world, including feminist groups are trying to organize to protect the women who are sex workers, by providing safer environments for them. As a woman, I'd like to see other women be free to choose what type of work they do. Organizations formed and led by women are helping those in sex work.
Please note that I am NOT suggesting that some prostitutes —and can we please stop using the word woman/women when so many prostitutes are not women?? —enjoy the work or prefer it to other work available to them. I have NOT suggested making prostitution illegal and HAVE repeatedly said that I support decriminalizing prostitution.

What I am saying over and over and over again—with links no one reads! is that legal prostitution has its issues that are not addressed and that one of the issues with legalized prostitution is that it actually increases the market for illegal prostitution: under aged, trafficked individuals who are essentially slaves in the sex industry. In Nevada, money from legal prostitution pales in comparison to illegal prostitution.
 
Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
No, it does not. Persecuting consenting adults does not help actual trafficking victims, including children. If anything, it diverts law enforcement resources from actual problems.
Persecuting. Yeah, you poor victim. Continually a reminder of the self-interest that drives your position on this.
 
No, it does not. Persecuting consenting adults does not help actual trafficking victims, including children. If anything, it diverts law enforcement resources from actual problems.
If prosecuting consenting adults who are breaking the law reduces human trafficking by reducing the demand for the illegal acts, your response is false.

So, the issue is an empirical one.
 
Really. So in Australia there is no illegal sex trafficking?
Er... That's not what I said. It's not even particularly relevant to what I said.

Perhaps a less emotionally charged analogy would help:

In Queensland, it is not a crime for terminally ill patients who have followed the correct procedures to arrange for a doctor to kill them. In such situations, neither the doctor nor the patient is comitting a crime; Killing someone in Queensland, in these specific circumstances, is not "A victimless crime", because it is not a crime at all.

To respond to the above paragraph with:

"Really. So in Queensland there are no murders?", would be to tragically and irrationally miss the point.

Of course there are still crimes. That doesn't in any way imply that non-criminal acts are "victimless crimes". :rolleyesa:
Disregarding the whole assisted suicide comparison, the FACT is that where prostitution is legalized OR decriminalized, it does NOT eliminate illegal human trafficking for sex work.
I don't know much about this, and don't have the time (now) to read all the links provided by you and sohy.

It sounds like you are saying we shouldn't legalize sex work because it won't eliminate trafficking, and I'm sure you're correct on that. Is there any country that has legalized it that has at least reduced trafficking? The idea of sex work is much broader these days, with much of it being online (still exploitable, but less so, I think?) and there may be particular aspects of it that need tighter controls than others.

Unfortunately, with the online issue, much of it occurs in other countries and can't be addressed easily.
 
Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
No, it does not. Persecuting consenting adults does not help actual trafficking victims, including children. If anything, it diverts law enforcement resources from actual problems.
Persecuting. Yeah, you poor victim. Continually a reminder of the self-interest that drives your position on this.
I think that you and Toni are being pretty nonsensical here.

I'm quite sure that legalizing ordinary human behavior, including transactional sex work, will only suppress the abusive/coercive kinds. Not only will it increase supply a bit, but who is more likely to know about and report unethical conduct than legal competitors?
Tom
 
https://journalofethics.ama-assn.or...ng-through-sex-work-decriminalization/2017-01

In order to decrease human trafficking, health care workers should support the full decriminalization of prostitution. Similar to trafficking in other forms of labor, preventing trafficking in the sex trade requires addressing the different forms of marginalization that create vulnerable communities. By removing punitive laws that prevent reporting of exploitation and abuse, decriminalization allows sex workers to work more safely, thereby reducing marginalization and vulnerability. Decriminalization can also help destigmatize sex work and help resist political, social, and cultural marginalization of sex workers.

Introduction​

In August 2016, Amnesty International, while maintaining and reaffirming its strong condemnation of human trafficking, released a model policy that calls upon countries to decriminalize the sex trade in order to better protect the health and human rights of sex workers [1]. As Amnesty explains in the policy, decriminalization is the shift from “catch-all offences that criminalize most or all aspects of sex work,” including laws that target noncoercive third parties who purchase or facilitate sex work, to “laws and policies that provide protection for sex workers from acts of exploitation and abuse” [2]. The policy has been supported by the World Health Organization, UNAIDS, the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women (GAATW), Human Rights Watch, Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, Freedom Network USA, and numerous other organizations that focus on vulnerable populations, including victims of human trafficking [3, 4]. Most importantly, it is a policy overwhelmingly supported by those trading sex—the community impacted by these laws and policies [5].

In contrast, organizations that view decriminalization as granting permission and impunity to would-be exploiters have criticized the policy, despite its insistence that anti-trafficking and physical and sexual assault laws be maintained or established [1]. These criticisms, however, fail to engage in a nuanced conversation of sex work as it relates to exploitation, poverty, discrimination, worker rights, and human trafficking [6]. More importantly, research shows the opposite to be true—that it is criminalization that creates conditions of impunity and enhances sex workers’ vulnerabilities to violence and exploitation, including trafficking.
Some have the opposing view, but I think it's relevant that organizations like the ACLU and Amnesty International etc. are trying to help make sex work decriminalized to help those who choose this work. As other links I've posted mention, it's not just sex workers who are often "trafficked" to do this type of work. There are people in farming, meat packing etc. who are falsely promised a better life and then are exploited for their labor. Nobody should be exploited for their labor, but all workers, regardless of their type of work should be protected. I don't view sex work as immoral and based on years of reading how women in this type of work feel about their work, I strongly support legalization with regulations, including access to health care etc.
As I would think is obvious, I and I would guess almost everyone on this forum and posting in this thread agree that human trafficking is a horrendous evil and needs to be stopped. Whatever industry 'benefits.'
 
Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
No, it does not. Persecuting consenting adults does not help actual trafficking victims, including children. If anything, it diverts law enforcement resources from actual problems.
Persecuting. Yeah, you poor victim. Continually a reminder of the self-interest that drives your position on this.
Hopefully, he meant prosecuting. I would hope that even Derec wouldn't claim that being denied buying sex is a form of persecution.
That's crazy talk.
I am only concerned about the workers, their safety, their rights and their freedom to choose this work without fear of being charged as criminals or stigmatized.
 
Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
No, it does not. Persecuting consenting adults does not help actual trafficking victims, including children. If anything, it diverts law enforcement resources from actual problems.
Persecuting. Yeah, you poor victim. Continually a reminder of the self-interest that drives your position on this.
I think that you and Toni are being pretty nonsensical here.
Feel free to quote where I was specifically nonsensical. Unless you think Derec is a victim with the current laws.
 
Really. So in Australia there is no illegal sex trafficking?
Er... That's not what I said. It's not even particularly relevant to what I said.

Perhaps a less emotionally charged analogy would help:

In Queensland, it is not a crime for terminally ill patients who have followed the correct procedures to arrange for a doctor to kill them. In such situations, neither the doctor nor the patient is comitting a crime; Killing someone in Queensland, in these specific circumstances, is not "A victimless crime", because it is not a crime at all.

To respond to the above paragraph with:

"Really. So in Queensland there are no murders?", would be to tragically and irrationally miss the point.

Of course there are still crimes. That doesn't in any way imply that non-criminal acts are "victimless crimes". :rolleyesa:
Disregarding the whole assisted suicide comparison, the FACT is that where prostitution is legalized OR decriminalized, it does NOT eliminate illegal human trafficking for sex work.
I don't know much about this, and don't have the time (now) to read all the links provided by you and sohy.

It sounds like you are saying we shouldn't legalize sex work because it won't eliminate trafficking, and I'm sure you're correct on that. Is there any country that has legalized it that has at least reduced trafficking? The idea of sex work is much broader these days, with much of it being online (still exploitable, but less so, I think?) and there may be particular aspects of it that need tighter controls than others.

Unfortunately, with the online issue, much of it occurs in other countries and can't be addressed easily.
My reading over the years (and sorry, I no longer have the links nor the time to seek them out again) is that legalizing INCREASES trafficking and INCREASES illegal sex work. I personally was quite shocked and that totally changed my mind about legalization.

I suppose it is rather comparable to having a coffee shop on the corner: it increases the traffic of people in the area looking for coffee and so other coffee shops pop up. Or like illegal drugs: there are always some subset of drug users who are seeking a new/different high and believe that whatever is illegal is illegal precisely because it gets you more high.

Again: I honestly do not care about adults having mutually consensual sex with other adults, providing that all parties are in fact, adult and are, in fact consenting.

Many years ago, a neighbor lady and I (I was a teenager at the time) were talking and she was rather upset with her husband who fiercely believed that a woman who was not tied up or knocked out could not be 'raped.' That if she 'gave in' after being punched and knocked around enough, well, that was consent. I am certain that he's not the only person to have that belief/attitude.

That is not the kind of consent I'm talking about. It's not consent if compliance is forced by physical force, use of intoxicants, or extortion: let me do what I want or I'll go after your kid. Let me do what I want or you'll be out on the street. Let me do what I want or you lose your job or your front teeth or I'll kick that baby right out of your stomach. Those would be examples of not actually having consent.
 
Your liberal sexual freedom politics comes at an enormous price—for someone else. Including little boys and girls.
No, it does not. Persecuting consenting adults does not help actual trafficking victims, including children. If anything, it diverts law enforcement resources from actual problems.
Persecuting. Yeah, you poor victim. Continually a reminder of the self-interest that drives your position on this.
Hopefully, he meant prosecuting. I would hope that even Derec wouldn't claim that being denied buying sex is a form of persecution.
That's crazy talk.
I am only concerned about the workers, their safety, their rights and their freedom to choose this work without fear of being charged as criminals or stigmatized.
Here's my take---and I do NOT know if this applies in any way to Derec inparticular (and NOT my business at all!) but I know that it does apply to many people:

I have tremendous sympathy for those who are unable to enjoy a physical relationship (with or without sex) with another person for all sorts of reasons. And for those people, I certainly have the most sympathy if they use sex workers to satisfy their needs for touch and/or sex and/or intimacy. It's a STRONG need that is both physical and emotional. I think that those who DO rely on paid sex workers to satisfy their needs DO feel persecuted when people like me speak out about the evils of sex work. That's not my intention. I honestly want everyone to be as happy and healthy as possible, so long as their happiness does not involve harming other people, drowning kittens, pulling wings off of butterflies, etc. We just disagree about whether or not harm occurs and whether or not that harm is offset by money exchanging hands.

Again: I don't find it immoral for two CONSENTING ADULTS to have whatever kind of relationship they choose, whether or not it involves sex or money. My only problem is with consent and with adults only. I honestly think that one should have to be at least 25 to engage in paid sex work--by which I mean having sex/sexual contact with clients for money or substitute. Yes, I would include 'exotic dancing' in the category of 25+ for that work. Probably only fans type of stuff as well. I'm sure there are plenty of platforms and forms of sex work I am not particularly familiar with.
 
If prosecuting consenting adults who are breaking the law reduces human trafficking by reducing the demand for the illegal acts, your response is false.
To quote the laconic Spartans, "if".
I see no mechanism for this relationship to happen. At most reports of human trafficking would increase because it would be easier to find genuine wrongdoing and genuine victims when you are not conflating them with consenting adults.
But would that not be a good thing? What is more important to you, uncovering actual wrongdoing or "juking the stats"?
So, the issue is an empirical one.
It's also an issue of individual freedoms. Used to be a time when "liberals" were about liberty.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom