Should prostitution be legal?
#asknostr
Discussion
Yes.
Why?
So that it can be taken off the streets. For safer work environments for the women who work in the field. But mostly because I hold libertarian values.
How do libertarian values play into it?
If it's done between consenting adults, it should not be illegal, since, there is no crime.
I like how it sounds, but I'm not sure it could live as an absolute rule. If I consent to you killing me, does that mean it shouldn't be illegal for you to do it?
Murder is still a crime. The underlying principle of libertarianism, also known as the NAP, can be summed up like this, "Don't hurt me and don't touch my stuff." anything outside of that should be lawful. You still need contract law though because defrauding someone is touching their stuff.
But what if I consent though?
If I consent to you touching my stuff, then that's ok.
If I consent to you killing me, is that ok?
Don't know about the others, but I think if the consent is valid, then no offense has occurred. There was a notorious case about this in Germany maybe twenty years ago.
They stung the guy with desecrating a corpse or some such, couldn't get anything resembling murder to stick
At the very least you would and should end up being investigated. You could go to jail even if it was a consentual murder if you were misunderstood. That makes even consentual murder risky.
I agree, it is risky, in this example consent makes the difference between going to prison for the rest of your life or facing no consequences at all.
As we know, consent can be a fickle and hard to prove thing even when both parties are still alive to tell their story. If one of them is dead, then I don't think there's any way justice could ever be served.
I think in these instances, you get better outcomes erring on the side of a rule that just bans it altogether.
Your rule would have to be interestingly drafted to navigate around:
- Abortion
- Risky medical procedures, esp cosmetic ones
- "Bug chasing"
- Euthanasia
The above to one side, I, respectfully, cannot agree with the logic of blanket banning anything preemptively "just to be safe". Consensual (or apparently-consensual) murder is so rare that when/if it comes up - just give the case to a jury to hear the facts in evidence and decide if they believe the consent was valid.
(This is an example of why I believe precedent-based law is superior to legislation-based law)
What The Beave said. Additionally, less offences means less police required to police crime which means less taxation. That's why I think it ridiculous that smoking weed or even taking party pills is a crime, even though I don't do drugs.
I mostly agree, though do you worry that legalization leads to normalization? Will we see more pill-heads and is that a bad thing?
We'd probably see less if you brought them like alcohol in the shops. I'm not really sure. Again, legalising them and making them in a lab could be safer than allowing the black market to handle it too.
I agree, legalizing it might actually take away some of its shine. In any event, it's safer for everyone and takes away gang profits, it can't be that bad.
I'm unaware of any government succeeding in preventing it.
The most that's yet been achieved has been state-sponsored persecution, imprisonment and/or abuse of women who are poor, coloured or trans, for the offense of "undercutting" more privileged women's imagined monopoly on privileged men. Oh, and creating monopoly profits for organised crime, and free/coerced sex for uniformed organised crime (police).
Never thought criminalising it was worth it, even when I was a teenage Social Democrat with a teenager's faith in authority.
I mostly agree in that it can't be prevented and it's better for everyone to regulate and tax it. I disagree that it's some kind of scheme to persecute
It is linked to poverty and a lack of education, I think that's the common denominator.
Account manager sleeps with client to get contract = not prostitution
B-list celebrity sleeps with director to get big role = not prostitution
Journalist sleeps with general to get classified scoop = not prostitution
Employee sleeps with boss to get coveted promotion = not prostitution
Working class but well-read girl with crooked teeth gets paid to go to restaurants with tycoon, sympathise with his first world problems, and later sleep with him = prostitution
(Last example was my neighbour one place I lived)
That's what I mean by how selective the criminalisation is.
Sex is an asset that has been used to influence behavior for as long as humans have existed. The same is true for deception, intelligence, etc. Your girlfriend could deny sex because she's pissed off with you, for example, or offer it up when she's happy.
When you're selling sex for money, it's a business transaction. It's similar to selling your body's ability to lift objects or dig up dirt.
Helping your friend build a fence is different from being a professional fence builder who sells that service.
Wealthier people can choose forms of exchange with more formalities and more ambiguity (and consequently more economic friction).
You've chosen good examples, but its often not that clear cut.
I have a friend who was once a (non-stripper) entertainer at a bar in Japan. Sex wasn't explicitly required, but boyfriends were forbidden, to make sure the customers felt they were in with a chance. Grey area. Not a big jump from there to some account management or acting careers.
And on the flip side, my neighbour had a favourite client she was always happy to see. And before I knew her, her last boyfriend had started out as a client.
I don't think its practical to distinguish, and I certainly don't think its practical to distinguish in a nondiscriminatory way.
Has a service been exchanged for money? If the answer is yes then I think that's a clear enough way to distinguish it.
Let's say you have a friend who runs a coffee shop, for example. If you pay for a coffee, that's a business transaction. If they offer you a coffee for free because they like you, that's not.
The end result is the same, you got a coffee, but the dynamic is entirely different.
Once the client becomes the boyfriend, he no longer pays for sex and the dynamic is completely different.
I do agree that wealthier people have more options, as I agree that poor people are way more likely to resort to prostitution. I don't think prostitution is that ambiguous though.
What if I get the coffee for free because I helped her with an assignment? What if I get the coffee for free because she thinks then I'll vote for her in a party preselection for delegates to the state convention? (Both of these have happened with me).
Commercial vs noncommercial is actually very hard to distinguish some times, and business at the higher levels is less about cash and more about relationships.
(I've never paid cash for sex, but I've written papers, offered sympathy, helped with chores/moving, taken out socially, given tours of my city, in more ambiguous circumstances)
Sure, but influencing someone through various means, including sex, is not the same as selling sex for money.
Anything can garner influence, from gifts to small favors to just being nice to someone or having a family connection.
Most corporations recognize this, for example, which is why they have policies in place to regulate gifts, workplace relationships, etc. They're not seen as business transactions, they're seen as liabilities.
If I sell expensive watches at my store, it is not the same as me gifting an expensive watch to gain influence. One is a business transaction, the other is not.
On another note, you sly fox you! ;)
Everything should be legal untill made illegal. This is the natural order of things... Always has been.
The problems come when a population believes they have only the rights bestowed on them. This is dictatorship.
If prostitution isn't illegal then its legal and the question becomes should we continue to have a right to prostitute ourselves? Feel free to interpret prostitution as widely as possible.
Its not easy being me 🤪
Something being legal does not mean it is a positive right. Food is legal, yet you don't have a "right" to it. You have to earn it.
Your answer seems to work. Which comes first though (a priori)?
I suppose the thing comes into existence and law grows around it. From prostitution to AI, this all seems to hold.
AI is legal and yet there's a huge rush to "Law" it. Why is the question on prostitution not settled long b4 now?. All I'm saying is there's a natural order and going against that is anti-human expression and requires coercion and control. There are many ways to "prostitute " oneself.
It is in civilized countries.
