Why is prostitution generally outlawed in USA anyway ?

geoff1000geoff1000
in General

The sex workers presumably would prefer it legal, as would their clients ; people can always evade income tax, even when their activity is legitimate.
I presume female pro-cuddlers ( and maybe some non-pro too ) would prefer it legal, to get sex workers and their customers off this site.

I'm wondering what the demographic is of the "typical" advocate for it being illegal, and what their reasoning is. The legalisation of cannabis, suggests a general acceptance of "money for enjoyment", post-Prohibition. Are they trying to protect current and potential sex workers, or people who might be mistaken for such ? Do people not like the idea of "living off immoral earnings", whenever they get money off the government ?

The UK permits prostitution, but outlaws many of the activities which make it a public nuisance. Rather like drinking alcohol is allowed, but many of its potential adverse effects ( e.g. DWI ) are not.

People on this site are probably happy with pro-cuddling to be allowed ( though I suspect there are those off the site, who think even that is going too far ). I'm interested to know views of people, who think one is OK, but not the other.

Comments

  • Mike403Mike403

    @geof1000 - Pornography is legal, but prostitution is not... so in another words, it becomes legal if they set up a camera. It makes no sense.

  • [Deleted User]SanFranResident (deleted user)

    There seem to be two strains of opposition to legal prostitution.

    1. People who think it's wrong from a religious or moralizing perspective.

    2. People who think it harms women, typically from a feminist perspective. These people cite sex trafficking and so forth.

  • Mike403Mike403

    @SanFranResident - then why is pornography okay?

  • [Deleted User]SanFranResident (deleted user)

    I'm not claiming it's completely rational, but one can easily think of many differences between pornography and prostitution.

  • geoff1000geoff1000

    So sex workers could legally practice as either sex therapists ( to help improve their relationships ), or trainers for those considering a career as a pornography actor.

  • geoff1000geoff1000

    @SanFranResident
    I think the main difference is that the man gets paid, rather than paying ; but there are "internships" where the inexperienced person has to effectively "pay to be employed".

    In the movie business, people can be actors as well as the Director or Producer ; and they may do multiple rehearsals to get the scene right, before rolling the cameras.

  • HugonautHugonaut

    This is a complex question. I won't even attempt to address moral or religious concerns or reasons but more address it through an economic/realpolitik lens. I'm for decriminalizing sex work and providing protections. It will take time. Timing is important.

    Done correctly, legalized sex work can provide protections for workers and clients, and even ensure an increased tax base to fund related enforcement and health care. The reality is it's not always done correctly and can end up driving increases in trafficking and abuses. Like many industries it also eventually incentivizes owners to seek cheaper labor (importing trafficked women) and creates a competing black market.

    For example, in the Netherlands where sex work was decriminalized over 20 years ago, foreign workers may come in to work in one of the famed windows in the red light district. They have to 'rent' their window at a rate where they have to see 5 clients/day to break even and that's not counting for the higher tax rate. There are also negatives to legally registering, including higher taxes, loss of privacy and stigma, which drives providers underground who then can and do charge a lower rate, which is a vicious circle for those complying with the law.

    In the US it would have to done in more states at first (like Nevada) and go through all of the growing pains until it becomes the new normal. Maybe NY, California, Massachusetts, Portland once it's no longer on fire, and maybe Minnesota. It would be highly politicized of course (candidate X wants to turn your daughters into hookers!!) and would result in endless clickbait articles as the media prioritizes eyeballs over journalistic duty. Given our current political climate, I don't see it happening unless the dems not only win this election, but secure a second term with a supermajority.

  • [Deleted User]Snuggler21685 (deleted user)

    It is a problem for the busybodies on both sides of the political aisle. Churchy women originally got it banned, and now the presumption is that no women would freely choose to do it. I find that ridiculous because many jobs are unpleasant but people still do them to earn a living.

  • CuddleRichCuddleRich

    It's all about money. I can go to a pub, hit it off with a woman, and go home with her and have sex. Perfectly legal. Introduce some amount of money to the equation, all else being equal, and it's illegal. Only difference in the two is money!

  • geoff1000geoff1000

    @CuddleRich
    What if you bought her a drink, or dinner, or her ticket for the movie / play / sporting event ?
    What if you went back to your place, and afterwards gave her the money for a taxi home ? What if she instead walked or took the bus, and pocketed the difference ?
    What if you gave her money for the baby-sitter, or the dress she hired ?
    What if you paid her for baby-sitting, body-guarding, dance lessons etc. but you happened to hit it off and have sex ?

    The definition is a bit vague ; but in this thread, I'm really just etrying to understand the motivation to want it illegal.

  • chocolatey775chocolatey775

    its got weird law. If you hire a woman and have sex with her you have to broadcast it in public over the internet , or sell the video so it will be just pornography which is legal but it is not prostitution . So doing it privately is a crime but broadcasting it is not .

  • geoff1000geoff1000

    @chocolatey775
    So the law-makers are effectively saying : "It's OK for you to pay a woman for sex, as long as we can watch".

    Ouch.

  • chocolatey775chocolatey775

    @geoff1000 yep . Sharing is caring

  • geoff1000geoff1000

    In the movie "Aliens" the actor who plays "Newt" ( the little girl colonist survivor ) kept getting a scene of sliding down a chute wrong, needing multiple retakes. The Director eventually found out that she was deliberately spoiling the scene, because she enjoyed playing on the chute. He therefore promised that she could play on it as often as she wanted, and the next take was perfect.

    I'd probably make a very bad porn actor, for the same reason. "Sorry, I got my lines wrong, again. Can we reshoot the scene tomorrow ?"

  • chocolatey775chocolatey775

    1) government wants a piece of the pie from taxes. You can't tax from an activity that people do discreetly. The most you can do is make it illegal so you can collect from bail or bond money.
    2) it is highly an unproductive work. You just need to do is to lie down. Nobody is involved. You don't have to purchase a camera, hire a producer, director, fapper, makeup artist, scriptwriter, hairstylist, cameraman. In other words it does not produce something or give someone a job.

Sign In or Register to comment.