[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Tom_

The chances are they used a vice girl, not a prostitute. There is a slight difference between the two.

There is not difference. Both sell their bodies for sex.

[Magic]

Originally posted by GiRTh
We had this debate about this time last year. I'll find the thread.

The best answer is probably not. If prostitution was legal it would cause just as many problems as it would cure. The girls would have to be tested regularly, their working conditions would have to be aproved etc. All of this would increase price and probably create 'underground' brothels where rules were not as strict.

Also, if we legalised prostituion then how would we regulate which sex acts were legal and which ere illegal? How far would the punters be allowed to go with the girls? Legalising prostitution is a good idea in theory but the reality is that it's a logisitical mightmare.

I agree with Girth. If it was legalised, we would go to the point of debating how far prostition should go & should the men be responsible if the prostitute does get pregnant, and protection fails.

If it is legal, only more issues will arise.

[Legend]

Originally posted by Dr43%er
"I do look down on them purely because its extremely derogatory to have to have sex for money."

If someone offered you £1'000'000 to sleep with them, they are not hideous but may not be your first choice. Would you?

Only those with "so much respect for themselves" wouldn't I bet.

Originally posted by supernoodles!

no how is it the same thing ,gettign your tits out for a photo or letting some married bloke with 3 kids who you dont know from adam put his greasy paws all over your body and do god knows what to you {not saying all men who go to prostitues are like this just an example]

That's exactly it ... THEY are LETTING them put their "greesy paws" all over them ... that is their choice so who are we to tell them no?

As Matt10K said, keeping it illegal means the women have to put themselves in more danger as they are not wanting to get caught by the police whereas if it was legal then they wouldn't have that worry and they wouldn't be in as much danger.

I know what you mean GiRTh but that's for another debate.

[Tom]

Originally posted by GiRTh

There is not difference. Both sell their bodies for sex.

There is.

1) Prostitutes generally work alone, do not get checked and may be riddled with disease, and just generally tramps to put it nicely. They will also go for about £50 and stand on street corners, work wherever. They are used for sex.
2) Vice girls work for an agency, have regular checks and get paid a lot more. They also appear to be of a higher class and only work mainly in hotels. They do not just sell themselves for sex. Some people hire vice girls purely for conversational purposes (as strange as that may be) and some hire them to be a dominatrix. Vice girls are not all about sex.

[Legend]

Originally posted by Tom_

Yes, it is a stereotype but that is just the way I think. I can't help that.

No, thats a completely different job. They aren't having god knows what shoved up them for a start.

1) Porn is fake
2) Porn is crap- its funny and unrealistic. It does NOTHING for me.
3) I'm left handed

I knew you'd be left handed.

Yeah, it may be a different job but they are both "selling their bodies" which is "extremely derogatory".

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by GiRTh

Prostitution will always be illegal in some way shape or form. Did you read my post above? If prostitution is legal how do we decide what the punters can do to the girls? Also, what to stop a dirty old man type entreprneur opening brothels that appeal to people who demand more hardcore sex. How do we control that and stop him hiding behind the law inorder to discriminate and oppress women? Isn't it strange how this debate runs into another debate.

The only thing I can see your argument applying to is underage prostitution and no I don't think this should be legalised but consenting adults- yes.

Legalising it won’t stop abuse, it will ‘reduce’ it. It is impossible to stop it.

[Legend]

Originally posted by Tom_

There is.

1) Prostitutes generally work alone, do not get checked and may be riddled with disease, and just generally tramps to put it nicely. They will also go for about £50 and stand on street corners, work wherever. They are used for sex.
2) Vice girls work for an agency, have regular checks and get paid a lot more. They also appear to be of a higher class and only work mainly in hotels. They do not just sell themselves for sex. Some people hire vice girls purely for conversational purposes (as strange as that may be) and some hire them to be a dominatrix. Vice girls are not all about sex.

So because they prance around a restaurant before bending over they are better than the tramps yeah? To put it nicely.

Prostitutes sell sex for money.
Vice girls sell sex for money.

Don't be a hypocrite.

[PapaRoachGurlx]

I think, no one cares if its legal or not [ no offence ] They would still do it anyway

[Tom]

Originally posted by Legend

So because they prance around a restaurant before bending over they are better than the tramps yeah? To put it nicely.

Prostitutes sell sex for money.
Vice girls sell sex for money.

Don't be a hypocrite.

They are tramps as well, they just don't necessarily look like them

As for the porn stars, then yes its derogatory to them as well, if not more so.

But to be honest and after thinking about it, I couldn't care less if it became legal or not because it won't affect me because I have no plans to become a male prostitute and I can get it for free anyway. Whether or not it is legal, it will still be happening probably on the same scale because those interested in it will probably already be into it. I doubt there would be a dramatic increase.

[Billy]

ROFLMFAO At the lefthanded comment!!

i dont see the point in it being illegal, its still goin to happen

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Matt10k

The only thing I can see your argument applying to is underage prostitution and no I don't think this should be legalised but consenting adults- yes.

Legalising it won’t stop abuse, it will ‘reduce’ it. It is impossible to stop it.

How does my argument only apply to underage prostitution? Surely a clever entrepreneur can make money out of older women by offering a more kinky option.

Of course abuse is impossible to stop but legalising prostitution would in a way legalise the abuse. The abuse would reduce due to the fact that its legal. Is that what we want?

[Matt10k]

[/quote]How does my argument only apply to underage prostitution? Surely a clever entrepreneur can make money out of older women by offering a more kinky option.

Of course abuse is impossible to stop but legalising prostitution would in a way legalise the abuse. The abuse would reduce due to the fact that its legal. Is that what we want? [/quote]

Where is your evidence for this? Prostitution is far safer in the Netherlands because it is legal and able to be controlled.

Your argument only applies to underage prostitution because since when is something 'kinky' illegal? How kinky are we talking here? Even S&M is legal so I'm not really sure what sort of kinky you are referring to?

Also, by legalising prostitution, you are not legalising abuse. Women aren't being abused by having sex. The abuse comes from violent punters and by legalising it and having set areas with security, the abuse is greatly reduced.

See, in the Netherlands, the legal prostitutes work inside, not on the streets. They make the men use protection, there are security guards and they are regularly tested for Sti's.

How is keeping it illegal and having it run by criminal gangs and violent pimps on the streets better?! Don't see your point at all...

[Dr43%er]

On the vice girl thing. Do you mean "call girl" They tend to be the "higher class" prostitutes. They are still prostitutes though.

The woman Hue Grant went with was a street worker. Not high class at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Brown_(sex_worker)

Porn is fake? It is not love, true. But the people are still having sex for money. Prostitution is not about love, but having sex for money. Where is the difference?

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Matt10k
Where is your evidence for this? Prostitution is far safer in the Netherlands because it is legal and able to be controlled.

In Amsterdam just about all of the brothels are within spitting distance of each other. That is a big factor in making them safer. The wider the aree for brothels then the harder it become to regulate. Amsterdam is not such a good example on the legalisation of Prostitution.

Your argument only applies to underage prostitution because since when is something 'kinky' illegal? How kinky are we talking here? Even S&M is legal so I'm not really sure what sort of kinky you are referring to?

Also, by legalising prostitution, you are not legalising abuse. Women aren't being abused by having sex. The abuse comes from violent punters and by legalising it and having set areas with security, the abuse is greatly reduced.

You've missed my point by about a mile. Maybe I should take the time to explain it in much easier to understand terms. Max Hardcore is a pornographer who makes films where he frankly abuses girls. Take a look at his wiki page to find out what a charmer he is. He hides behind the first amendment and his right to freedom of expression inorder to get away with this. What is to stop some clever but pervy entrepreneur taking advantage of lax prostitution laws to abuse women in a similar way. legalising prostitiution opens the flood gates. Where do the goverment draw the line between consentual sex and rape if prostitution is legal and girls are legally paid to have sex.

See, in the Netherlands, the legal prostitutes work inside, not on the streets. They make the men use protection, there are security guards and they are regularly tested for Sti's.

I already made the point that this would a very necessary step in the legalisation of prostitution. So who's going to pay for that? Surely the girls who work on the street are cheaper? If so then are they regulated? I doubt it. I fail to see the point in legalising prostitution only for the problem of illegal prostitution to still be around.

How is keeping it illegal and having it run by criminal gangs and violent pimps on the streets better?! Don't see your point at all...

It's not better but legalising prostitution would cost too much, mean political suicide for whichever party proposed it and develop into a logisitical nightmare. Legalising protitution is a great idea in theory but the practice is unworkable.

[Matt10k]

Holland is a good example because it demonstrates how legalising prostitution has a positive affect. I looked up Max Hardcore and it appears he has been charged and his computers seized so I‘m not sure that was a good example. Even still, if one or two manage to work the system this is still preferable to the thousands who will abuse women as it is currently because the government has no control over prostitution.

With controls set on what you can and can’t do, it becomes easier for police to target the real bad eggs out there and not waste their time busting up men who are simply sleeping with prostitutes but are not abusing them- see this is a diversion of police time away from the more serious cases.

As for all the legal brothels being within spitting distance, how do you know this- have you visited them all?

Finally… how do you know the cost of legalising prostitution? Do you know how much the government and specifically police spend managing prostitutes as it is currently? I’m pretty sure having a structured system would reduce costs in the long run.

I also disagree that it’d be political suicide. It seems the majority of posters here understand how legalising prostitution could reduce abuse and I don’t think this would make them decide not to vote for that particular party…

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Matt10k
Holland is a good example because it demonstrates how legalising prostitution has a positive affect. I looked up Max Hardcore and it appears he has been charged and his computers seized so I‘m not sure that was a good example. Even still, if one or two manage to work the system this is still preferable to the thousands who will abuse women as it is currently because the government has no control over prostitution.

With controls set on what you can and can’t do, it becomes easier for police to target the real bad eggs out there and not waste their time busting up men who are simply sleeping with prostitutes but are not abusing them- see this is a diversion of police time away from the more serious cases.

As for all the legal brothels being within spitting distance, how do you know this- have you visited them all?

Finally… how do you know the cost of legalising prostitution? Do you know how much the government and specifically police spend managing prostitutes as it is currently? I’m pretty sure having a structured system would reduce costs in the long run.

I also disagree that it’d be political suicide. It seems the majority of posters here understand how legalising prostitution could reduce abuse and I don’t think this would make them decide not to vote for that particular party…

All very nice in theory.

Holland only works because the brothels are so close togehter. I haven't been to any but I do go to Amstredam quite regularly. Do I need to have been to all of them in order for you to believe its so? The Redlight area where prostitiution is legal in Amsterdam is a tiny area of the city. Do I need to produce a map inorder to prove this?

Max Hardcore is an example of a clever man who has used the lax law inorder for him to make money out of abuse. I believe he's the blueprint for the kind of person who is likely to own a brothel. His kind will certainly crawl out of the wood work under a legal system. At least with the laws that we have we can throw people in jail for abuse.

Legalising prostitution would on par with attempting to legalise drugs. There would be so much opposition from the moral majority that it would never happen. Do you agee or do I need to hunt for facts and figures to back up my believable theory. I note you dont back up your posts with figures. I'll do it when you do it.

[Matt10k]

But Max Hardcore was caught and charged, why don't you just admit it was a bad example?

Also, you say you visit amsterdam but there are brothels all over The Netherlands so that would make them spread out- no?

I'm not sure why I'd have to back any of this up. Look Max Hardcore up yourself and see that he has been caught (after all, it was you who mentioned him) and also the fact that prostitution is legal in the netherlands and there are plenty of brothels outside amsterdam- you aren't suggesting ALL the brothels in the country exist in one city are you?

[GiRTh]

As i recall I used Max Hardcore as an example of how the relaxing of the rules has bought explitative men like that out of the woodwork. Men who can use the law to get away with their abuse. I think I made my point pretty clear I dont see how you misunderstood it.

There are Brothels in Amsterrdam all within a one mile radius of one another. Where are the all the others? Give me the fact and figures that back up how successful this scheme is. For me the sucess of the scheme in Amsterdam not all over Holland is in part down to the close proximity of the brothels. If you disagree then give me the figures you insist I produce.

[Matt10k]

I disagree, these men exist already and are currently abusing women. You are right though in stating that it 'brings them out of the woodwork'. It does make them easier to spot...

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Matt10k
I disagree, these men exist already and are currently abusing women. You are right though in stating that it 'brings them out of the woodwork'. It does make them easier to spot...

Of course these men exist but, as I stated earlier, if prostitution is legal then they can hide behind the law to get away with their abuse. At least with the current system we can throw them in jail.

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by GiRTh

Of course these men exist but, as I stated earlier, if prostitution is legal then they can hide behind the law to get away with their abuse. At least with the current system we can throw them in jail.

If they legalised prostitution and a man abused a woman by either physically assaulting her or doing something she didn't consent to, he would still be thrown in jail.

[GiRTh]

Are you sure of that? Why cant the man claim that by giving her money she implied consent? Thats the logistical nightmare I've been on about. One can claim that under the current system the same could happen, but with the legalisation of prostitution surely such cases would become more prevalent.

[Matt10k]

I see your point and I'm not sure which view to take. I think there are advantages for and against legalising prostitution and I believe the pros outweight the cons (bad joke, sorry).

It's a shame you can't debate in the same civil and intelligent way on the other thread...

[GiRTh]

Originally posted by Matt10k
I see your point and I'm not sure which view to take. I think there are advantages for and against legalising prostitution and I believe the pros outweight the cons (bad joke, sorry).

Glad to see we agree. Its a can of worms.

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by GiRTh

Glad to see we agree. Its a can of worms.

I agree on some points but I also think there are advantages to legalisation. We can only speculate as to what the full effects of legalisation could be and how it'd work in the uk. However it's clear to see there would be some benefits ie. greater control and in some areas safety for women.

Perhaps some people may then decide to work the system, so I see you point that legalisation may make this easier for a specific type of abuse to occur. In other areas it could help to reduce it. Like I said, there are good and bad points to both arguments...