To be upset a brothel has opened next door to my child's school

I cannot see how the brothel, if indeed it is one, will impact on the children at the school next door. Presumably it is staffed by consenting adults and the clients are the same, they will go in, come out and go home, won't even look at the school.

Honestly, what do you think will happen? Be sensible please.

No, because all of those things are inherently harmful and dangerous.

Sex between consenting adults is not harmful or dangerous.

Really? Society does make all sorts of rules which people have to follow. Wearing seat belts, not speeding, not smoking in public places, not carrying guns in the UK, not jay-walking in the US, not selling body parts, not soliciting for sex on the streets.......in fact selling sex is legal in the UK but brothels are not.

There are potential harms associated with many activities in life. That doesn’t mean we should prevent people from choosing to do them.

I am convinced they do not. I am not pro-sex work per se but do have a very close friend and acquaintances who are currently / former FSSW who would reject people insisting to them that they are rape victims who just don’t realise that yet.

I also have an old friend who, while not a sex worker directly, had “benefactors” and was very clear she would not think of having sex with a man who was not financing her life (this was when she was criticising me for thinking differently.)

I just don’t get why some people here think they should he the sole arbiters of the “correct” contexts in which people may have sex.

I am convinced they do not. I am not pro-sex work per se but do have a very close friend and acquaintances who are currently / former FSSW who would reject people insisting to them that they are rape victims who just don’t realise that yet.

I also have an old friend who, while not a sex worker directly, had “benefactors” and was very clear she would not think of having sex with a man who was not financing her life (this was when she was criticising me for thinking differently.)

I just don’t get why some people here think they should he the sole arbiters of the “correct” contexts in which people may have sex.

There are potential harms associated with many activities in life. That doesn’t mean we should prevent people from choosing to do them.

I have spoken to a woman who has worked as an ‘upmarket’ escort. She loved the role as she made a fortune and had complete flexibility.

Why should it be for the state or other women to dictate what women can and can’t do out of moralistic paternalism?

I wish in these discussions people would realise the difference between individual and societal. Just because some individuals have chosen to blind themselves to the realities of prostitution (abuse, rape, exploitation, trafficking, to mention a few - there are plenty more) doesn’t mean those realities don’t exist and doesn’t mean the wider negatives for women and for don’t exist.

It’s not about someone’s happy hooker pal.

Same issues when trying to discuss surrogacy.

Do you know any sex workers?

CerealKiller, you appear to be somewhat hard of thinking. I said very clearly that this isn't a matter of quantifiable 'proof' because it's a matter of definition. There is an agreed definition of 'consent' in the context of sexual matters. And I think most reasonable people would agree that part of that is that 'consent' cannot be purchased. If you HAVE to pay for sex, this is something that would not otherwise happen. Lots and lots of posters have spelled this out to you, so why do you appear to find it so hard to understand? I honestly do hope you're just a troll, and not someone who has anything to do with children in RL.

So no, it's not a matter of proof. You're using this same phrase again and again like you think you're some sort of Jeremy Paxman-like God of Debate. It makes you look extremely foolish - quite aside from the whole issue of how you seem bent on normalising men paying women for sex.

CerealKiller, you appear to be somewhat hard of thinking. I said very clearly that this isn't a matter of quantifiable 'proof' because it's a matter of definition. There is an agreed definition of 'consent' in the context of sexual matters. And I think most reasonable people would agree that part of that is that 'consent' cannot be purchased. If you HAVE to pay for sex, this is something that would not otherwise happen. Lots and lots of posters have spelled this out to you, so why do you appear to find it so hard to understand? I honestly do hope you're just a troll, and not someone who has anything to do with children in RL.

So no, it's not a matter of proof. You're using this same phrase again and again like you think you're some sort of Jeremy Paxman-like God of Debate. It makes you look extremely foolish - quite aside from the whole issue of how you seem bent on normalising men paying women for sex.

Proof? Consent can’t be bought - that’s just a fact. If it’s transactional it’s not freely given consent. Ergo, it’s rape.

I’m sorry the “sex work is work” mantra has blinded you to reality of prostitution.

That’s appalling that the council have allowed this - I would start with them. Kick up as massive a fuss as you can. Children should not have to walk past the disgusting predatory abusive men who will be going there.

Well they haven't - brothel-keeping is against the law. They just obviously haven't checked / don't care.

Ok I’m out
you are just on a wind up

I have spoken to a woman who has worked as an ‘upmarket’ escort. She loved the role as she made a fortune and had complete flexibility.

Why should it be for the state or other women to dictate what women can and can’t do out of moralistic paternalism?

Again I will ask how many women have you spoken to working as prostitutes either in massage parlours or on the street.
Those who aren’t trafficked are still being exploited and often have little “choice”

it’s not pretty woman

There is a difference between exploitation and prostitution. Of course trafficking should be tackled like it would be in any business. There is a big issue with women being trafficked to work in nail bars- that doesn’t mean nail bars should be banned.

In my view having prostitution as a legal and tightly regulated business would reduce the criminal activity associated with it.

There is a difference between exploitation and prostitution. Of course trafficking should be tackled like it would be in any business. There is a big issue with women being trafficked to work in nail bars- that doesn’t mean nail bars should be banned.

In my view having prostitution as a legal and tightly regulated business would reduce the criminal activity associated with it.