The greens and prostitutes

For what it's worth, when I say that I was "not impressed" I mean to say that what I see in Germany reinforces my long-held belief that legalised prostitution does indeed engender more of the worst sort of prostitution and abuse. As I said in an earlier post a couple of days ago, I do believe traffickers will move goods to whichever market they think will be easiest to sell them in. I would not be happy with such legislation in the UK and that is even without my personal interests (i.e., concerns about increased competition) being involved.

I am not going to stop working as a prostitute, personally. I have worked under full criminalisation and things went on pretty much as they do now. My only interest in joining this discussion is to hear what other people are thinking, examine my own thoughts on things, and to air my own opinions, particularly when I am annoyed to see both sides fling around or dismiss spurious statistics, choosing those that support the opinions they already hold. It is hard to hear people say things that describe me as a victim or whatever, and I think I have pretty well made a case against that for myself, personally. However, I can't actually speak for the women who are NOT happy in prostitution because I haven't really met women who are literally forced to sell sex.

I would have nothing to gain, financially, by legalisation. If anything, I would probably benefit more from full criminalisation as I am privileged enough to work discretely.

All of those arguments are valid arguments against prostitution. Ethical public policy is based on the vulnerable, not the strong. So I wouldn't hesitate to cut off your commercial opportunities to prevent what you describe as "endless examples of bad, exploitative and abusive prostitution". That shouldn't be a problem for you since you have other choices, right?

I think it was in my first post on this thread that I said that I wasn't impressed by what I saw of the German brothels on the Mega Brothel program recently aired on Channel 4. I then went on to say that I would be perfectly happy if the only prostitutes were those who operated as I do, although I personally have known women who wish to work in UK brothels for various reasons that I consider valid.

There are many arguments going on, here. One is whether or not sex should ever be bought or sold. Another is if it can possibly be bought or sold in an ethical way. Still others are debating whether or not some prostitution can be OK while other prostitution is not OK. And many of us are debating the root causes of why there is exploitative prostitution in which the women do not have autonomy and control over what they do.

I can, without anyone's assistance, find endless examples of bad, exploitative and abusive prostitution. I have never claimed that it does not exist.

However, I maintain that what I do is does not entail abuse and so the problem does not lie intrinsically within selling sex, but rather with underlying issues of addiction, poverty, or other factors by which someone may be generally vulnerable.

An endless queue of 'nice gentlemen' eh?

Here's an "economic migrant"

Or this.

No it's not the lying passively that is the issue although you may like to read this:

www.spiegel.de/international/germany/human-trafficking-persists-despite-legality-of-prostitution-in-germany-a-902533.html

Why don't we start up blood farms where people can lie all day having their blood extracted? Or, following last night's Newsnight, stool farms. Your job could be to eat All Bran all day and have your stool harvested. What about milk farms where lactating women can be hooked up to milk pumps? Bone marrow farms, the list goes on. Are these okay so long as there is consent? Would we have a problem if we realised it was predominantly the poorest and most desperate people who were doing it because every now and then a university student thinks there's easy money in it and they won't feel damaged by the constant invasion of their bodily integrity?

I'm not sure if what you're objecting to is people selling their blood, feces, milk, etc or the idea that they are - in your scenario - lying passively while things are being harvested from them "all day." Surely the sexual equivalent would be some sort of brothel where the women are lying passively and allowing men to climb on top of them. I certainly think that's an abhorrent picture, but it doesn't describe what I do nor does it describe anything I have ever heard of.

Frankly, it's unbelievable that people can't see the difference between stacking shelves and having body parts and objects pushed into your vagina, anus or mouth.

Well, I can see the difference between stacking shelves and lecturing at a university. Of course what I do feels different from stacking shelves. But, I don't find the idea of having body parts and objects pushed into my vagina, anus or mouth particularly upsetting. I mean, when you phrase it that way - as if the receiver were merely a passive object - it does sound terrible. But what I experience is not terrible as I am not passive.

We've had punters (self identified) on here who think it's fine for women to accept a penis inside their body when they are not sexually attracted to the owner, but recoil in horror at the thought of themselves doing the same thing, because they aren't gay. And they simply can't see the link between their sexual feelings and a woman's sexual feelings. So, there's that.

I don't think one's sexual orientation has anything to do with finding the idea repugnant. I mean, many heterosexual women do and plenty of gay men do as well. So they were clearly missing the point of the question. However, they may have meant that if they were gay they could possibly imagine it?

I have zero interest in purchasing sex from a man. I'm trying to imagine how I would feel if I couldn't have sex any other way and I am not sure I can. Perhaps I would feel differently if that were the case. I honestly do not know.

"They wish to have sex with someone other than their wife (perhaps because they are no longer having sex with their wives) but they feel an affair would be complicated and possibly disastrous."

So the financial transaction protects them, as well as guaranteeing them sex (once vetted and agreed terms)

Why don't we start up blood farms where people can lie all day having their blood extracted? Or, following last night's Newsnight, stool farms. Your job could be to eat All Bran all day and have your stool harvested. What about milk farms where lactating women can be hooked up to milk pumps? Bone marrow farms, the list goes on. Are these okay so long as there is consent? Would we have a problem if we realised it was predominantly the poorest and most desperate people who were doing it because every now and then a university student thinks there's easy money in it and they won't feel damaged by the constant invasion of their bodily integrity?

Frankly, it's unbelievable that people can't see the difference between stacking shelves and having body parts and objects pushed into your vagina, anus or mouth. Should the Girl Guides start offering badges? How about stalls at Career Fairs?

It's an argument steeped in cognitive dissonance.

Oh yes, Kim definitely the institution rather than you personally! I don't want to make ad feminam attacks on you!

I'm off out so won't able to reply for a while, but happy chatting everyone.

I agree that rape is any non-consensual sex where both parties are not consciously agreeing to participate. I thought we were discussing the sexual interactions I have (awake, sober, verbally agreeing, etc) and their similarities to rape. Now I understand a bit more where you are coming from.

I am not sure what relationship, if any, what I do has to a rape culture. I certainly don't believe that a man who can't purchase sex will rape. I don't think that I am some sort of valve relieving the pressure of their brute urges or anything like that. If there is anything I am standing in for, I think it is extramarital affairs. I do hear a lot of men saying that they see visiting a prostitute as a very different thing than having an affair. They wish to have sex with someone other than their wife (perhaps because they are no longer having sex with their wives) but they feel an affair would be complicated and possibly disastrous.

I have no reason to believe that the men who see me feel entitled to women's bodies at their own whim. They may feel it's acceptable to purchase access to my body, but they generally assume that the money means there need not be any other obligations on their part.

However, I think you are more concerned that the institution of prostitution, especially when it is openly tolerated or when legalisation means the State is profiting from it, may engender a belief that they have the right to access any woman's body. There are many things for sale that normal people do not feel entitled to just take. I feel entitled purchase a television but I don't feel entitled to just take one.

Perhaps it would make more sense to be concerned that the institution of prostitution may engender the belief that all women can be bought.

Mengog oh no I'd absolutely want to apply the Nordic model to both. Women buying sex is astonishingly rare - most male escorts sell sex to gay men, often much older and richer than them so there's a power imbalance, so the same issues apply.

And that's an interesting idea Bertie

Mengog, I personally wouldn't be comfortable with it. Until we (as a society) have a very clear understanding of consent, I do not want to endorse any situation where consent can be bought or paid for. I think the idea of "freely given" consent is far to important to let go of.

I remember a female friend of mine musing back when we were teenagers over the significance of the fact that women physically take a part of a person inside of us when we have sex whereas when men have sex they are merely using a part of their body which is fairly external. She wondered if it was why women are often thought to be more emotional around the issue of sex, are often touched or affected more deeply by it, and why men appear often to shrug it off as though it is no more significant than (to use the example) a conversation.

If we think about parallels it does follow. Accepting something into your body is often uncomfortable even if it does not physically hurt. Many people have a fear of the dentist, most men dislike the idea of prostate exams, internal examinations for women are often more uncomfortable emotionally than physically. The idea of being forced to have a dental exam or internal exam when you don't want one is horrible.

But to take the example of a pedicure or manicure, even if you didn't really want it, it wouldn't be that bad, and you wouldn't be frightened. You could probably endure it unless you had some kind of phobia which I think would be quite rare. We are very used to the idea of using our hands and even to an extent feet to explore new situations and would think nothing of using our hands or feet to do something we don't particularly want to do. I mean, I don't have a penis and so I can't say yep it's exactly the same, but it does seem that using an external body part has to be less significant, emotionally, than accepting something into your body.

As a man, I am finding this thread incredibly interesting.

I've only ever known a male escort, he earn earnt good money and was never damaged by it.

Which leads me onto male prostitution. Would people be comfortable with a law that made female prostitution illegal but not male. So women could buy sex with men but not the other way around.

But rape isn't always violent, in that it doesn't always include force or pain, as in the case of my friend who was raped while unconscious. Rape is unwanted sex.

Many rapists don't think what they're doing is rape. Their image of rape is of shadowy men in dark alleys, screams and knives and so on, but most rape isn't like that at all. The common factor is a total lack of concern for the feelings and pleasure of the sexual partner, and the idea that mutual pleasure is not necessary in a sexual exchange feeds into that.

To be clear - I'm not saying that prostitution is rape, only that it's part of a cultural attitude towards sex that in some cases leads to rape, i.e. a rape culture.

The same applies to buying sex. I personally believe that it is impossible to buy consent with money. If money HAS to change hands for the woman to consent then she hasn't actually consented. I would therefore think of a man who buys sex as having a very different concept around consent to the one held by myself and lots of other men.

But, I feel perfectly confident that I am consenting. I also feel free to withdraw consent at any time. While you (general you, not specific you) may say that I am actually not consenting, then why do I not feel bad and/or what does consent really mean? If I engage in an interaction and feel happy about it, what does that mean?