Should men should be prosecuted for paying for sex

[ICanSeeTheSun]

On channel 4 news now.

I think they should.

There is also talk about legalising prostitution. Which in a way I think in a way it should because at least the women who does it would have more protection.

[TheGirlFromIpanema]

Branleause, would you say the same for doctor/patient or teacher/pupil relationships? That If they are all happy and in agreement, then its ok?

I think the argument is fundamentally flawed due to the power of the punters money in exactly the same way as the forbidden relationships I mention.

I would like to see kerb crawlers and the like have their pictures posted in newspapers personally. See how many of them still argue that its only a business transaction...

[Exitedwoman]

If the world wasn't so fucked it would be obvious that paying for 'sex' is abusive. I'm sick of these debates. Criminalise punters and demand will drop. Therefore 'supply' will drop. Pimps will go out of business. Hopefully prostituted people will be helped by welfare and exit plans. By the way, why do those who worry about what prostitutes' alternatives are, not worry about the poor pimps? Are you suggesting the latter will be ok and find different work, but not the former?

[SaucyJack]

I can think of at least 3 things he could've done. None of which include using her as a dehumanised wank sock and sending her away with £30.

I can think of a hundred things he could have done. None of them are a realistic expectation though of what one should feel obligated to do for someone whose life and debts are no responsibility of their own.

Yes, it might in some ways be nice if we lived in a society where credit was banned so that noone could run up debts they couldn't pay back, or drugs/alcohol didn't exist so that noone could develop addictions they needed to fund, but the simple fact is we do and there will always be women who're desperate enough for money to have sex with strangers for payment.

As long as they're essentially living the life they do of their own free will, and there is support there for those who've had enough then as far as I'm concerned it's none of my business tbh.

[Caitlin17]

How would it work that paying for sex is a crime but being a prostitute isn't?

Both should be illegal.

[nickymanchester]

LRD Sorry - I just reread my post and now I get what you're asking for.

Sorry, if I came across as being a bit short I'm trying to do a bit too much multi tasking at the moment and failing miserably.

I don't have the link to hand at the moment but will dig it out tomorrow.

[FreudiansSlipper]

one wonders why if the Swedish model has been so unsuccessful other countries have followed along similar lines, Norway, Iceland (both known for their progress approach to equality for women) and France

the approach is that prostitution, men buying sexual services from women is a form of violence against women, it is moving away from the attitude that men have to have sex and that it is the oldest profession (again rubbish) and women will always provide this service (vast majority because there are no other or few other options)

there will always be people who trade sex if they really want to but surely we need to move away from men having a right to buy a woman (often just over the age of consent) because that is what he wants at that given time

strange how we view male prostitution very differently we would not be so accepting to a boy of 17 selling himself to older men as we are about a girl of the same age

[Caitlin17]

The current law in Scotland is prostitution is legal. Soliciting, kerb-crawling, pimping and keeping a brothel are all illegal. A "brothel" would be any house used by 2 or more people for the purposes of prostitution. 2 prostitutes operating out of 1 house or 1 with a maid/pimp/minder are operating a brothel.

Edinburgh Council's ridiculous and disgraceful policy of granting sauna licenses, for premises everyone knew were brothels, has finally been ended

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

No worries nicky, and thank you. You didn't come across as short at all (I may have done, sorry).

[ICanSeeTheSun]

Omg 3 hours to read that thread, but thank you for the link it was an interesting read.

[Darkesteyes]

In terms of comment above about disabled men - nobody needs sex. Nobody has the right to use another human being to have their desires met. And I notice you talk about disabled men, but say nothing about disabled women

Grennie this riled me earlier tonight. They had comments from a man with cerebral palsy who said that a sexless existence is a pretty miserable one.

Well its a pretty miserable one for women too and im speaking as a woman in a sexless marriage. Society doesnt give a shit when its women though. Mens needs always come first.
I wouldnt want to have sex with someone who didnt desire me. And i couldnt/wouldnt use a male escort for this reason. And im getting pretty fucking tired of men being painted as the ones who desire sex and women being painted as the gatekeepers who "dont like it really"

[FreudiansSlipper]

I find the argument what about disabled clients really patronising one that always comes up can disabled people not have relationships

it comes down to do men have the right to buy women or men for their own needs (and yes the very very few women that buy sex)

[Toadinthehole]

Huh? Any idea that men - or anyone needs sex as some kind of life essential is a pretty recent one, and certainly not something that was believed in the days before FWR.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

That's nonsense. In 'the days before FWR' (not sure when you mean, but ...) men were thought to need sex so much that they were entitled to rape their wives.

[Darkesteyes]

EXACTLY LRD. I believe here in the UK it was only made illegal as recently as 1991.

[SaucyJack]

I don't really think this one has any more to do with the "right to buy" than any other goods or services.

I don't particularly have the right to buy tasteless, over-priced doughnuts but if Krispy Kreme are willing to sell them to me then what's the issue?

[FreudiansSlipper]

what are you talking about it was not that long ago (1991 law changed) because of men's needs it was not against the law to rape his wife in this country

[FreudiansSlipper]

what is the issue well one is that doughnut's do not have emotions

[Darkesteyes]

Surely i did NOT just see women compared to doughnuts. Basically Saucy you have proved that you see women as objects.

[AgaPanthers]

You can criminalise it, but it won't change a thing. It's not as if it is really open and unshameful now is it?

Prohibition is bad law.

[Grennie]

Aga - Except where pimps and punters have been criminalised it does make a difference,

[Toadinthehole]

That's not correct.

The view was that marriage meant the irrevocable giving of consent (by both husband and wife), and therefore marital rape wasn't rape.

This view, horrible as it was, actually reflects the traditional view that marriage was the place for sex, being a procreative activity.

Sex outside marriage, or fornication was absolutely frowned upon, as was illegitimacy and abortion. Even as late as the 80s, 50% of the population believed sex outside marriage to be morally wrong- regardless of whether one was male or female. That is a view completely contrary to the view that sex is a ' basic need'.

[manicinsomniac]

I don't know, It's tough. I definitely think buying sex should be illegal but I'm not sure about selling it. In a way it doesn't make sense to criminalise one but not the other. I think I'd be inclined to have both officially illegal but the purchasing carrying a far higher penalty.

I know a couple of disabled men who use prostitutes. Reality is, it's the only way they will get to have sex.

That's a horrible thing to say, on more than one level.

A) Loads of disabled people have very fulfilling marriages and sexual relationships. For many of those who don't it won't be because of their disability.

B) If the only way a person can get sex is to buy it, whether it's their fault or not that they can't get sex, then they shouldn't have sex. It's not such a tragedy. Certainly not as bad as exploiting a desperate (and possibly coerced) woman into having sex they wouldn't choose to have without financial incentive.

[Toadinthehole]

Prev post in response to LRD

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Er, yeah, we know, toad.

But it was justified with the idea that men needed sex. And, for that matter, the idea that women needed sex. There are shedloads of texts explaining that you really had to shag your wife because if she didn't get sex she'd become ill. I'm not kidding.

There is also a particularly pleasant argument that if a woman's husband wanted sex, and she'd just given birth and was bleeding, she should absolutely just go with it, because it'd be a greater sin for the man to have a wank.

But please, do continue to teach me history lessons about the great days before FWR, when it was all lovely and wonderful.

[CremeEggThief]

Yes. I've always believed they should.