The Decriminalisation and Regulation of Prostitution.

[SmellsLikeTeenStrop]

I've been doing a bit of reading on this, since the disabled deserve sex thread.

Would I be right in thinking that the decriminalisation and regulation of prostitution does more to protect men - the pimps and the johns, than it does to protect the women in prostitution?

I'm looking at Nevada as an example. Prostitution is legal, but only in licensed brothels. A woman can still be charged for working on the streets. A woman working in a state licensed brothel must register as a sex worker, is subjected to weekly STI testing but interestingly, the customer is not required to prove is freedom from STIs by producing a recent certificate of health.

For the privilege of working in a state licensed brothel, women must hand over a large percentage of their earnings to the brothel owner, she usually has to pay for any extras such as condoms, toiletries and even bed linen. She can be fined for falling asleep during her shift, or appearing late for a line-up. She's often required to live 'on site' for days or weeks at a time and is not permitted to leave the brothel grounds.

This is all apparently legal in Nevada.

How does this set up benefit the women who are prostitutes?

Hi sausageeggbacon - this article is pretty good too.

www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/sep/10/women.socialexclusion?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Donna Hughes is very good on the subject too.

"The enormity of the sex trade throughout the world is overwhelming, but the only way to proceed is to acknowledge the violence and exploitation for what it is and create remedies accordingly. Legalization will only benefit traffickers and pimps and compromise individual women and the status of women in the long run. In the words of one survivor of prostitution: "Legalization will not end abuse; it will make abuse legal.""

Seriously I just don't get it. How can anyone want to have sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with them?

Another article from a sex worker who does not consider herself a victim here

'' Crazy, I know, that one group of women who claim they want to give women a voice make an awful lot of effort to hush women who have opposing opinions, particularly marginalized ones. It's not the first time privileged women have silenced other women "for their own good.". ''

Isn't that ironic, don't you think?

Fake ETA. You've got to admit it's pretty damn funny when pro sex-industry speakers claim that they're being marginalised and silenced when they've got far more money and far more influence than the feminists who take the opposing view.

What is a "fake ETA"?

Am thinking "estimated time of arrival" but that doesn't make sense.

And I don't find it ironic at all, though I understand why you do.

What a whiney-arsed, self-absorbed piece of wankery that article is

I'm not the type of feminist who does think all prostitutes are 'victims'. I have no denial that there are women who enjoy being prostitutes and are too selfish, lazy and yes privileged to see the bigger picture behind the choices they are making. I know because I've met them and interviewed them. Yes, they are in a minority, but they absolutely exist. I don't have much truck either with the argument that a feminist shouldn't criticise another woman's choices because we all do what we can to survive in the patriarchy. I think that feminism needs to embrace that women can be just as selfish, entitled and unaware of privilege as men.

I've been processing thoughts about this for years and my conclusion is it's just human selfishness not to recognise when an individual choice has an adverse impact on another person or group's choices. So if you're a selfish person and you're too lazy to earn your money ethically - and you fail to recognise your own privileges, you can see how a prostitute will say:

'This is my choice. Isn't that what feminism is about?'
'I love sex and I might as well get paid for something I enjoy and am good at'
'I'm at the high-end of the market and so the type of men I see tend to be intelligent and wealthy and not violent or abusive at all'
'I think street prostitution is really bad for the punters as well as the girls, but not every man can afford people like me so it will always exist'
'I've always been able to separate my emotions from sex, so I've never been screwed up by what I do.'
'I don't really care about the men's partners. That's not my problem. I'm giving them something they can't get at home and I'm just meeting a need'

Not so different from the weekend Charlie users who insist that they are able to control their habit, pay for it out of their legitimate earnings, are entitled to a 'treat' and are able to completely disassociate themselves from the bigger picture of the demand they are fuelling and the human misery created by the cocaine trade.

At the centre of these non-dilemmas is selfishness, pure and simple. What always surprised me about this very small minority of 'choice' prostitutes, given that they were breathtakingly self-absorbed and selfish, was how they were unable to see the impact their choices had on them as women in a patriarchical society - a society that they were propping up by their choices. How their choices were so time-limited because the sex industry values youth above any other attribute and how even now they faced daily acts of sexism and misogynist behaviour that were likely to get worse when their privilege of youth and sexual attraction vanished. They couldn't see the link at all in that.

I got used to their selfishness about the impact on other women - either women in the sex industry or the partners of their clients, but it was their inability to see the impact on them personally that surprised me the most.

Charbon, that was a really useful post. I've previously had discussions with people on the prostitution issue where we got snarled up in knots around the 'high class' issue.

In fact, this has been really useful throughout even if it was old ground for some!

i agree with much of that.

it isn't empowering or an ok choice for a black person to perpetuate racism because he/she enjoys making money out of it re: if there was a trade in dressing up as a golliwog and entertaining the 'white folks' it would not be empowering or good for racial equality for someone to do that no matter how much they got paid and enjoyed it.

likewise for priviliged women choosing prostitution.

I just want to say a big thank you to all the posters on here for such an interesting, thought-provoking thread.

I can see the harm for women in 'traditional' prostitution, but wonder whether the same applies to things like phone sex. Did anyone see the C4 'documentary' called My Phone Sex Secrets? The women in that were shown as empowered, managing their own working lives, making good money for what looked like minimal effort, and all from the comfort of their own homes. Obviously, too, they didn't have the risks associated with physical contact (violence/STDs etc) that prostitutes have. Still, I didn't feel entirely comfortable about what these women were doing, but haven't been able to articulate why. I have no idea what sort of legislation covers work of this nature and apologise if this should be a topic for a different thread. The women involved were still selling sex as a commodity, there were no pimps or madams involved although a couple of the workers got work through an agency, which operated from a legitimate-looking call centre on an industrial estate. Everything was very much out in the open (or that's what the programme makers led you to believe) and the 'distance' that a phone line creates between worker and clients seemed to sanitise what they were doing.

I guess what I'm asking is, do you think this kind of work is also exploitative to women? I would really appreciate a feminist perspective on this as I feel I'm missing something.

I have learned a lot from this thread, thank you everyone- I will keep on lurking, and wanted to express my appreciation for your thoughts and resources. I think trafficking and prostitution is one of the biggest problems we face in asserting that women (and children) are people, but I dont know enough about how to talk about it. Yet.

Back to the OP. Yes the legalisation and regulation of prostitution protects the johns and the pimps. It also tells men like this that they are justified:

secretdiaryofadublincallgirl.wordpress.com/2012/02/17/how-it-feels-to-get-reviewed/

Reading that link has made me sick. When men bang on about women having sexual power they are talking crap, because sex is cheap and women are expendable, just objects to be judged on their sexual attractiveness an performance.

It seems that so much in this world is set up to service the male d**k, from prostitution to pornography to female circumcision, regardless of the risks to women's health.

Men bang on about women having "sexual power" to disguise the fact that they are the ones who hold all the power, and abuse it horribly.

Oh, Fake ETA = Fake Edit To Add. It's a habit I picked up on another forum which doesn't allow editing of posts.

Great post Charbon and that dublincallgirl blog is a very insightful read.

Thanks for posting that piece on the "happy hooker" IAOS. So important to expose it for the BS it is.

This one is good too.

survivorsconnect.wordpress.com/2012/02/19/prostitutions-fine-but-not-for-me/

It is exactly what I always want to say to people who academically argue for the institution of prostitution but who wouldn't dream of doing it themselves.

A position so hypocritical and entitled that it makes my blood boil.