Should it be illegal for men to pay for prostitution?

[EatsBrainsAndLeaves]

Should we criminalise all men who pay for prostitution, alongside help for women to leave prostituion?

Housekeepers don't risk HIV, haemorrhoids and faecal incontinence.

Cleaning toilets is necessary work - somebody has to do it, in fact I have done it for a living.

There's no comparison.

I still haven't seen a satisfactory answer to how men can use prostitutes knowing that not all are as happy as belle de jour. And that they'll often be gifted actors and hide their distress.

Other than 'because we want to'.

I wonder why interestedpunter wouldn't go on an affairs site as well- the only thing I can think of is that even if hooking up for casual sex with strangers, you still have to relate to the other person. Be considerate.

With a prostitute you are buying her obedience - you don't have to make any effort, she'll laugh at your jokes, listen attentively and then do pretty much what you want in bed. Money is power.

But of course first of all you need to have your excuse - the wife won't give out is a good one.

Secondly you absolutely must dismiss all that inconvenient bad stuff about prostitution as 'nothing to do with you'. Minimise it as a tiny minority of girls.

Or- as is the case for some I think- you just don't care.

you just don't care.

That just about sums it up. It is about power-you have the money and beyond that you have to make no effort at all. You don't care about her feelings, her likes, her dislikes, her problems, her parents,where she was born, her children, her views on anything. You don't even have to know her name or whether she drinks tea-in short not the simplest information. She is a merely a commodity that you have bought for your pleasure. This is not something that is acceptable to do to another human being.

You can tell the majority of the people in this thread have never seen or spoken to a working girl in their lives.

*you just don't care.

That just about sums it up. It is about power-you have the money and beyond that you have to make no effort at all. You don't care about her feelings, her likes, her dislikes, her problems, her parents,where she was born, her children, her views on anything. You don't even have to know her name or whether she drinks tea-in short not the simplest information. She is a merely a commodity that you have bought for your pleasure. This is not something that is acceptable to do to another human being.*

Pffft that happens in a lot of jobs, not just prostitution. Whoever has the money has the power.

*you just don't care

Actually, I did.

They don't buy the person. I certainly wouldn't put up with it in any other job. They might have the money but they don't have power over me.

But that has nothing to do with caring about her likes/dislikes, her views, her family etc. I've worked in a few places where the employers ultimately didn't give a shit about us, as far as they were concerned we were minimum paid workers, ten to a dozen. And they did have power over us, in the sense at the time i badly needed the money so just had to shut up and put up.

I am lucky that I have always been able to leave a job if they won't treat me as an individual.

Well i would say that is a luxury that many don't have.

Certainly many drug addicted prostitutes don't have that luxury, no.

But prostitution is not a job, is it? It is being bought/selling yourself as a commodity... but I feel we are going round in circles here.

I guess of all the eye-brow raising comments on here, I just wanted to say that the most eye-brow raising is Mr Interested's cavalier discussion of either of his children going into prostitution - presented with the scenario that his son is estranged from his father and down on his luck, such that he considers prostitution, does Mr IP even say well, I hope my son and I wouldn't end up estranged, or if I was in a position to help him financially to avoid this, I would, or anything along those lines or does he get straight down into continuing his rationalisations even at the expense of his children's theoretical well-being?

I mean, surely, whatever your views on prostitution, you have to hope that your child is never in the position presented to Mr IP, or Mr IP are you so desparate to believe your own rationalisations that you would see your own child, even hypothetically, engaged into 'sex work' just to prove a point? Because it is all okay, right?

Anything for attention, Mr IP, and all your cronies from Puntersnet, clearly. You need to pay women and you need to come over here and justify your sordid habits on a women's forum so that the thread revolves around you. I think my original assessment was pretty spot on, to be honest.

Bloody well said, summerflower.

What a lot of bollocks that was summer, he was given a very specific scenario. He answered that specific scenario. But somehow he should have leapt off at a tangent and gave an answer which would have been nicer and fluffier but not one that was included in the specific example.

This entire thread was started by EatsBrains, not someone from an outside forum. She asked her thing it got some responses and it grew. How others heard about it I do not know but they did and came here to post in a thread that was already started and to which they have a point of view.

He and his cronies do pay for sex which is exactly what the thread is about, I cannot think of a more qualified person to talk about the subject, unless it is a woman who works in the industry. We have had a few of those on here too, some of whom I think you would disagree with but I do not say any bile being thrown at them. In short this thread has done nothing but give the radfems the chance to beat their gums cry foul for something they started, and in the end alienate women and men. Way to go!

" but I feel we are going round in circles here." so agree

"does Mr IP even say well, I hope my son and I wouldn't end up estranged, or if I was in a position to help him financially to avoid this, I would, or anything along those lines or does he get straight down into continuing his rationalisations even at the expense of his children's theoretical well-being?" but I was being asked about a fictitious scenario. I'd already made it clear that I would discourage my children from going into prostitution and that I would help them financially avoid it if i could. I was at work, when i posted and had little time to do much other than answer the post. Is there really a need for me to state the obvious every time? And this just proves; how the anti brigade twist anything that punters/ WG's say so that it meets with their superior world view. And they say we rationalise

"and you need to come over here and justify your sordid habits on a women's forum so that the thread revolves around you". I'm sure you would have preferred a thread where you could just whine about your morally superior views without being challenged. Apologies for failing to indulge your arrogance. After all the questions I have answered I still haven't got a response to the original question I asked though, namely:

"something I do wonder about is why feminists who say they are trying to protect prostitutes from us scum, refuse to talk or listen to the prostitutes themselves when they want to get involved with the debate? I appreciate that not all women on here are in their own view "feminists" (and I don't think that a dirty word btw) and I may not, therefore, get an answer to this. However, why when feminists do have meetings will they not agree to prostitutes with a different view to theirs attending that meeting?"

Think I've answered it myself though: You hate being challenged and fail to have an open mind; pure arrogance. You were right SabrinaMulhollandJones when you said we would never agree.

I actually think prostitution is viewed as a job, i certainly don't think those involved view it as a paid hobby or a vocation.

Its perhaps not the nicest job, or the most socially accepted job. Do you not think modelling is a job, after all they are selling their bodies as well. Just not to the same extent of prostitution. What about actors/actresses who do kissing/sex/nudity scenes?

Leith- calling a post boolocks- is that you showing us how to intelligently debate? Thanks for that.

I think a lot of women do reserve their anger and disdain for the punters rather than the prostitutes themselves. I know I do.

Interestedpunter- you have invaded from another site - your site would no doubt ban me if I went over there and gave my opinion. (I won't) . But MN is a bit more open and welcomes all viewpoints - however I do wonder why you have spent so much time trying to rationalise what you do and convince us that there is no harm in it.

Unfortunately there is harm in prostitution - and you saying 'look at the belle de jours' doesn't and will not negate that harm.

You question is answered in beachcombers posts- read them again.

Yes Sabrina it was exactly the same level of debate as the majority of what has been said complete and utter meaningless bollocks, note spelling please Sabrina!

I realise 'invaded' sounds a bit dramatic - but it's what mn calls a group of posters from a different website - all posting on a single issue.

Yes there is harm in prostitution, but why not tackle the problem head on instead of a blanket ban (which won't solve the problem of the abused/forced victims pushed into the sex trade, if anything you will be encouraging more of the criminals behind them into thinking there is an even bigger gap in the market).

It was a typo leith - get over it. Do, please, lead by example in the 'intelligent debate' you want.

It's the criminalising of punters I'd like to see - as in Sweden and Norway.

So you'd criminalise me for being so ugly I can't get a shag without paying for it? Thank you very much. And this from someone who can't even spell her (his?) nickname right ...

something I do wonder about is why feminists who say they are trying to protect prostitutes from us scum, refuse to talk or listen to the prostitutes themselves when they want to get involved with the debate?