Why do men use prostitutes?

[QuentinSummers]

Guardian have published a summary of a research project here
www.theguardian.com/society/2010/jan/15/why-men-use-prostitutes
Men were asked what would put them off. A criminal record, an ASBO or their employer being told was the answer. Finding out the woman was pimped or coerced apparently not so much.
Not sure how that squares with the full decriminalisation model.

My point remains, that men who approach sex workers have no way of knowing whether the woman they're paying for sex is there willingly.

In practical terms, how should this be addressed? While I wish it wouldn't happen, I'm not sure banning and heavy policing would be effective in stopping trafficking, even if only those paying were targeted for prosecution, if anything, it seems like it would force out the (debatable number) of willing participants. If that approach should be used, should it also be applied to nail salons and car washes, since those too are large draws for the traffickers?

these responses confirm that the decriminalisation model would be best for sex worker safety, and that the Nordic model would contribute to violence against sex workers.

And yet the evidence does not support this punter logic.

I'm not sure banning and heavy policing would be effective in stopping trafficking

The evidence suggests it is effective:

www.lse.ac.uk/website-archive/newsAndMedia/newsArchives/2012/12/Legalised-prostitution-increases-human-trafficking.aspx

Women and children are trafficked because there is demand from men who want to buy them. Bringing down demand is the key to fighting trafficking and all forms of coercion. So you go after the johns and go after them hard. Criminal records, fines / jail sentences and public shame. Treat them the same way other sex offenders are treated.

Prostitution is nothing to do with work. The prostituted women are the products, not labourers or service providers. A 13 year old with no experience is worth far more to the rapists than a 30 year old with 12 years experience. Because it is the woman or the child's body that is being sold, as a commodity to be consumed. Experienced workers are worth more than inexperienced workers, but fresh commodities are worth more than used commodities.

They would go to these meetings with the intention of ending up in bed with famous drivers/riders, staying in nice hotels and enjoying fine dining
They were probably doing this half a dozen times a year, for them it was glamorous and they were getting rewarded
In effect, they were doing to men what men do to female prostitutes

There is absolutely no comparison here. None at all. I can't drum up the slightest concern or disapproval here. What is being described is consenting adults having consensual casual sex.

If that approach should be used, should it also be applied to nail salons and car washes, since those too are large draws for the traffickers

Yeah why not

And what lass said tuesday night...

Flora, I am afraid the paper you cite attempting to prove a relationship between decriminalisation of prostitution and trafficking is a travesty. The “trafficking” figures for some countries conflate people smuggling, illegal migration and include labour trafficking as well as sex trafficking.

For a fuller take down of that paper see here p85 para 2 et seq.

Weitzer is a pro-prostitution advocate whereas Prof Neumayer doesn’t take a position on legalization or decriminalization.

Why don’t you summarize what you think is wrong with the LSE paper and outline why Weitzer’s bias doesn’t affect his approach?

Also totally agree with Lass. There’s no comparison between mutually desires consensual sex and sex performed for the gratification for one person only who pays to overcome the lack desire from the other person.

I haven't read all 13 pages, so apologies if this has already been raised;

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47865363

Thoughts? It's a Christian-inspired movement apparently. The church hardly has an inspiring record on women's rights and status, but it is worthwhile? And what of collectives run by the prostitutes themselves, such as Proud (referenced at the end of the article? How do you present the case to them, and who does it?

From the linked BBC item:

.. Some 42,000 young people have added their signatures, which means the issue will be debated by politicians in a country that has some of the most relaxed laws around paying for sex.

Excellent! We have some smart young people here too; let's hope ours are inspired to take similar action.

Why do men use prostitutes? Same question as why does a dog lick its bollocks.

because they can

How do you present the case to them..

When it's illegal we won't have to.

We don't "present a case" to rapists or others who commit crime, do we?

The sooner this is done away with the better, it degrades humans as a group.

Flora-the usual ad hominem attack. Why don't you deal with the long list of objections that Weitzer summarizes instead of attacking the (supposed) views of the author?

I did provide a brief one liner on what was wrong with the original paper (Cho, S. Y., Dreher, A., & Neumayer, E. (2012). Does legalized prostitution increase human trafficking? World Development, 41,67–82) here. I would invite readers to read both the Weitzer and Cho papers.

Another problem with the Cho paper (besides as I mentioned the fact that the trafficking figures are not collected in a uniform way from country to country-include labour trafficking, people smuggling as well as sex trafficking-so CANNOT be Compared) and should have been clear to any decent editor and is illustrated in fig.1 which summarizes the data.

What the figure claims to show is the relationship between trafficking and legalization of prostitution in a number of different countries. It is a scatter plot through which the authors have drawn a gently up-sloping line-which is the claim they are trying to make. If you look at the raw data-it is all over the shop-no competent editor of a scientific journal should have accepted that-its pretty much garbage-as is the rest of the paper. It is all very well trying to cover the scatter in the data with statistics but its always best to look at the raw data instead of the summary tables.

Now it could be that there is a relationship between legalization and trafficking but this paper is not good enough to show that for sure.

I very much fear that the hardcore criminal gangs will continue sex trafficking whatever strategy is used with regards to prostitution. The victims are mostly too terrified to come forward. If they don't come forward, it doesn't much matter what the law says about prostitutes and punters.

Trafficking victims are often afraid of the police as well, as they're mostly in the country illegally.

I could think of several reasons, one of them being the 'cool girl mentality' that even women in their 40's have in response to the oppression and subjugation of women in the sex industry. I was recently told by two women at a friends dinner that 'little girls may very well grow up wanting to be prostitutes'.. if not for my pounding head I would have stuck around to tell them all the reasons they're absolutely wrong, but alas, sometimes you just have to know when to give up.

I very much fear that the hardcore criminal gangs will continue sex trafficking whatever strategy is used with regards to prostitution..

Even if that's true I do not believe it's a reason to do nothing.

It can be really hard to catch murderers but nobody would suggest that we therefore should do away with the law regarding killing?

I was recently told by two women at a friends dinner that 'little girls may very well grow up wanting to be prostitutes'..

When I hear people talking shite like that I ask them if they think "sex work" should be promoted in schools by careers advisors and if not why not?

After all it's just work right?

@Horsewithnolycra

Exactly! I would have gone into depth about all the ways in which they were wrong but I had an awful headache and needed to lie down. If I have the 'pleasure' of seeing them again I will definitely have my talking points ready.

It's not an ad hominem attack to point out that the paper you are promoting was written by someone who advocates for prostitution. It's an important factor in assessing the credibility of research which purports to be evidence led rather than ideologically driven.

I've waded through enough punter babble that I generally avoid following links to potentially dodgy websites.

Professor Neumayer is a professor of Environment and Development at the LSE who writes across a wide range of issues. He does not use his paper to advocate for any political response and, in fact, notes several factors that need to be considered in a political response that are outside the scope of his research. The paper was published in the reputable peer-reviewed World Development journal. Examples of current articles from this journal are:

Why do countries emulate each others’ policies? A global study of renewable energy policy diffusion

China in Africa: Competition for traditional development finance institutions?

The relationship between LGBT inclusion and economic development: Macro-level evidence

Ronald Weizer is a sociologist at George Washington University who writes almost exclusively to advocate for legalising prostitution. The paper you have linked to was published in Sexuality Research and Social Policy, a peer-reviewed journal which is an official journal of the National Sexuality Resource Centre, an organisation which describes itself as a community of gender and sexuality studies researchers, educators, and activists committed to understanding and addressing the intersections of race, class, gender, and sexuality in the pursuit of social justice Examples of current articles include:

Improving the Health of Cisgender Men Who Identify as Bisexual: What Do They Want from Interventions?

Supporting LGBTQ+ Foster Teens: Development of a Relationship-Focused,Self-Guided Curriculum for Foster Families

Gender Identity Nondiscrimination Laws in Public Accommodations: a Review of Evidence Regarding Safety and Privacy in Public Restrooms, Locker Rooms, and Changing Rooms

pie when you comment that "no competent editor of a scientific journal should have accepted" the data in the LSE paper, what are your credentials to justify such a statement?

Why do men use prostitutes?

Because men want, need, crave sex.

Women can take it or leave it.

= Instant imbalance - we have what they want which they can't abide so if they can't attract it, they will ask, wheedle, demand, take, steal or buy it at will.

Advantages:

1 they get what they want

2 women have no power or control and are kept in our place

Prostituted women are trafficked, brutalized, brainwashed, forced.

Those who say they are empowered and in control of what they do are (if not in denial) simply fuelling and reinforcing the myth that female flesh should be for sale. Part of the problem.

@HorsewithnoLycra

No, of course it's not a reason to do nothing. The police have to work with the victims and earn their trust. Successful prosecutions of the ringleaders is what needs to happen, and keeping the victims safe.

But trafficking is already against the law, so it's not about creating new laws, but acting on the existing legislation.

Why do men use prostitutes?

Because men want, need, crave sex.

Women can take it or leave it.

I don’t believe this is true. I think men are socialised to believe they are entitled to the type of sex they want with they women they want. If a 60 year old man wants to anally penetrate an 18 year old woman, prostitution affords him the opportunity to do so. Women are not socialised with this entitlement.

Thoughts? It's a Christian-inspired movement apparently.

Of course it is. Most opposition to legalised sex work comes from people with socially conservative values, such as religious people.

The church hardly has an inspiring record on women's rights and status,

Actually, the church has always taken the view that sex outside of marriage is fornication, and fornication is a sin. Religious people have always held a deeply negative view of prostitution because they believe any sex outside of marriage is inherently harmful to women. I thought this was common knowledge.

Within the UK, the criminalisation of payment for sexual services was spear-headed by the DUP, a Christian fundamentalist party which also wants Christian creation science taught in school classrooms. The news that Christian groups are pushing for sex work to be made illegal should not be a shock to anyone.

Religious people have always held a deeply negative view of prostitution because they believe any sex outside of marriage is inherently harmful to women

That is one interpretation of a religious view. I have also heard the argument that it is harmful to society- that it cheapens and trivialises something which should be meaningful. In the case of prostitution it devalues and cheapens something priceless which should be freely given and shared for mutual enjoyment.

Oh I'm a not particularly socially conservative but hardline atheist and those arguments make sense to me. I don't necessarily agree in relation to sex out with marriage or even casual sex but I do agree re prostitution.

Radical feminists and other feminists opposed to prostitution are not socially conservative, quite the contrary. Women as sex objects is not socially progressive, again, quite the contrary.

In any event, here's Pope Francis on prostitution as torture, quite distinguishable from sex outside of marriage:

"this is not making love. It’s torturing a woman. Let’s not confuse the terms"

cruxnow.com/vatican/2018/03/19/pope-says-prostitution-tortures-women-apologizes-for-catholic-clients/