I am not a supporter of prostitution. Pornography also gets on my nerves. That's all my personal feeling, though.lrkun said:The some of the missing factors are:
1. Religion
2. Politics
3. Ethics
That's more an argument against deep sea welding, isn't it?Yfelsung said:There are lots of professions more dangerous than prostitution that people do every day.
Deep sea welding for example (probably one of the most dangerous jobs on earth).
ImprobableJoe said:That's more an argument against deep sea welding, isn't it?Yfelsung said:There are lots of professions more dangerous than prostitution that people do every day.
Deep sea welding for example (probably one of the most dangerous jobs on earth).
So, rape is not a "special" crime. If you haven't been hurt much physically, it's a minor crime?Yfelsung said:Sex isn't special, it isn't magical, all that stuff our society has tacked onto it thanks to Abrahamism is just smoke and mirrors. We're not naturally monogamous creatures and we shouldn't pretend we are.
It's a messy exchange of fluids and an attempt at mutual orgasm, that's about it.
Giliell said:So, rape is not a "special" crime. If you haven't been hurt much physically, it's a minor crime?Yfelsung said:Sex isn't special, it isn't magical, all that stuff our society has tacked onto it thanks to Abrahamism is just smoke and mirrors. We're not naturally monogamous creatures and we shouldn't pretend we are.
It's a messy exchange of fluids and an attempt at mutual orgasm, that's about it.
And please, show me evidence for the "not monogamous", since evidence seems to indicate that we're at least serial monogamists
:lol:ImprobableJoe said:That's more an argument against deep sea welding, isn't it?Yfelsung said:There are lots of professions more dangerous than prostitution that people do every day.
Deep sea welding for example (probably one of the most dangerous jobs on earth).
Giliell said:So, rape is not a "special" crime. If you haven't been hurt much physically, it's a minor crime?Yfelsung said:Sex isn't special, it isn't magical, all that stuff our society has tacked onto it thanks to Abrahamism is just smoke and mirrors. We're not naturally monogamous creatures and we shouldn't pretend we are.
It's a messy exchange of fluids and an attempt at mutual orgasm, that's about it.
And please, show me evidence for the "not monogamous", since evidence seems to indicate that we're at least serial monogamists
Yfelsung said:Rape is physical assault, same as getting beaten. You have to remember, I have different views of how criminals should be treated. You assault someone, be it physical or not, you're in for several years of back breaking labour in a pit so deep you won't remember what the sky looks like while we forcefully educate you on how to be a productive member of society.
And we may jump from one monogamous relationship to another, but we also cheat a lot as a species and more and more people are not settling down in favour of multiple partners because we're finally shaking off the social norms imposed by Abrahamism. Believe me, I'm married and I'd never cheat on her, but that's because I have control over the animal urges I have to fuck anything older than 16 that crosses my vision. The urges are the natural part, curtailing them is the social engineering.
And, of course, it is an actual possibility because monogamy means one partner at a time, not one partner for life.ArthurWilborn said:Quite the opposite, really. If we were naturally monogamous then there wouldn't be jealousy; there wouldn't be any need for it. You're jealous only if you're worried over something that could be an actual possibility.
Nautyskin said:And, of course, it is an actual possibility because monogamy means one partner at a time, not one partner for life.
That's because your definition of monogamy is incorrect.ArthurWilborn said:Nautyskin said:And, of course, it is an actual possibility because monogamy means one partner at a time, not one partner for life.
... What? Monogamy implies more then the avoidance of polyamory. You seem to be saying that people are monogamous until they aren't, which just seems silly.
TheFlyingBastard said:Works for us here in Holland.
And the English love it.
lrkun said:I don't get it. Hehe. Sex is free. Why make it a market?
Historically, there's not really been any sort of well-defined population as to who buys nights with hookers. Sure, it would seem that ugly/overweight/unaccomplished/unlikable people are more likely to be desperate enough to seek it out, but for people who don't necessarily fit into those groups, there's just those who have certain proclivities and lots of money.RestrictedAccess said:Free sex is hard to come by when you're ugly, overweight, and unaccomplished.
I think this is the sort of thing that may become a problem if you start getting into prostitution as a regulated industry. There are some things women won't do for free because they're simply not into that sort of thing (i.e. highly specific fetishes), and that's probably fine. But there should be certain boundaries that, under regulations, shouldn't be crossed like those that are higher-risk or prone to injury... e.g. erotic asphyxiation, sadomasochism, etc.RestrictedAccess said:There's also the fact that prostitutes are often paid to do things most women aren't willing to do for free.
My guess would be that it's easier to get a prostitute to do those kinds of risky things when it's illegal, rather than when it's like other industries (legal, regulated, and people doing it have rights). What would probably happen is that prostitutes themselves would have to define what they are willing to do for their "customers", and that would be easier to do since advertising it would also be legal. Though I wonder what format the advertisements would take, given that in many places there is a social taboo against it.ShootMyMonkey said:Historically, there's not really been any sort of well-defined population as to who buys nights with hookers. Sure, it would seem that ugly/overweight/unaccomplished/unlikable people are more likely to be desperate enough to seek it out, but for people who don't necessarily fit into those groups, there's just those who have certain proclivities and lots of money.RestrictedAccess said:Free sex is hard to come by when you're ugly, overweight, and unaccomplished.
I think this is the sort of thing that may become a problem if you start getting into prostitution as a regulated industry. There are some things women won't do for free because they're simply not into that sort of thing (i.e. highly specific fetishes), and that's probably fine. But there should be certain boundaries that, under regulations, shouldn't be crossed like those that are higher-risk or prone to injury... e.g. erotic asphyxiation, sadomasochism, etc.RestrictedAccess said:There's also the fact that prostitutes are often paid to do things most women aren't willing to do for free.
At the very least, I would expect people who have to sign waivers or something if they really demanded those kinds of services. In any case, this kind of ends up shifting the point from legalize (yes/no) to how much regulation is enough.