# General Discussion > Opinions >  Enjo Kosai (or teenage prostitution) OFFTOPIC about legalising prostitution

## bossel

> It's bad because for anyone, anywhere you wouldn't want your mother, sister, or daughter to do it, because people, male or female, are worth more than that. 
> [...]
> I know I do unless that's the woman's only option.


The worth of human beings is up the themselves. If they consider it OK for them to sell sex, it's entirely their own business (unless they have a contagious disease which they deliberately spread).




> Prostitution stops when a woman says she's worth more than a few hundred bucks or a LV bag, when she can't be bought.


You don't buy a prostitute. She (or he) sells a service.

If you look down upon them, maybe you should check your own attitude?





> Many women in the West do have sex freely, but that doesn't make them whores.


That depends. If a girl has sex with a guy because he is in a position of power or because he supports her financially, it's not that much different from prostitution.





> The phenomenon of enjo kosai cannot be blamed on the West.


PaulTB has a point here. It's probably a combination of both a more lax attitude towards sex & of western materialist influences.

----------


## A.A. Lee

> "The worth of human beings is up the themselves. If they consider it OK for them to sell sex, it's entirely their own business (unless they have a contagious disease which they deliberately spread)."


I disagree. The worth of human being to other humans is determined by society. If a white man can sell a black man or his children than the black man's worth to people at large is low. Sadly throughout much of history, the population at large were mostly peasants whose lives were worth little compared to the elite. In modern times, though, the common people have more rights and greater worth. A person can estimate his own worth, but if his fellow man can mistreat him without impunity than that degrades his position. I once heard the saying, "Some people's lives are worth more than others." I like to believe that in God's eyes this is NOT true. In society people are simply not equal, but I like to believe that we are moving towards greater equality.

In many Asian coutries, including Japan, women are denied opportunities and better jobs. This is true of the West, too, though to a lesser extent. In Japan there are no laws barring women from these chances, but they are taught to be inferior to men and to occupy a submissive role. Quite frankly a lot of Asian women are raised to have low self esteem. And not just in Japan. My Taiwanese father raised me to have low self esteem. A lot of my Asian girlfriends were raised to have low self esteem. This is sad reality that I have personally observed. If a woman chooses to sell sex it's true that that's her business and her life. I just want to explain that those many young Japanese girls who choose to sell their bodies did not just come up with this on their own and that this is a sympton of a wider problem, the low status of women in Japan.

----------


## A.A. Lee

> You don't buy a prostitute. She (or he) sells a service.
> If you look down upon them, maybe you should check your own attitude?


A woman who prostitutes herself sells her body. Selling your body is selling yourself even if for just a limited time. It's also said that someone who will do just about anything for money or material wealth can be bought and you don't get much lower than selling your body (except those who would kill for money; of course they're the worst). 

I don't go around spitting on prostitutes and persecuting them. If they decide to do what they do, then they do so at their own risk. Some of the risks are pregnancy and stds, but the worse is getting beating or turning up in a river, dump, etc. And don't tell me this doesn't happen to prostitutes in Japan. It happens to women everywhere even to those who aren't prostitutes, but it is much more likey to happen to a prostitute for obvious reasons. I look down prostitutes because what they do is just crazy to me, that the money is worth more than their health and safety. If you think it's okay for a woman or girl to take these risks, then you need to check your own attitude.

----------


## A.A. Lee

> "That depends. If a girl has sex with a guy because he is in a position of power or because he supports her financially, it's not that much different from prostitution."


If a women has sex with a guy only because he supports her than in a way he owns her. She is financially dependent on him, which gives him significant power over her. If a woman is married to the man, though, that entitles her to certain rights and privileges in my country anyway. A prostitute earns chump change, but a married woman can take her man to the cleaners. You might think of a woman who marries a man for money as a prostitute, but if she can make a killing off of him or the divorce than the man's the chump!

I wasn't referring to these women, though. I meant women who have sex freely because they want it. The puritans of my country (W's supporters) view them as sluts and whores, but they're not "selling services," so they're not whores. And yes whore is a dirty word for a dirty profession.

----------


## bossel

> A woman who prostitutes herself sells her body. Selling your body is selling yourself even if for just a limited time.


If you see it this way, pretty much all people who work for others are selling their body. You work with your body, you get money for it.




> It happens to women everywhere even to those who aren't prostitutes, but it is much more likey to happen to a prostitute for obvious reasons.


Any statistics? I suppose, it depends where & under which circumstances a prostitute works. I haven't heard of that many prostitutes being murdered here in Germany. 




> If you think it's okay for a woman or girl to take these risks, then you need to check your own attitude.


I tend to the Libertarian point of view. As long as you don't harm anyone without their consent, it's OK. 
If you deny people the right to sell their services (as long as those services comply with the ZAP), you're on the wrong side, IMO.

----------


## nurizeko

> If a women has sex with a guy only because he supports her than in a way he owns her. She is financially dependent on him, which gives him significant power over her. If a woman is married to the man, though, that entitles her to certain rights and privileges in my country anyway. A prostitute earns chump change, but a married woman can take her man to the cleaners. You might think of a woman who marries a man for money as a prostitute, but if she can make a killing off of him or the divorce than the man's the chump!


thats kinda sad, that in western countries to some women marriage is meaningless apart from lies, cheating and unfair financial gain...

it also reminds me of that japans virgin wives thread where wives aint getting any yet they arnt considoring divorce and love their husbands....i dont think its fair to live in a sexless marriage, but still, much more admirable then the population of western women who marry and steal a blokes cash and in some ways his life.

back on topic, prostitution is weak, ive felt pretty low at times but ive never felt so low that selling myself is an option, granted im a guy, but the principal remains the same, what kind of self confidence and respect stealing condition drives girls down so low that selling themselves for an expensive bag is acceptable?.

you dont need to be a miserable wreck to have no self respect, its just sad.

----------


## A.A. Lee

> "If you see it this way, pretty much all people who work for others are selling their body. You work with your body, you get money for it."


No, because the product being sold is not one's body. When someone hires a janitor, he's paying for a clean floor or office. If someone hires a construction worker, he's paying for the finished building. But if someone hires a prostitute, he's paying for that person's body. That's a significant difference.

A very good friend of mine recently started doing nude photos much to my disappointment (but I make a lot of more money than her and I just can't blame a good friend). She said that she could never be a stripper because men touch them and it's so much more degrading. She says that a woman feels violated when someone she doesn't lust after touches her and it takes someone who's messed up in the head to put up with this. Of course, her boyfriend and I are at the shoots to make sure she doesn't get molested. 

Also if someone works like 60+ hours for a company, it is said that he's sold his soul to the company and the company owns him. 




> "Any statistics? I suppose, it depends where & under which circumstances a prostitute works."


Most people in the US don't really care if a prostitute or stripper gets beaten or killed unless she was forced into prostitution, so these events are rarely reported on the news. People who actually do research on it say that a lot of prostitutes are beaten regularly. It's pretty hard to measure how many are killed as many of these people fall under missing persons unless a body if found. But considering how many women do get abducted and killed in the US, I can imagine that it's much worse for prostitutes. World wide women are raped and beaten regularly and it's much worse for prostitutes.




> "If you deny people the right to sell their services (as long as those services comply with the ZAP), you're on the wrong side, IMO."


I don't have a problem with denying women the right to prostitute themselves in my town. Most people here don't want them in their towns either. A lot of people don't even want strippers in their precinct. The majority decides how the town is going to be for better or worse.

----------


## bossel

> No, because the product being sold is not one's body.


Ah, you seem to have a complete different understanding of the concept of prostitution. Prostitutes do not sell their body. They sell a service performed with their body. & this is IMO not essentially different from what eg. masseurs, construction workers or craftsman do.




> She says that a woman feels violated when someone she doesn't lust after touches her and it takes someone who's messed up in the head to put up with this.


Not really. It depends on the personality, education & social environment whether you want to do this job, or not. Being messed up in the head is not a necessary precondition. I don't know any prostitutes personally, but those I saw on TV gave me the impression that their mindsets & mental health is as varied as in the general population.




> Most people in the US don't really care if a prostitute or stripper gets beaten or killed unless she was forced into prostitution, so these events are rarely reported on the news. People who actually do research on it say that a lot of prostitutes are beaten regularly.


Well, this looks to me more like a problem of society than of prostitution. Of course, the legal problems in the US probably worsen the situation regarding maltreatment of prostitutes as well. Since they are unable or unwilling (for legal reasons) to call police for help, there is a greater chance to fall victim to a sexual predator or other criminals.

Here in Germany this is mainly a problem in the illegal setting, where women from Eastern Europe or 3rd World countries are forced into prostitution. For regular prostitutes from Germany or the EU, that is much less an issue.




> I don't have a problem with denying women the right to prostitute themselves in my town. Most people here don't want them in their towns either. A lot of people don't even want strippers in their precinct. The majority decides how the town is going to be for better or worse.


This is quite hypocritical, because this simply drives prostitution underground. Which in turn increases the problems you described above.

----------


## Sr Pasta

Bossel's way of seeing this is as repugnant to me as if he was defending slavery.

There's a good law for this in Sweden: selling sex is not criminalized, but buying it is. That way, the scumbags are the ones risking a sentence.

----------


## bossel

> Bossel's way of seeing this is as repugnant to me as if he was defending slavery.


Interesting that you mention slavery in that regard. Shouldn't you have the _freedom_ to decide what to do with your life (or your body)?




> There's a good law for this in Sweden: selling sex is not criminalized, but buying it is. That way, the scumbags are the ones risking a sentence.


Well, better than in the US, but still crap. A certain Petra &#214;stergren has quite something to say about the Swedish law.

Quote:
"Until now, the law against buying sexual services in Sweden has lead to:

* Less street prostitution.

* Instead, more prostitution in other ways and places.

* Increased sex tourism to other countries.

* Increased violence, force and compulsion against prostitutes, and more pimp dependence. A worse situation, especially for those who lack alternatives to street prostitution, like the drug addicts.

* Less possibilities to fight forced prostitution and trafficing.

* Less societal control, and less possibilities to help prostitutes and clients.

* A law that can't be implemented, and will diminish either law obedience or legal security. Without getting rid of prostitution. The law is already being ruled out by important legal instances.

* The prostitutes have been run over and humiliated by the politicians. Sex workers now, at last, seem to be on their way to create a union, but the law is already a fact and it will take time before it can be abolished.

* Sweden has made an example to rest of the world - that this is not a good road to follow. The law is a complete failure so far - whatever some politicians may claim on international conferences. "

----------


## Sr Pasta

Well, she's simply wrong. Prostitution is much less of a problem in Sweden than in most countries. I think the most obvious difference that this law has made is that when people mention prostitution in Sweden, they most often understand that they are talking about a form of sexual abuse. When people mention it in Japan or Germany, they don't. Since I came to Japan, I've really come to appreciate the lack of red light districts in Sweden.

----------


## bossel

> Well, she's simply wrong. Prostitution is much less of a problem in Sweden than in most countries.


Well, you obviously simply didn't read the text. She also said: "Sweden has never had much prostitution, compared to most other countries. According to an investigation made by the government in the mid-nineties, Sweden had about 2500 prostitutes, 650 of whom were street prostitutes; half of the latter were on drugs."

Therefore, Sweden didn't even have much of a problem before the new law. & the new law obviously didn't do so much good.




> When people mention it in Japan or Germany, they don't. Since I came to Japan, I've really come to appreciate the lack of red light districts in Sweden.


Well, speaking for Germany, I never had any problems with red light districts. I don't even know if the city I live in has one (probably there is one, I just never came across it). I only know one big brothel because it's close to the main station & you can see it from the trains passing by (big numbers on the windows, so that the passengers know which girl to ask for).

People in Germany understand that prostitution is not sexual abuse. Forced prostitution is.

----------


## Sr Pasta

Sure I read it. The point is not that the law changed very much, it is that it has prevented some of the commercialization of sex from reaching Sweden. And that's very important. BTW, Petra &#214;stergren is not exactly a research institute. Her depiction of the law, it's results and it's political dynamics is simply not accurate.

Of course you never had any problems with the red light districts. If you'd been a roman 2000 years ago, you wouldn't have had any problem with the slave markets either.

----------


## PopCulturePooka

> People in Germany understand that prostitution is not sexual abuse. Forced prostitution is.


That reminds me. Been meaning to ask you.

What are your thoughts on this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...30/wgerm30.xml

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/jan/05013106.html

To me this is forced prostitution.

----------


## bossel

> What are your thoughts on this:
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...30/wgerm30.xml


Exaggerated. The job centre didn't know that it was a brothel that offered the job. They operated under the name of a massage parlour. 

German job centres generally do not place people in brothels. They are surely not allowed to force anybody to work there, since there is a German law against that.

The German news story:
http://www.welt.de/data/2003/07/11/132368.html (quite reliable source)

& a German article on the general implications of that law:
http://www.taz.de/pt/2004/12/18/a0077.nf/text (leftist newspaper with a feminist touch)





> Sure I read it. The point is not that the law changed very much, it is that it has prevented some of the commercialization of sex from reaching Sweden.


That sounds quite naive. Prostitution still exists, it's only better hidden now.




> BTW, Petra &#214;stergren is not exactly a research institute. Her depiction of the law, it's results and it's political dynamics is simply not accurate.


OK, then provide me with some better sources. Or better yet, tell me what exactly is wrong with her analysis.




> Of course you never had any problems with the red light districts. If you'd been a roman 2000 years ago, you wouldn't have had any problem with the slave markets either.


How would you know?
& what is your point?

----------


## PopCulturePooka

> Exaggerated. The job centre didn't know that it was a brothel that offered the job. They operated under the name of a massage parlour. 
> 
> German job centres generally do not place people in brothels. They are surely not allowed to force anybody to work there, since there is a German law against that.
> 
> The German news story:
> http://www.welt.de/data/2003/07/11/132368.html (quite reliable source)
> 
> & a German article on the general implications of that law:
> http://www.taz.de/pt/2004/12/18/a0077.nf/text (leftist newspaper with a feminist touch)


  :Doubt:  
I can't read german (very well at all).
But I'll take your word for it, and its the whole reason I asked (considering you're like the only german I currently know online).

So... basically those stories were BS?

----------


## bossel

> So... basically those stories were BS?


Sorry, but I didn't find an English article that relates to this particular incident.

The story was not completely BS, since the girl actually got that offer. But she wouldn't have been forced into prostitution, neither was she threatened with losing her unemployment benefit.

----------


## Sr Pasta

> That sounds quite naive. Prostitution still exists, it's only better hidden now.


Of course it does - I'm simply saying that this law has prevented the problems from increasing, as they tend to do in many countries these years. This goes especially for those countries legalizing the prostitution industry.

This law is also efficient in the long run, since it targets the a******s and marginalizes them in society. Many men in Germany grow up believing that having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you is a normal thing - you can pay someone to "endure" it. Fewer men in Sweden will grow up with those beliefs. That's a good thing.

Let's try a simple rethorical question: I suppose that you agree on forbidding working with asbestos, since it's quite a health risk. I also suppose that you agree that at least some people get very bad experiences with prostiution, for example destroying their sex life. Why do you want to allow "jobs" with that kind of health risks involved? Is it because you suppose your daughter will never work there?

----------


## bossel

> Of course it does - I'm simply saying that this law has prevented the problems from increasing, as they tend to do in many countries these years. This goes especially for those countries legalizing the prostitution industry.


Out of sight, out of mind! Just because you don't see the prostitutes anymore, doesn't mean they are gone.

Some points from the Norwegian report "Purchasing Sexual Services
in Sweden and the Netherlands - Legal Regulation and Experiences" (2004)

regarding Sweden:
"...The police informed us that it is more difficult to
investigate cases of pimping and Trafficking in Human beings
because prostitution does not take place so openly on the streets any
more.
[...]
An unintended effect is that the clients are less visible than previously and that they are less willing to cooperate in bringing to light coercion, Trafficking in Human beings, or underage persons involved in prostitution. Another unintended effect of the fact that women are less visible is they are more difficult to reach by the support system. An unintended effect of the police's "threatening" presence on the streets is that the prostitutes' dependence on pimps has probably increased. 
[...]"

regarding the Netherlands:
"Experiences from the police suggest that prostitution has become more transparent and it is easier to impose control with the legal brothels. On the other hand a so-called "grey market" still exists where, to a lesser degree, the police have information and control. It is assumed that the victims of human trafficking are within the "grey market".
[...]
In those municipalities where there has been experience and where good relations have existed between the municipality and the brothel owners, implementation has been successful. The relationship between the prostitute and the brothel owner has varied. Some brothel owners are good employers and some are not. Our impression is that what the municipalities have offered in the way of health, safety, fire provisions etc. have worked well in relation to the prostitutes."




> This law is also efficient in the long run, since it targets the a******s and marginalizes them in society.


As I said, quite naive.




> Many men in Germany grow up believing that having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you is a normal thing - you can pay someone to "endure" it.


What crappy ideas you have. Any evidence for this?
If prostitutes don't want to have sex with you, they don't need to. Unlike illegal prostitutes, legal ones have rights. If a pimp wants to force them, they can easily sue him.




> Let's try a simple rethorical question:


Rhetorical? Then you don't want an answer? Well, I'll respond, anyway.




> I suppose that you agree on forbidding working with asbestos, since it's quite a health risk.


Nope. If you take the necessary precautions, you can work with asbestos. Else, all those asbestos-contaminated buildings couldn't be broken down.




> I also suppose that you agree that at least some people get very bad experiences with prostiution, for example destroying their sex life.


Could be. But a lot of jobs with high stress levels (& smoking) could destroy your sex-life.
Bad experiences (& higher risks to personal health) can be had in a number of jobs as well. Police, jailers, fire fighters, etc.

The most dangerous jobs in the USA:
1. Truck driver 8. Taxicab driver
2. Farm worker 9. Timber cutter
3. Sales supervisor/proprietor 10. Cashier
4. Construction worker 11. Fisherman
5. Police detective 12. Metal worker
6. Airplane pilot 13. Roofer
7. Security guard 14. Firefighter

You want to forbid them all?




> Why do you want to allow "jobs" with that kind of health risks involved?


Why should I prohibit any of the above jobs? 




> Is it because you suppose your daughter will never work there?


Which daughter? Anyway, if this imaginary daughter for some strange reason decided to become a prostitute, it would be entirely up to her. It's her life. As a father I would still support her.

Just because you don't like something, you would forbid it for everybody else?


BTW, you didn't answer my questions from the previous post:
How would you know?
& what is your point?

----------


## lolife

> I haven't read the whole thread, just some on the first page, but this clarifies a lot of things up for me. I guess they really want the cash (to buy stuff) so they can at least have what their friends have or something of that nature. I never understood why some people are very materialistic.


I agree. Me neither.




> ...


I do agree - somewhat - that someone who is absolutely bent on working as a prostitute, even though there are a lot of other options and they knows all the risks, should be free to do so. But I thinks it's pretty safe to say that probably about 99% of the worlds prostitutes do not choose this "profession" because they _want_ to. And also remember - _the hidden prostitution and trafficking have existed before aswell!_ So, I personally believe that especially prostitution, but perhaps also trafficking, have decreased overall since.




> Why should I prohibit any of the above jobs?


I would never compare those professions with prostitution. I really don't think it's the physical health that is the most in danger for most prostitutes.




> Which daughter? Anyway, if this imaginary daughter for some strange reason decided to become a prostitute, it would be entirely up to her. It's her life. As a father I would still support her.


You say that if your imaginary/future daughter gets involved with prostitution, you will just accept that? Well.. It'll probably be a couple of years before I'll even ponder about getting kids. But I can tell you right now, if any daughter of mine gets involved with prostitution and I find out, and given the circumstances, no way in hell I'll accept that and letting her keep doing that..

I admit, I have not read all posts here, so I might have read this completely out of context. But really...?

 :Okashii:  




> Just because you don't like something, you would forbid it for everybody else?


The question is, do _they_ like it?

Last.. Sorry if I have taken this out of context, and please correct me if so.

----------


## Sr Pasta

I think the fact that you're trying to say (you're avoiding the question, but implying) that you would not mind your daughter working as a prostitute any more than her working as a truck driver speaks for itself really. I don't believe - and if it would be true, I'd say your mentally unfit to be a father.

Legalizing prostitution does not mean everything gets transparent, not the least. People working against human trafficing often point to Australia as an example of how legalizing bordellos increased not only the now legal problems (sexual abuse of prostitutes) but also the still illegal ones (slavery in different forms). 

A single report from the norwegian police doesn't mean squat - and the report does not give any overview of where the problems are the worst. Maybe we should have a look at the major organizations fighting human trafficking, and see if they make any such overviews?

----------


## bossel

> But I thinks it's pretty safe to say that probably about 99% of the worlds prostitutes do not choose this "profession" because they _want_ to.


I don't know if it's 99%, but I agree that probably most of the world's prostitutes did not really want to become that. That's not the real problem, though (mind you, that goes for most professions. I didn't want to become a clerk, yet I became a trainee. After I finished vocational training, I worked only half a year there & then said good bye to that profession), the real problem is human trafficking & forced prostitution.




> So, I personally believe that especially prostitution, but perhaps also trafficking, have decreased overall since.


That's doubtful, the Swedish police themselves told those who wrote the Norwegian comparative paper that it's even harder now to investigate human trafficking:
"The police informed us that it is more difficult to investigate cases of pimping and Trafficking in Human beings because prostitution does not take place so openly on the streets any more."




> I would never compare those professions with prostitution. I really don't think it's the physical health that is the most in danger for most prostitutes.


That was Pasta's idea. But I do think that health risk is a valid factor in comparing jobs. I don't know if mental health is included in the posted list.




> But I can tell you right now, if any daughter of mine gets involved with prostitution and I find out, and given the circumstances, no way in hell I'll accept that and letting her keep doing that..


If she's an adult, what could you do? It's her life. The only valid thing to do would be to support her in a way that she can stop prostituting herself. If she decides to go on...




> The question is, do _they_ like it?


That's another question, but one they have to decide for themselves. I absolutely hate it, when this socialist babysitter attitude (not pointing my finger at you, Lolife) comes up. "I know what's best for people, I know what people should like, what people should do & how they should do it. Therefore, I decree..."  :Mad:

----------


## bossel

> I think the fact that you're trying to say (you're avoiding the question, but implying)


Perhaps you should read again what I wrote. I'm not implying anything (anyway "avoiding the question"? you said, it was only _rhetorical_. there is no need to answer a _rhetorical_ question). If you don't understand what I wrote above, here it is a bit clearer: The question whether prostitution should be allowed or not, is unrelated to the question how I feel about it.




> that you would not mind your daughter working as a prostitute any more than her working as a truck driver speaks for itself really.


Where did I say so?




> Legalizing prostitution does not mean everything gets transparent, not the least.


Exactly, prostitutes only disappear from the public view. Which makes it harder to investigate (see above).




> People working against human trafficing often point to Australia as an example of how legalizing bordellos increased not only the now legal problems (sexual abuse of prostitutes) but also the still illegal ones (slavery in different forms).


Could you provide some quotes?
I also doubt that sexual abuse of prostitutes is legal in Australia.




> A single report from the norwegian police doesn't mean squat - and the report does not give any overview of where the problems are the worst.


The Norwegian police? You obviously did not read the report. One report of a group of researchers definitely means more than your opinion which you seem unable to underpin with some facts.




> Maybe we should have a look at the major organizations fighting human trafficking, and see if they make any such overviews?


Do so! I'd like to see at least something that supports your points.

You still haven't answered my questions:



> Originally Posted by Sr Pasta
> 
> Many men in Germany grow up believing that having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you is a normal thing - you can pay someone to "endure" it.
> 
> 
> What crappy ideas you have. Any evidence for this?
> 
> BTW, you didn't answer my questions from the previous post:
> How would you know?
> & what is your point?

----------


## lolife

> That's doubtful, the Swedish police themselves told those who wrote the Norwegian comparative paper that it's even harder now to investigate human trafficking:
> "The police informed us that it is more difficult to investigate cases of pimping and Trafficking in Human beings because prostitution does not take place so openly on the streets any more."


_Of course_ it's getting harder. I mean.. It's obvious, isn't it. I say it again, the hidden prostitution and trafficking has always existed. What do you have left to fight, when you don't have the "open" activity anymore? Sure, the hidden activity have probably increased since, but I definitely believe that _overall_ it hasn't increased, but rather decreased.




> That's another question, but one they have to decide for themselves. I absolutely hate it, when this socialist babysitter attitude (not pointing my finger at you, Lolife) comes up. "I know what's best for people, I know what people should like, what people should do & how they should do it. Therefore, I decree..."


Given that many of them is also stuck on drugs aswell, they will still tell you they want to keep on doing it, because there are not other way to get money..for drugs. Etc, etc. The spiral downwards. But I can pretty much promise you they aren't feeling well about themselves, whatever they say. And if that is socialist babysitter attitude, so be it, but I want these people to get help.

 :Smiling:

----------


## Sr Pasta

Don't play stupid, Bossel: You were trying to imply that health risks (I'm not mainly talking about physical ones) were comparable between a truck driver and a prostitute. They're not, and that's one of the key reason you'd react quite differently if you your daughter became a prostitute. Am I right or wrong?

Now, what I'm saying is that there are plenty of work situations we don't allow because of health risks - but even so, many of those would worry you far less than if you're daughter started working with prositution. 

About more german than sweden men accepting "buying sex" as something normal: I think that's obvious. You're a typical example. If that's not true, why did german and swedish policies end up so differently?

Your follow up question about the romans is pointless, you know exactly what I mean: it's not like it's the first time in history a nation goes along with and accepts building their society around humiliation of some of it's people.

----------


## Sr Pasta

This document gives a good overview of the law and the research done about it, up until 2003:
http://action.web.ca/home/catw/attach/Ekberg.pdf

On trafficking:

The National Rapporteur for Trafficking in Women at the
National Criminal Investigation Department (NCID), Kajsa
Wahlberg, is responsible for the collection of data related to investigations
and convictions for trafficking crimes in Sweden and for
reporting annually to the Swedish government about the trafficking
in women in Sweden.16 In her reports published in 2003 and
2004, she noted that there are clear indications that the Law has
had direct and positive effects in limiting the trafficking in
women for prostitution to Sweden.

The NCID estimates that between 400 and 600 women are trafficked
into Sweden every year, mainly fromthe Eastern European
countries such as Estonia and Lithuania, as well as from Russia.
This number has remained fairly constant during the past several
years (National Criminal Investigation Department [NCID],
2004). This figure should be compared to the numbers of women
who are victims of trafficking for sexual purposes in neighboring
Scandinavian countries, such as Finland, Denmark, and Norway,
where the purchase of sexual services is not prohibited. In Denmark,
5,500 to 7,800 women are prostituted every year. It is estimated
that 50% or more of these women are victims of trafficking
in human beings (Ledberg, 2003; D. Otzen, director for Reden,17
Copenhagen, Denmark, personal conversation, December 15,
2003). According to a 2003 report from the Finnish Criminal Intelligence
Division of the National Bureau of Investigation, approximately
10,000 to 15,000 women from Estonia, Russia, Latvia and
Lithuania are prostituted in Finland every year (Leskinen, 2003).

In its report from 2003, the Swedish NCID stated that, despite the
increase in information and knowledge of trafficking cases in
other countries in the area, there is no equivalent increase in the
number of women who are victims of trafficking to Sweden.

There is also no conclusive evidence that the number of women
trafficked to Sweden has decreased (NCID, 2001, 2003).

Before July 1, 2002, when a new law against trafficking went
into effect, cases of trafficking in human beings for sexual purposes
in Sweden were prosecuted under the procuring provisions
or, depending on the individual case, under the provisions on kidnapping,
unlawful deprivation of liberty, placing a person in a
distressful situation, coercion, or sexual exploitation. Between
1999 and 2002, 25 persons have been convicted and sentenced to
prison for trafficking-related crimes. Since the implementation of
the new legislation criminalizing the trafficking in human beings
for sexual purposes, two individuals have been convicted and
sentenced.18 During 2003, 21 preliminary investigations under the
same legislation were initiated. Similarly, during 2003, approximately
20 cases of procuring were investigated. The women victims
of trafficking for sexual purposes came mainly from Eastern
Europe, the Baltic countries, and Russia, and most of them were
prostituted in apartment brothels in Sweden (Riksrevisionsverket,
200119; Kajsa Wahlberg, National Rapporteur on Trafficking
in Women, at the NCID, personal conversation, January 16,
2004). In the trafficking cases, most of the implicated pimps were
of foreign heritage but lived in or were citizens of Sweden and had
connections with organized crime networks in their countries of
origin that supplied the victims. However, this does not give a full
picture of trafficking ofwomen to Sweden. There are some indications
that Swedish and Danish motorcycle gangs are involved in
prostitution and trafficking in Sweden, mainly in the south.

The NCID has received signals from Europol and national
police forces in other European countries that Sweden no longer is
an attractive market for traffickers. Traffickers and pimps are
businessmen who calculate profits, marketing factors, and risks
of getting caught when they decide in which countries they will
sell women into prostitution. In conversations recorded during
crime investigations, pimps/procurers and traffickers have
expressed frustration about setting up shop in Sweden and
attracting customers who are willing to buy their women in prostitution.
According to these intercepted telephone conversations,
and fromadditional testimonies given bywomenwhoare victims
of trafficking, the pimps and traffickers experience the following
difficulties:

• Prostituted women must be escorted to the buyers, therefore giving
less time to fewer buyers, and gaining less revenue for pimps
than if women had been in street prostitution.

• Swedish men who want to buy women for prostitution purposes
express serious fear of being arrested and prosecuted under the
Law and hence demand absolute discretion from the pimps/
traffickers.

• To minimize the possibility of exposure/detection, the pimps/
traffickers are forced to operate apartment brothels in more than
one location and to change locations regularly. Thus the mode of
operation is expensive and requires that the pimp have local contacts.

The necessity of several premises is confirmed in almost all
preliminary investigations that have been carried out in 2002.
According to victim testimonies, pimps and traffickers prefer
to market their women in countries such as Denmark, Germany,
the Netherlands, and Spain, where the operating conditions are
more attractive, where the buyers are not criminalized and where
certain prostitution activities are either tolerated or legalized. In
addition, Detective Inspector KajsaWahlberg mentioned that the
Latvian police have concluded that Latvian traffickers do not sell
women in Sweden because of the negative effects of the Law on
their potential business. In its 2004 report, the NCID concluded
that the law that prohibits the purchase of sexual services gcontinues
to function as a barrier against the establishment of traffickers
in Swedenh (NCID, 2004, p. 35). Clearly, the Law functions as a
deterrent. Traffickers are choosing other destination countries
where their business is more profitable and not hampered by similar
laws (Detective Inspector K. Wahlberg, personal conversations,
April 18, 2002).20


And, to counter &#214;stergrens claim that this law came about as more or less a conspiracy from feminists in government:

The prohibition against the purchase of sexual services has
strong support in Sweden. Several polls conducted in 1999, 2001,
and 2002 show that approximately 80% of the Swedish
population supports the law and the principles behind its development.
Of the small number of individuals who want to repeal
the Law, the majority are men, with only 7% of women interviewed
in support of repeal. The latest poll, conducted in November
2002, shows that 8 of 10 persons interviewed in Sweden continue
to support the Law (Engstr&#246;m & Olsson, 2001).
Consequently, the issue today is more about how the Law is
enforced, than questioning the existence of the Law itself.

----------


## bossel

> Don't play stupid, Bossel: You were trying to imply


As I said, I don't imply. Please stop alleging crap!




> that health risks (I'm not mainly talking about physical ones) were comparable between a truck driver and a prostitute.


You were the one who came up with the asbestos comparison, on which I reacted.




> They're not, and that's one of the key reason you'd react quite differently if you your daughter became a prostitute. Am I right or wrong?


Wrong, as usual. I wouldn't want my imaginary daughter to become a truck driver, neither would I want her to become a prostitute. But that's not the issue, the issue is freedom of choice. Should people be free to chose their profession, or not.




> but even so, many of those would worry you far less than if you're daughter started working with prositution.


How would you know? You don't know me, you're assuming.




> About more german than sweden men accepting "buying sex" as something normal


Probably, so what?




> You're a typical example.


Assuming again. What a crap. How many Germans do you know?




> If that's not true, why did german and swedish policies end up so differently?


Perhaps because Swedish politicians are closer to feminist-socialist ideology than their German counterparts.




> Your follow up question about the romans is pointless,


As was your mentioning of the Romans, to begin with.




> you know exactly what I mean:


Assuming is your favourite pastime?




> it's not like it's the first time in history a nation goes along with and accepts building their society around humiliation of some of it's people.


Are you saying the Germans are building their society around prostitution? You must really suffer from severe tunnel vision. Prostitution is a very minor part of German society.





> This document gives a good overview of the law


Nice that you finally provide some source.
Not so nice that it's completely biased. It's from a member of the Swedish government (who trusts politicians?).

The feminist bias is very clear in that document. Example: "In Sweden, prostitution is officially acknowledged as a form of male sexual violence against women and children."
Male prostitution is completely ignored. Though the number of male prostitutes may be much smaller than that of female prostitutes, the complete exclusion of this issue makes it very clear, where the law (& Ekberg) comes from. It's feminism pure (I wonder, if the Swedish government could be sued for sexism before the European court of Human Rights).

Don't have time right now, but I will have a closer look later.

----------


## bossel

> I say it again, the hidden prostitution and trafficking has always existed.


Yep, & tougher laws won't make it disappear.




> I definitely believe that _overall_ it hasn't increased, but rather decreased.[...]Given that many of them is also stuck on drugs aswell, they will still tell you they want to keep on doing it, because there are not other way to get money..for drugs.


Perhaps you make the same mistake many people make: seeing only street prostitution? IIRC, most prostitutes in legal brothels are not on drugs. Actually, as long as prostitution is legal, health risks are by far not as severe as in illegal circuits. Brothels have to meet certain standards, prostitutes are applicable for regular health insurance, a.s.o.




> And if that is socialist babysitter attitude, so be it, but I want these people to get help


If you want to help these people, then that's not what I called the SBA. SBA is this crappy attitude of "I know what's best for you, therefore I can tell you what you have to do (& what you are allowed to)!"

Legalisation is one way to help, & it's not the only one. In Germany you get help if you want to leave prostitution. The same institution that helps you to leave would also provide assistance if you want to become a self-employed prostitute. It goes all ways, if you're not a beton head (German: _Betonkopf_, perhaps pighead?) with tunnel vision.

----------


## Sr Pasta

Bossel - you're really dodging, aren't you? I'm posing a simple question: would you or would you not worry a lot more about your imaginary daughter becoming a prostitute than about her becoming a truck driver? 

We both know you would, but you can't say it out loud because it would undermine your argument. So, if you don't like me assuming, please answer? 

"Feminist bias"  :Laughing:  Ever heard of an "antiracist bias"? Everyone is biased in a debate - you even quoted Petra &#214;stergren - but that itself doesn't mean they're wrong. Look at the sources for that paper, are they solid or not? Is the NCID biased?

----------


## bossel

> Bossel - you're really dodging, aren't you? I'm posing a simple question: would you or would you not worry a lot more about your imaginary daughter becoming a prostitute than about her becoming a truck driver?


I'm not dodging. You're either a misleading bugger or you can't read. I quote:



> Originally Posted by Sr Pasta
> 
> They're not, and that's one of the key reason you'd react quite differently if you your daughter became a prostitute. Am I right or wrong?
> 
> 
> Wrong, as usual.


You ask "right or wrong", I answered "wrong". How's that dodging?
As I already said twice: Stop alleging crap!




> Look at the sources for that paper, are they solid or not? Is the NCID biased?


Solid? Like "the work of the Swedish radical feminist and physician, Alma
Sundqvist" from the 1930's? Or like those many "personal conversations" Ekberg quotes? Crap!

The only valid source seems the NCID, & this is an organisation under governmental control. Their National Rapporteur Wahlberg (coincidentally appointed by the government) says that "that there are clear indications that the Law has had direct and positive effects in limiting the trafficking in women for prostitution to Sweden", but at the same time she has to admit that the number of women trafficked into Sweden "has remained fairly constant during the past several years."

The reference list below doesn't mean very much. I could provide a list of 50 books now, but that doesn't mean that I really rely on their data, nor does it mean that their data is reliable.

Ekberg is biased, her paper is biased. Not worth very much.


BTW, a little sidekick, since you seem to have a rather low opinion of German men, how comes that rapes seem to be so much more prevalent in Sweden than in Germany? 
Acc. to the _Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends_, the rate of recorded rapes in Sweden is 23.4 resp. 24.5 (in 2001 resp. 2002) per 100.000 inhabitants, while in Germany it's 9.6/10.4 & in the Netherlands it's 10.8/11.2. It seems, the Swedish policy doesn't work very effectively in regards to the status of women in society.


Another question (you seem to ignore the topic): What about male prostitution? Not so bad? Or why all this focus on women? Since you only mentioned a possible daughter, you seem to have the same bias.

----------


## Sr Pasta

OK, so let me see if I understood you correct this time: You would not be more worried if your daughter became a prostitute, than if she became a truck driver?

If that's true, your argument is logical within itself. However, I think very few people in the world would consider you fit for being a father.

The report shows quite clearly that your idea that the swedish law might increase the problem of human trafficking has no basis in fact. Please, find me an organization against human traficking that supports your claims, would you? 

Any criminologist will tell you comparing crimes between countrys is more or less impossible, especially when it comes to crimes like rape where very few cases are actually investigated. For example, the differences in social stigma of being a rape victim will affect the statistics greatly. Those few brave who actually bring their cases to court risk facing some real a*****e judges & lawyers even in Sweden - and let's just say I have no faith in german judges being better in this regard.

Buying sex from anyone, male or female, is a crime IMO. Male prostitutes might face less humiliation in society compared to women, but the basic issue is the same.

----------


## bossel

> OK, so let me see if I understood you correct this time: You would not be more worried if your daughter became a prostitute, than if she became a truck driver?


Exactly, I wouldn't want her to become either. Still can't see how this is related to the question of legalising prostitution, though.




> I think very few people in the world would consider you fit for being a father.


Very few people in the world are good parents. So, if the majority thinks that, it won't worry me.




> The report shows quite clearly that your idea that the swedish law might increase the problem of human trafficking has no basis in fact. Please, find me an organization against human traficking that supports your claims, would you?


Again imagining things? Where did I claim that the Swedish law _increases_ human trafficking? Perhaps you should at some time in your life start to read instead of fantasizing.

BTW, which report? Unlike the research paper I linked before, your link was simply a propaganda pamphlet by one of those people who proposed the law in the 1st place. Nothing like a report.





> Any criminologist will tell you comparing crimes between countrys is more or less impossible,


& this from the one who quoted Ekberg's allegation "This figure should be compared to the numbers of women who are victims of trafficking for sexual purposes in neighboring Scandinavian countries, such as Finland, Denmark, and Norway, where the purchase of sexual services is not prohibited."
You're a bit inconsistent in your argumentation.

Since she (& perhaps you) wants to compare Scandinavian countries, here the rape rates (2001/2002) per 100,000 inhabitants for Finland (8.9/10.6), Norway (not in the UN list, but from Interpol IIRC it's around 15) & Denmark (9.2/9.3). 




> the differences in social stigma of being a rape victim will affect the statistics greatly.


Yep, but that most probably wouldn't make up for a difference of more than 100%.



BTW, since you talked about dodging before:
I'm still waiting for you to provide some numbers about the alleged increase in "sexual abuse of prostitutes" & "slavery in different forms" in Australia due to legalisation of prostitution. Haven't seen any evidence that "sexual abuse of prostitutes" is legal there, either.

You also didn't provide any evidence for your claim that "many men in Germany grow up believing that having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you is a normal thing."

----------


## Sr Pasta

"Exactly, I wouldn't want her to become either."

Haha! Dodger, dodger! The question is about comparing two things, and you simply don't want to do that...

"Again imagining things? Where did I claim that the Swedish law _increases_ human trafficking? Perhaps you should at some time in your life start to read instead of fantasizing."

This is hilarious  :Laughing:  If you admit the law does not increase the problem of human trafficking, then why did you start getting into that subject at all? Answer: because your only way of defending yourself is in implying, in this case by trying to say "difficulties investigating" means "bigger problems". It does not, however, as the report shows. (Illegal firearms investigations might very well tend to be more complicated in Germany than in the US, not because firearms is a bigger problem in Germany but rather the opposite.)

"You're a bit inconsistent in your argumentation."

I wouldn't draw many conclusions from those statistics either, except for these: there's no basis for saying the Swedish law has increased the problem of human trafficking. In anything, the statistics seem to say the opposite.

The number of actual rapes leading to a conviction could very well be around 1 per cent less. That's why these statistics in particular are difficult to use. Please, find me a single criminologist who agrees with your reading of these rape statistics? 

"I'm still waiting for you to provide some numbers about the alleged increase in "sexual abuse of prostitutes" & "slavery in different forms" in Australia due to legalisation of prostitution."
Buying sex from someone is sexual abuse, that's my whole point. About human trafficking in Australia, I've only read articles in swedish. The report I cited details quite clearly some reasons human trafficking increases with legalization, though.

"You also didn't provide any evidence for your claim that "many men in Germany grow up believing that having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you is a normal thing.""

You're my key witness here  :Laughing:  BTW, I also said this is true for many swedish men as well - though most probably fewer. The second evidence is in different political climate regarding prostitution.

----------


## bossel

> Haha! Dodger, dodger!


Nice discussing with such a grown person. Just out of kindergarten?




> The question is about comparing two things, and you simply don't want to do that...


Liar or dyslexic, what are you? 
The question was "let me see if I understood you correct this time" & I answered "Exactly."




> This is hilarious


Yep, you should really take a course in reading comprehension.




> If you admit the law does not increase the problem of human trafficking


Where did I say so? You should *really* work on your reading comprehension.




> because your only way of defending yourself is in implying, in this case by trying to say "difficulties investigating" means "bigger problems".


Oh man, it's probably not only reading comprehension, there must be deeper troubles. I said quite often now that I don't imply. 




> It does not, however, as the report shows.


Which report? You didn't give us a report yet.




> Illegal firearms investigations might very well tend to be more complicated in Germany than in the US, not because firearms is a bigger problem in Germany but rather the opposite.


Don't really see your point, but either way, those who want to get a gun don't have much of a problem to get one, neither in the US nor in Germany.




> there's no basis for saying the Swedish law has increased the problem of human trafficking. In anything, the statistics seem to say the opposite.


Which statistics?




> That's why these statistics in particular are difficult to use. Please, find me a single criminologist who agrees with your reading of these rape statistics?


Which is my reading? (Just to be sure, since you imagine so much.)

BTW, Kirby R. Cundiff shows in his Independent Institute Working Paper Number 50, called _Prostitution and Sex Crimes_, that there is a correlation between the availability of sex (part of which is prostitution) & rape. 
Quote:
"The one variable model gives the following equation: 
R=12.414 – 0.1087*I 
where R is the rape rate per 100,000 people and I is the monthly income in units of prostitution encounters. The statistical significance of the constant is (t = 4.709) and of I is (t = -1.664) making this result significant beyond the 90% confidence level.
[...]
Given these problems, the analysis seems to support the hypothesis that rape rates could be lowered if prostitution was more readily available. This would be accomplished in most countries by its legalization."




> Buying sex from someone is sexual abuse, that's my whole point.


Ah, I see. Making up your own definitions. But still you didn't provide any numbers for this alleged increase & the probability of any correlation.




> You're my key witness here


Might be hard to comprehend for you, but one person is not representative. & I don't think that "having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you is a normal thing." You're perhaps fantasizing again.




> The second evidence is in different political climate regarding prostitution.


Legal prostitution is unrelated to the question whether "having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you is a normal thing." Legal prostitutes have the right to refuse any customer, if they don't want to have sex with him or her. But this is probably something you can't comprehend, either.

"Having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you" is commonly called rape (although this might be another of your very personal definitions). Rape rates are higher in Sweden than in any country with legalised prostitution. Therefore the available evidence doesn't really support your position. Any _numbers_ that do support it?

----------


## Sr Pasta

Well, seems like it's time to end this nonsense. My position is that paying someone for sex is a form of sexual abuse, and that the Swedish law is an efficient way of adressing this violence. I also believe there are positive side effects to this law, for example regarding human trafficking and rape, but this is both a) beside the main point, and b) more or less impossible to prove due to the unreliability of crime statistics. 

You seemed to argue/imply that there were important negative side effects to this law, and cited some people who took a stand against it. My conclusion from comparing their arguments with the argument of pro-law advocates was that the later could show a lot stronger basis for their views. On the issue of rape supposedly being higher in countries where prostitution is illegal, I can only conclude that this would be impossible to prove even if it were true. I advice anyone genuinely interested in the subject to call their local criminologist.

Last but not least, I'm of the opinion that a person that refuses to see the differences in human risks between prostitution and truck driving is unfit to be a parent. You may have convinced me to believe there is one more such person in Germany than I initially thought.

----------


## bossel

> Well, seems like it's time to end this nonsense.


Oh, you've got enough of tilting at windmills? Good on you.




> My position is that paying someone for sex is a form of sexual abuse, and that the Swedish law is an efficient way of adressing this violence.


The one is your very own definition & the other you haven't shown any evidence for. Even the pamphlet you presented admitted to the fact that prostitution numbers stayed stable in the recent years.




> I also believe there are positive side effects to this law


That's the problem, I suppose: You believe. I seems kind of a religious question to you.




> You seemed to argue/imply


Finally becoming a bit more cautious? That's another problem: You didn't argue with what I said, but what you _believed_ I _implied_.




> My conclusion from comparing their arguments with the argument of pro-law advocates was that the later could show a lot stronger basis for their views.


Then why didn't you show us this stronger basis? 
Eg. in your previous post you mentioned some statistics supporting your point, but you didn't show them.




> I advice anyone genuinely interested in the subject to call their local criminologist.


Who most probably won't be able to answer, since 
1) he probably doesn't have the international statistics available
2) lacks the necessary knowledge in deriving demographic statistics




> I'm of the opinion that a person that refuses to see the differences in human risks between prostitution and truck driving


Just when I think you start getting a bit more cautious, you do it again: Imagining things.
You talked about health risks as a reason for forbidding jobs. That's when I gave a US list of jobs with the highest health risks, truck driver being number one. Which led me to another question you didn't answer: "You want to forbid them all?"




> is unfit to be a parent.


I would be disappointed if you thought otherwise. Getting that from someone with such an SBA as you show, is quite an honour. Thanks.

You know, discussing with people like you reminds me of my Libertarian core. Always convinces me that I shouldn't become more of a statist. Too many sheep around already.

----------


## lolife

Maybe it's time to agree that we disagree, m'kay?

 :Smiling:

----------


## Jonathan

> This document gives a good overview of the law and the research done about it, up until 2003:
> http://action.web.ca/home/catw/attach/Ekberg.pdf


I'm sorry, but I've found that document is inaccurate (or LIES ...) in many ways and I think is worthwile to report that.
Unfortunately I've no time to translate from italian to english language the analysis I've done of the whole chapter "gNUMBER OF WOMEN IN PROSTITUTION IN SWEDENh, on my site http://jonathanx.altervista.org/estero/duello10.html
You can try using Altavista Translation or such on that page.

In brief, I've found that in fact the figures Ekberg reports in her writing show strong hints that the general Swedish prostitution market HAS GROWN after sexual buying criminalization.
Ekberg cites figures from Danisk street prostitution market in a fully wrong way: the real number of street prostitutes in "liberal" Danmark is estimated to be today about equal to street prostitutes in Sweden (500-700 prostitutes)!
Certainly not the 5500-7800 value Ekberg wrongly says.
It's very unsuitable to read such lies in a document of a top-level swedish government representative.

Moreover, Ekberg says the number of prostitute's ads on the web in Sweden is low and so suggests a total low number of prostitutes in Sweden: it's not.
If you compare the "web ads/total estimate of prostitutes" ratio for other countries we have data about, Italy for example, you find that the projected figure for Swedish prostitution market could be about ... 5000 prostitutes, the same level of today Danish market and the DOUBLE of the number in Sweden before the repressive law came in force, in 1999!

There were other things to talk about, for example the use Swedish government is doing of arrests made for trafficking, sold off as they were arrest fo "buying sexual services".

The swedish law has been a substantial failure, as the norwegian report has clearly shown.
It has not been so far cancelled just for "feminist" ideological reasons.

----------

