• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Oldest Profession In The World: Yea Or Nay

Harmless Prostituution. I'm

  • For it

    Votes: 16 64.0%
  • Against it

    Votes: 6 24.0%
  • Having other thoughts

    Votes: 3 12.0%

  • Total voters
    25

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Well, yeah, s/he does, since that is the DEFINITION of 'prostitute.'

From Mirriam-Webster:

a : a woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse especially for money : whore
b : a male who engages in sexual and especially homosexual practices for money

IN other words, if someone is married to a professional who does it for money, s/he is married to a prostitute. If s/he is married to someone who no longer does it for money, or who does it for free, s/he is not married to a prostitute.



the clients always choose. The prostitutes seldom do. I certainly don't know any young person who puts "prostitute" in his/her list of 'what I want to be when I grow up." Do you?

And the OP doesn't have any conditions. All it does is beg the question of whether prostitution is ever harmless. I counter claimed...no. AND I provided evidence/argument for my claim. I haven't seen anybody show prostitution can be 'harmless."
The definition you offer for a women leaves the possibility that it is done without the need that money change hands when it qualifies it as 'especially for money', meaning it does not have to be done for money. The alternative word that is offered would also apply.

The OP does offer conditions and I do not see it begging the question. Under those conditions, it is a personal choice. I agree with personal choice even if I do not agree with the specific choice and would not make that choice myself. Others are free to choose as they see fit or are you suggesting that we all be made to accept the choices of others. This is not about a choice of which client to accept or reject. You have jumped further down the road on that one.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
There are solvable problems with prostitution.
And since it won't go away, I'd rather have it legal
so the problems can be addressed. It beats jailing
those who want it.
As for crapping in subways, there should be lavatories
where it can be done legally & safely...unless you oppose
crapping too. Well, it is gross.
I say criminalize crapping and only criminals will do it. Since they will be in prisons, we do not even have to witness it or think about it. Think of all the pollution, sewage and water problems this will solve. I can see it now. Hordes of FBI agents smashing toilets with sledge hammers for photo ops.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I am concerned it will either do nothing better than marriage or make things worse. To me if you are going to make the sex trade public and legal, then its only worthwhile to do so if it helps to decrease STD's (more than marriage does) and/or helps to decrease the trade in sex-victims (more than marriage does). The sex trade clearly doesn't provide everything that a marriage does, so show that there is a benefit to risking the way things work now. I have concerns.
Actually, the issue isn't the "sex trade" as such, but the whether or not the harmless act of exchanging sexual services for money is acceptable. And please note that for the purposes of this thread the prostitution is harmless.

.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
.

Religious and safety considerations aside, what are your thoughts about a woman or man having sex for money? That is, having sex for money that would in no way adversely affect the person.

(Some of the words here have been put in bold because some respondents are missing these key qualifications)



View attachment 27544

When a man pays for a woman's dinner/drink, it's no secret that he's hoping she appreciates the act and reciprocates with sex. This is simply socially and legally accepted prostitution. Marriage is also prostitution, since men typically buy expensive gifts for their wives that lead to the woman giving the man sex in return.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Actually, the issue isn't the "sex trade" as such, but the whether or not the harmless act of exchanging sexual services for money is acceptable. And please note that for the purposes of this thread the prostitution is harmless.

.
It seems like a pretty straight forward question. Can two adults enter into a contract for service in exchange for cash where the service happens to be sexual relations? My previous answer stands and is one of those instances where my views correspond to a libertarian position.

How many times have wives used the offer of sex to gain something they want from a marriage. Certainly, offering sex for a new kitchen is not an offer made out of love or to produce children in in some senses is worse than a simple business transaction.

If you had expanded your question to cover religious views or public health, I might have to change my answer or modify it. Certainly, with regards to public health, some regulation would need to be applied. But there is no regulation on appliance repairmen, plumbers, electricians or sales people and you could get communicable diseases from interactions with them too. Not necessarily STD's, but I do not think the functional classification of the disease would matter much.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
I say criminalize crapping and only criminals will do it. Since they will be in prisons, we do not even have to witness it or think about it. Think of all the pollution, sewage and water problems this will solve. I can see it now. Hordes of FBI agents smashing toilets with sledge hammers for photo ops.
Upon further thought, I must retract my support here. Prohibition of this would only lead to organized crapping running rampant, toilet mills and the illegal importation of toilets from across the border. In a place like Chicago or New York, entire families could gain power over gangs of crapeteers demanding rolls of protection paper from innocent citizens. My dreams of a cleaner society are circling the bowl.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Those things aren't comparable because the
activity isn't voluntary for the injured party.
Prostitution involves consenting adults.

Not so much, no. a huge percentage of the prostitutes around did not voluntarily get into the life, and cannot leave it. As I wrote earlier, I know NO woman (or man) who put 'prostitute" on the list of things s/he wants to be when s/he grows up.

This is a personal view, & not shared by many who do it legally.

You have spoken to all the 'sex workers" who 'do it legally, have you? Did THEY grow up thinking that "prostitute" was a profession they aimed for?

Btw, I believe that eating raw or undercooked meat is disgusting
& dangerous. But I wouldn't make it illegal for those who feel
otherwise, & take reasonable precautions. Tolerance when practical.

Eating raw or undercooked meat is generally dangerous only to the one eating it. Sashimi is generally considered safe, actually. Prostitution is dangerous to the provider, the consumer...and everybody either one encounters sexually after that, especially the unknowing ones who trust that their sexual partners have not been dipping in that particular pool, so have no reason to take extra precautions...or to tell their prospective partner to take a hike.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
The definition you offer for a women leaves the possibility that it is done without the need that money change hands when it qualifies it as 'especially for money', meaning it does not have to be done for money. The alternative word that is offered would also apply.

The OP does offer conditions and I do not see it begging the question. Under those conditions, it is a personal choice. I agree with personal choice even if I do not agree with the specific choice and would not make that choice myself. Others are free to choose as they see fit or are you suggesting that we all be made to accept the choices of others. This is not about a choice of which client to accept or reject. You have jumped further down the road on that one.

Y'know, I just realized that the OP was written by the only person in this forum that I have on my 'ignore' list, so I honestly don't know WHAT it says. However, I can't think of any conditions that would make prostitution not 'harmless.' For one thing, I really do not think that prostitution, in 2019, is ever consensual or that the prostitutes themselves are all that willing. At least, not on any level under 'millionaire's mistress' or "king's courtesan." The ones 'on the street," or in brothels...legal or illegal...didn't set out to be prostitutes, probably would do something else if they physically could, and probably physically can't because of threats to their lives. Human trafficking..you know, the modern term for 'slavery,' is USUALLY about prostitution...and what do you think those children think of things?

...and do you think that regulating prostitution in the USA will stop human trafficking?

Not even possible. As well, regulation of prostitution would involve health and drug checks...and how many prostitutes would PASS those?

And what would they do when they don't, if their pimps...or their circumstances, leave them little other choice?

Personally, I think that HIRING prostitutes should be made a felony with real jail time, but BEING a prostitute should result in mandatory retraining, half way houses and real help to get out of the life. And their pimps/owners should be shot.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Actually, the issue isn't the "sex trade" as such, but the whether or not the harmless act of exchanging sexual services for money is acceptable. And please note that for the purposes of this thread the prostitution is harmless.
Harmless prostitution is harmless, but is that the oldest profession in the world?
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
I watched a documentary a long time ago about what porn stars go through. Now, i know there not prostitutes, but, they sorta are, kinda.

They absolutely are. The only difference between porn stars and street prostitutes is the camera and a script.

They are still providing sex for money.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Harmless prostitution is harmless, but is that the oldest profession in the world?

That's circular. Of course harmless prostitution is harmless. However, that's begging a rather large question. First establish that there IS such a thing as 'harmless' prostitution. Because from where I sit and view stuff, there ain't no such critter.

As for whether it is the 'oldest profession in the world,' I'd say that...biblically at least, the oldest profession would have been zookeeper, or apple orchardist.

If we go for something not biblical, the oldest profession in the world would probably be...weapons and tool maker. After all, those hunter gatherer folks had to hunt and gather using tools of some sort. Humans really aren't that good at killing things bare handed, as a rule.

Perhaps....knitting? the gatherers needed to gather their stuff in something, after all. Weaving? I'd like to think that it's in the running.
Prostitution, however, has got to be up there. If not at the top, certainly close to it. Any patriarchal society that thinks of women as 'lesser,' (and that's most of 'em) is going to have prostitution in the mix.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
There are many jobs where you get paid because they are degrading enough or unpleasant enough you wouldn't do them unless you get paid. Somehow, cleaning bathrooms isn't seen as degrading. Why not?
Because it's a reasonable and necessary public service.
 
It's not for everyone.
Who are we to say what 2 consenting adults cannot do?

Thats a good point. But, youve heard the saying "friends with benefits"? Well, thats like free sex, without the commitment.

The reason i bring that up is because im concerned that if perse prostitution became legal, and tests wer done after each client, how would funding happen for these tests? I dont think it be right to tax the working citizens for it.

It should be funded ONLY by the payer of the prostitute. But if they do tests after every client, thats gonna get expensive.

And if they dont do tests after each client, will disease spread more?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Not so much, no. a huge percentage of the prostitutes around did not voluntarily get into the life, and cannot leave it. As I wrote earlier, I know NO woman (or man) who put 'prostitute" on the list of things s/he wants to be when s/he grows up.



You have spoken to all the 'sex workers" who 'do it legally, have you? Did THEY grow up thinking that "prostitute" was a profession they aimed for?



Eating raw or undercooked meat is generally dangerous only to the one eating it. Sashimi is generally considered safe, actually. Prostitution is dangerous to the provider, the consumer...and everybody either one encounters sexually after that, especially the unknowing ones who trust that their sexual partners have not been dipping in that particular pool, so have no reason to take extra precautions...or to tell their prospective partner to take a hike.
This is the point where we agree to disagree.
And I'll admit that libertarian thought disgusts & frightens normal people.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Thats a good point. But, youve heard the saying "friends with benefits"? Well, thats like free sex, without the commitment.

The reason i bring that up is because im concerned that if perse prostitution became legal, and tests wer done after each client, how would funding happen for these tests? I dont think it be right to tax the working citizens for it.

It should be funded ONLY by the payer of the prostitute. But if they do tests after every client, thats gonna get expensive.

And if they dont do tests after each client, will disease spread more?
Consider real estate brokerage....
The broker is the one licensed & tested.
The broker pays for this, not the clients they charge for their services.
I'm sure that you & I could design a regulatory system to reasonably ensure health, profit & happy endings.
With your cute & innocent avatar, who could object?
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
You know, sometimes a man (or a woman) finds it difficult to attract a partner. Maybe they're hopelessly shy, or perhaps quite unattractive. Maybe they've also lost a spouse and are trying to find some much-needed solace.

On the other hand, there are people who are really in a spot for money, and are having a really, really hard time -- you know, no family to fall back on, perhaps lacking some necessary skills, perhaps just out on the street for whatever reasons, their own or not.

What on earth can possibly be wrong with two people finding a way to satisfy each other's needs?

Disclaimer, at 17, I was on the street having been released from the Children's Aid, and never having been adopted. So, no decent education, no family to fall back on, no clear understanding of my way forward...guess what I did for a couple of years...
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Not so much, no. a huge percentage of the prostitutes around did not voluntarily get into the life, and cannot leave it. As I wrote earlier, I know NO woman (or man) who put 'prostitute" on the list of things s/he wants to be when s/he grows up.
Actually, there was journalism professor at Ryerson University in Toronto a bunch of years ago who cheerfully admitted to prostituting himself on the side. Was quite proud of it, actually. I won't mention his name here, but you can easily find it on Google.
 
Top