The Oldest Profession In The World: Yea Or Nay

[Dan From Smithville]

I wasn't born on that banana boat yesterday.

Sometimes I like to throw in an obscure reference here and there to see if it is recognized. It is sort of my only little version of an Easter egg.

I have gathered that you are a fellow font of obscure knowledge far from boats full of bananas.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Explain to yourself why it would be unacceptable to you that your wife, daughter, husband, or son work as a prostitute, and you will then understand why prostitution is wrong, and should be illegal.

Appeal to emotion fallacy is not an argument.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

And boy do we collect cultural garbage... like the way our entire work ethic, and much of our infrastructure, revolves around farmers' work hours, even though 97% of us have no contact with agriculture now.

I agree. Once, years ago, I was watching an old Western--love those movies--and it occurred to me how little I knew about the actual history of Billy the Kid. So I set out to rid myself of Hollywood history and replace it with scholarly work. I found out a lot including the fact that many of the Hollywood stories were not so far from the historical facts as I would have guessed. Sure, it was dressed up and artistic liberties were taken, but there was much of the actual story that was adhered to. Not everything is even that true to reality though. We do a lot of things just because that is how it is done.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Do you see a difference between your wife doing Brazilian waxes for a living, and having sex with strangers for a living? Because I'm guessing that if you are being honest, you will see a HUGE difference. The one you could probably accept, and the other I very much doubt you would. Yet you think it's OK for women that you don't know or care about to do it, right?

If the difference is so huge and obvious, perhaps you'd be so good as to explain it to those of us who can only see the difference as a matter of degree, not type?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I agree. Once, years ago, I was watching an old Western--love those movies--and it occurred to me how little I knew about the actual history of Billy the Kid. So I set out to rid myself of Hollywood history and replace it with scholarly work. I found out a lot including the fact that many of the Hollywood stories were not so far from the historical facts as I would have guessed. Sure, it was dressed up and artistic liberties were taken, but there was much of the actual story that was adhered to. Not everything is even that true to reality though. We do a lot of things just because that is how it is done.

I'm a historical reenactor and armchair historian. Preaching to the choir, friend

 

[Dan From Smithville]

And boy do we collect cultural garbage... like the way our entire work ethic, and much of our infrastructure, revolves around farmers' work hours, even though 97% of us have no contact with agriculture now.

That time change in the Spring really leaves me groggy for days to follow. I could do with just leaving it there.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Why is it that so many are willing to deride and impugn a straight up, honest prostitute, while happily allowing gold diggers to ascend to the upper echelons of society, on the arms of Presidents, even.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sometimes I like to throw in an obscure reference here and there to see if it is recognized. It is sort of my only little version of an Easter egg.

I have gathered that you are a fellow font of obscure knowledge far from boats full of bananas.

Whuh....?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Whuh....?

Eh. I was going for something. I do not recall what now.

 

[Scott C.]

.

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

​

If we lived in a world where consensual sex outside of marriage or adultery were illegal, it would make sense for prsotitution to be illegal. But given the generally loose sexual morals of our society today, and given every type of sexual activity that is legal, it seems inconsistent for prostitution to be illegal. For example, it's not a crime for a man driving a car, who sees a sexually desirable woman on the corner, to stop and ask her if she wants sex. It's not illegal for the woman to voluntarily get in the car and go somewhere to have sex. If this is all consensual and no money changes hands, it's completely legal.Consensual sex among adults is seen as a personal and completely legal choice. Why then, is such consensual behavior illegal if someone is paid for the "favor" or for the "service"? One person is selling a service which service is not in and of itself, independent of compensation, illegal. On the contrary consider illegal drugs. It's illegal for me to take LSD. If someone gives it to me for free and I use it, we both committed a crime. So if someone sells it to me, that's also a crime. But in the case of prostitution, someone is selling a service which is not illegal to participate in for free. So where is the crime?

While it sounds like I'm defending prostitution, I really am not. I find it to be immoral. But I also find it immoral for a man and woman, who have never met before, to hook up for consensual sex for free. But since society accepts this behavior, why prohibit prostitution? This assumes the prostitute has chosen this career of his/her own free will, is free to quit, is an adult, and is not otherwise abused.

Can someone point to any other behavior between inviduals, and services or favors, or any human relationships, which are perfectly legal when done for free, but illegal when there is compensation?

 

[PureX]

I wouldn't want her to do either for a living. Because she wouldn't want to.

Would it bother me if she took money to have sex with someone? No. But then, I don't assume monogamy.

Do you understand that you're in an extreme minority on this? That you are suggesting that laws be written to reflect your very unorthodox views?

 

[PureX]

Your argument was to justify an anti- stance because you feel prostitution is humiliating, not because of social necessity (and there are many who would, in fact, argue that prostitution does, in fact, serve a socially necessary function, but that's a different discussion)I already posted the clear caveat that I'm in favour of legal, protected, fully consensual prostitution only.I didn't say prostitutes don't feel humiliated, I made the argument that nothing they do is inherently humiliating. Subtle but important difference.

It is humiliating precisely because it is not a necessary humanitarian service. And those who think it is are childish, selfish fools. As proven by the many billions of human beings that manage to go through life without having to pay anyone else to pleasure them sexually.

I myself have done and had done a number of things across my varied history that I don't talk about with people who care about me, for various reasons, including that I would feel humiliated discussing them. None of the activities I'm referring to are immoral, or illegal, even.

Sometimes the law has to be used to protect us from ourselves. Not just from each other. Because we humans can become so jaded and hopeless and abused that we think it's a normal, and acceptable condition of life. Thus creating a situation where such people are incapable of protecting themselves. When this happens, it should not make it acceptable for the rest of us to use/abuse them for our own pleasure just because we can, and because we are so weak, childish, and selfish that we'd want to.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

To a great extent prostitution has been superceded by "social media hook ups" by many younger people, and with no money involved.
it is a mistake to think sex is a one way street, as many women are looking for the pleasures of uncommitted sex as are men. Prostitution in all its forms are probably here to stay and serves a section of the community with out the social skills to hook up.

It is however inextricably tied up with the criminal world in most countries, and is largely a degrading involuntary profession. Often one of slavery.

 

[PureX]

Appeal to emotion fallacy is not an argument.

No, but it's a reality. Because our emotions are a very real part of us.

If the difference is so huge and obvious, perhaps you'd be so good as to explain it to those of us who can only see the difference as a matter of degree, not type?

Why do you perceive any difference at all, if, as you assert, there is no difference? I agree that people accept money for other humiliating kinds of services. But instead of using that fact to excuse it, I would say that those other situations ought to be treated like prostitution, and be banned.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm for it, though it's not the oldest profession (that belongs to the Shaman)

 

[Polymath257]

Do you understand that you're in an extreme minority on this? That you are suggesting that laws be written to reflect your very unorthodox views?

I expect laws to be written to allow appropriate liberties without undo government intervention. Whether money changes hands for sex doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

For most people, the issue is having sex with someone else. People like to possess the sexuality of their spouses.

Would it be degrading to pay someone to play tennis with you? Why or why not? And what is the difference between that and paying someone to have sex with you?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Why do you perceive any difference at all, if, as you assert, there is no difference? I agree that people accept money for other humiliating kinds of services. But instead of using that fact to excuse it, I would say that those other situations ought to be treated like prostitution, and be banned.

How much of your sentiment has to do with just STD's ? Suppose there were no STD's so that sex actually did not pose a health risk beyond pregnancy. Would you still feel as strongly?

It is humiliating precisely because it is not a necessary humanitarian service.

That is an interesting point. True its not a necessary service. It should not be something that people have to do to pay the rent, but if you legalize it then some people will have to or will feel it is one of their last options. A judge could potentially order someone in debt to work as a sex worker. That's kind of scary.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

It is humiliating precisely because it is not a necessary humanitarian service. And those who think it is are childish, selfish fools. As proven by the many billions of human beings that manage to go through life without having to pay anyone else to pleasure them sexually.

Billions of humans go through life without all sorts of things, like, say, insulin. That doesn't mean it's not a necessity for some. Further, there's billions of people who go through life receiving services they DON'T need, like, say, house cleaning, or instagram management, but that's not an argument against those services, either.

Sometimes the law has to be used to protect us from ourselves. Not just from each other. Because we humans can become so jaded and hopeless and abused that we think it's a normal, and acceptable condition of life. Thus creating a situation where such people are incapable of protecting themselves. When this happens, it should not make it acceptable for the rest of us to use/abuse them for our own pleasure just because we can, and because we are so weak, childish, and selfish that we'd want to.

You still haven't provided any reason to think such a law is either necessary or justified.

I appreciate that you feel strongly about this, but try for a moment to appreciate that that is what you are doing, feeling, not rationally analyzing. You and I both condemn others for making the mistake you are making now. I hope that I have the self awareness to be aware of it when it's pointed out to me when I do it, and I hope you can be aware of it when I respectfully and with nothing but good will point it out to you when you are doing it.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

How much of your sentiment has to do with just STD's ? Suppose there were no STD's so that sex actually did not pose a health risk beyond pregnancy. Would you still feel as strongly?

If STDs were the actual concern in the argument, it would be about criminalising numbers of sexual partners or unprotected sex, rather than prostitution. It isn't. It's safe to say STDs is pure ad hoc justification of pre-existing stance.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I wouldn't want her to do either for a living. Because she wouldn't want to.

Would it bother me if she took money to have sex with someone? No. But then, I don't assume monogamy.

I thought about this too. I have told my daughter since before she could talk that all I want for her is to be happy, healthy, and safe. If being a prostitute makes her happy, assuming she takes steps to be stay healthy and safe, I like to think I would support her. Would I like it? Probably not. But there's plenty of things I don't like people doing. There's a bunch of things I wouldn't like my daughter doing especially, many of which @PureX would probably be appalled by my dislike of. I'm grown up enough to realise that my personal distaste for someone else's choices is a really bad basis for legislation or proscription.