Ever paid for sex?

Mr Monster wrote:

Very interesting (and my head hurts!) so here's something to think on -

As with some drugs, how much of the "danger" or seediness associated with sex work is purely due to its illegality? The circular argument goes - we don't want people doing this because it's wrong, so we'll ban it. It's banned, so we don't want people doing it....etc etc.

Lots, in my opinion. We should have learnt by now about human nature, humans will do stuff, what ever the stuff is they'll do it. The vast majority of people are, on some level idiots. They know the dangers of things but still do them. Make that stuff as safe as you can, be it sex, drugs or loud music.

WandA wrote:

  The vast majority of people are, on some level idiots. 

Holy cow, somebody else gets it! 

WandA wrote:

Tigerlilies wrote:

This Morning had a former sex worker, an NHS specialist and...some journo, discuss the matter recently. Guess which one was talking of their arse? She dragged in morality and compared the consensual business agreement between two or more people to murder. LOGIC FAIL.

Another problem with the discussion of prostitution is that it is so often written by hacks with no idea what they're talking about and only consult a 'raunch culture' book and a 'womens studies' professor.

Sexualisation of children tends to be more of a gendered issue as well and there's iffy class stuff too. So common is the cry 'what are we teaching our daughters' but it's rarely a hysteria that focuses on the boys.

And Wanda, I know you're as dorky as me for a proper report instead of a sodding Panorama program so check out this shizzle http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/equal/reports-10/eor10-02.htm 

(Insert really bad joke about really good sex and the similarities to being dead)

I can understand why you disliked the comparison to violence and sex because twits like that can abuse any link. The only link I'm happy to apply is that it is 'adult', as in only adults are really capable of the consequences of it, vague, I know but meh!

Damn you, you stimulating little miss! (How much have I undermined my points with that comment?)

You have a knack of provoking great debate that spirals into many related points, such as the gender and class issues. I shall check out that shizzle, if not during revision *gulp*.

Mwah xx

Mr Monster wrote:

WandA wrote:

  The vast majority of people are, on some level idiots. 

Holy cow, somebody else gets it! 

I should add that the vast majority of people who recognise that fact are also super intelligent.

WandA wrote:

Mr Monster wrote:

WandA wrote:

  The vast majority of people are, on some level idiots. 

Holy cow, somebody else gets it! 

I should add that the vast majority of people who recognise that fact are also super intelligent.

I can't remember who it was who introduced the dictum: 'just remember everyone is essentially 12 and you'll be fine'

WandA wrote:

I should add that the vast majority of people who recognise that fact are also super intelligent.

Well, I knew that. Duh! 

(Would now be a good time to declare my undying love for WandA? Nah, I'll wait...)

Tigerlilies wrote:

I can't remember who it was who introduced the dictum: 'just remember everyone is essentially 12 and you'll be fine'

I object - I've never been twelve in my life!! I was born middle aged...

Tigerlilies wrote:

Mwah xx

Only WandA (and only just at a guess) could get away with that reply to "little miss"

In fact, that's too nearly condescending (but very much in jest) comments he's made in one day - spot the other!

Adx

I love both of you! Both of you are so refreshing!

Mr Monster wrote:

Tigerlilies wrote:

I can't remember who it was who introduced the dictum: 'just remember everyone is essentially 12 and you'll be fine'

I object - I've never been twelve in my life!! I was born middle aged...

Similar here.

I suspect I was only born premature so I can say at some point in my life I was young...

Inara14 wrote:

I think legalisation would make conditions better. Not necessarilly mean people wouldnt be trafficked or that there would be less coercion. Just more safety.

I should really be writing me essay ....not procrastinating reading this!

there is also the thought that if people are being miss treated, if what they are doing is legal they are more likley to come forward to authorities to report those who are trafficking. As it is there could be a reluctace as who would voluntarily admit their illegal activities!

and although it is not really relevant here you can derrogate ( legal term for give up) most of your rights under the human rights act 1998 ( exception is life) so you can effetivley give up bodily integrity and right to personal liberty.  Obviously it dosent count in trafficking situations.

sweetlove666 wrote:

Inara14 wrote:

I think legalisation would make conditions better. Not necessarilly mean people wouldnt be trafficked or that there would be less coercion. Just more safety.

I should really be writing me essay ....not procrastinating reading this!

there is also the thought that if people are being miss treated, if what they are doing is legal they are more likley to come forward to authorities to report those who are trafficking. As it is there could be a reluctace as who would voluntarily admit their illegal activities!

and although it is not really relevant here you can derrogate ( legal term for give up) most of your rights under the human rights act 1998 ( exception is life) so you can effetivley give up bodily integrity and right to personal liberty.  Obviously it dosent count in trafficking situations.

Is that not only to states and such, not individuals?

I know the UK doesn't allow for consent to injury, I think a gay BDSM bloke got done by the Manchester Police force for it.

WandA wrote:

sweetlove666 wrote:

Inara14 wrote:

I think legalisation would make conditions better. Not necessarilly mean people wouldnt be trafficked or that there would be less coercion. Just more safety.

I should really be writing me essay ....not procrastinating reading this!

there is also the thought that if people are being miss treated, if what they are doing is legal they are more likley to come forward to authorities to report those who are trafficking. As it is there could be a reluctace as who would voluntarily admit their illegal activities!

and although it is not really relevant here you can derrogate ( legal term for give up) most of your rights under the human rights act 1998 ( exception is life) so you can effetivley give up bodily integrity and right to personal liberty.  Obviously it dosent count in trafficking situations.

Is that not only to states and such, not individuals?

I know the UK doesn't allow for consent to injury, I think a gay BDSM bloke got done by the Manchester Police force for it.

It amuses me that they allow things such as boxing still even though they dont allow consent to other injury (usually sexual). Double standards are frustrating...

But it wouldnt be the government without double standards would it.... if we had a legal system with no contradictions or double standards we would have ascended to a higher level of being.

I think with boxing there is (theoretically) a chance that you would not get injured at all - and there are lots of safeguards etc around it. But it all comes back to perceptions - boxing is perceived as a sport (and a spectator one at that) whilst sex is still perceived as a private act, and BDSM is often seen as a perversion.... so people want to legislate against it. Even when two grown men smacking each other in the face with fists will do a lot more damage than a nice leather flogger....

 I would never pay for sex- there are too many creepy people out there. 

yep i do all the time    its called BEING MARRIED     [JOKE] LOL

WandA wrote:

Is that not only to states and such, not individuals?

I know the UK doesn't allow for consent to injury, I think a gay BDSM bloke got done by the Manchester Police force for it.

th case you are refering to is R v Brown. basically its cause the consentual S&M acts were between blokes.  in this country two hetro people can brand each other and ignite lighter fluid on the skin but its illegal for homosexual people to do it  we covered the case in a lecture and i was the only one who saw a problem with the blatent homophobia, so its gonna stay like that  unfortunatley.

 i'm not sure on the derrogation. but its still a point that human rights arn't affected by consentual prostitutuion.

I'm a bisexual; if I cant get it for free, I buy it!

Sorry for the earlier flippancy.

TBH, I was once so lonely that I did go to see a prostitute but couldn't go thro' with it (realised that causal sex wasn't what I actually needed).

 I used to live in Middlesbrough and there was a lot of prostitution, even an informal red light district.

After coming out of one of the clubs I have been approached by the same woman on at least 3 different occasions asking if I was "looking for business". Sounds fine until you know that she was 4'5" ish and had a smokers voice.

*shudder*

Jamba wrote:

 I used to live in Middlesbrough and there was a lot of prostitution, even an informal red light district.

After coming out of one of the clubs I have been approached by the same woman on at least 3 different occasions asking if I was "looking for business". Sounds fine until you know that she was 4'5" ish and had a smokers voice.

*shudder*

I remember in Hamburg, they're like bloody sheperds! They form lines and herd you and try to speak if you get too close.