Skip to main content

View Diary: Are the Laws Against Prostitution Doing Anyone Any Good? (210 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I have a job, I don't "exist" for it. People (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    epcraig, Darmok, JesseCW

    pay me to do what they can't or won't do themselves. That's pretty much true for most jobs.

    Now, I fix computers. Then, well, I think the statute of limitations has expired...but in neither case did I "exist" for my job.

    "You can please all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but we found a way to piss everybody off!" -Bipartisanship 2009

    by Jacques on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 12:22:34 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  you are being disingenous. (3+ / 0-)

      sexwork is not fixing computers, or washing cars.

      it is not even like massage therapy, which has many of the same issues of attachment and coercion.  

      sexworkers sell something that is literally unsellable in any other context and pretending that human connection is equal to an ipod purchase is wilful deception.  

      http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/bth/toc.html

      by shoeboy on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 12:31:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "...sell something that is... (8+ / 0-)

        literally unsellable..." is a ludicrous contention and a terrible sentence. It's just sex. Meat rubbing against other meat. Some "human connections" are more than that and some are less. It's as much a commodity as anything else there is a societal demand for. Grow up.

        •  Would you have sex with your own daughter for (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          martydd, MnplsLiberal, LegendClick

          money?  Would you recommend her to your friends as a good prostitute?

          •  You're creeping me out with... (8+ / 0-)

            ...this incest fantasy of yours.

            •  Posing the question (2+ / 1-)
              Recommended by:
              MnplsLiberal, LegendClick
              Hidden by:
              Darmok

              is how we expose how a person REALLY feel about it.

              You can't answer truthfully now, can you?

              •  Yes, I certainly could answer the question.... (4+ / 0-)

                ...but indulging you on this rather slimy train of thought would make me feel dirty.

                •  Alright. I'll play. (6+ / 0-)

                  If my daughter was a whore I would expect her to be good enough at it (both in the performance aspect and having the business sense) to not have to rely on her daddy for referrals. I'd assume that she would be successful in her endeavors if she were the smart, well-informed, emotionally stable human being I raised her to be. No, I would not fuck her. Ya don't shit where you eat. I would not add that extra layer onto our existing filial relationship and I doubt she'd be interested in such a thing. Your very ugly "what ifs" and rhetorical insistence lead me to believe that you could benefit greatly from seeing a therapist or some other type of "professional".  

                  •  If your daughter fixed computers (0+ / 0-)

                    and you needed a computer fixed, would you refuse to hire her because you did not want to "..add that extra layer onto our existing filial relationship".

                    If you had a friend who needed a computer fixed, would you refuse to tell him/her about your daughter because you did not want her to depend on referrals from daddy also?

                    Also, the reference to "shit where you eat", do you consider sex as dirty the same as "shit"?

                    The answers to these questions will tell whether you believe prostitution is the same as any other profession.

                    •  One more thing, (0+ / 0-)

                      about "shit where you eat"

                      I always eat my lunch at my desk where I work. Perhaps because I don't consider my job the same as taking a "shit".

                      Think about it. You will begin to see why the arguments to legalize prostitution fall apart.

                    •  Wrong (5+ / 1-)

                      The question posed is disingenuous in the extreme.  When you oppose prostitution, you are telling other people what they can and can't do with their bodies.  You dress it up as care for their well-being, but you're no better than anti-choice folks who claim that they are only looking out for the emotional welfare of the mother and the physical welfare of her embryo.

                      So, the question has about as much validity as the "same-sex relationships lead to sex with pets" argument.

                    •  not all professions are the same, period. (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Skaje, st minutia, drawingporno

                      restaurant owner, college professor, stylist, Police officer, accountant, stand-up comedian, janitor, professional wrestler, yakuza, pick-up seminar teacher, writer, IT technician --

                      these are all jobs of people I have known in my life the last few years. Other than the yak, all of them are legal. They are all jobs. I guarantee you that their parents all have very different feelings about their childrens' jobs, and very different reactions to the "would you ask your son/daughter to do their job for you?" question. Hell, there are parents of kids with the same job that have completely different opinions of it, that doesn't say anything about the worth of the profession itself.

                      Your question, maybe in your head, somehow says something about the person, but it makes no sense. People being creeped out by incest and people not being creeped out by prostitution are not the same thing. I am baffled that you do not see that.

                    •  I would never do any business with my offspring. (0+ / 0-)

                      whoring, computer repair (why is that such a favorite around here?), insurance agent, circus performer, dog breeder, high priestess....whatever my kids do is their "thing". I don't engage in business interactions with friends either (except my pot dealer). I streamline my relationships to one single connection rather than give us another unnecessary bone of contention. Sorry, giving my age away. "You don't shit where you eat" is an old phrase that has nothing to do with either eating or defecating. It was commonly used to imply things like not sleeping with your secretary on the job. It's about structure and compartmentalization so as not to confuse unrelated activities in the same physical space.  

                      •  Interesting you say this.. (0+ / 0-)

                        "not sleeping with your secretary on the job..."

                        Why would you not sleep with your secretary on the job if you are paying her extra for that and prostitution is perfectly OK?

                        Would you enter in a transaction to buy girl scout cookies your secretary was peddling, or allow her to pick up your dry cleaning for a fee?  Would you consider these transactions the same as having sex with her for money?

                        •  Still asking ridiculous questions? (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          sberel, Predictor

                          You obviously think you're clever with linking the legality of prostitution to whether someone would sleep with their offspring or employees in exchange for cash.  But there is no logical connection, so the question is ridiculous.

                        •  Uh, now you're just being obtuse. (0+ / 0-)

                          There was never any suggestion that the secretary was being paid extra for sex and as foreign as the concept may be to you, the "boss" and the secretary might have developed a romantic relationship that could hamper, obstruct and derail the business. "sleeping with" is not a euphemism for "paying for" to folks not suffering from some kind of sexual-psychological disconnect. I would buy Girl Scout cookies from her daughter and not expect my secretary to pick up my dry-cleaning unless that kind of errand was specifically covered by her employment contract. Really, your inability to stick to a purely logical debate is worrisome.

              •  Thanks for the retaliatory HR below (4+ / 0-)

                But, since you're relatively new around here, you should know it's against site rules.

          •  Rick Santorum, is that you? NT (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Darmok

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (170)
  • Community (76)
  • Baltimore (73)
  • Bernie Sanders (52)
  • Freddie Gray (42)
  • Civil Rights (41)
  • Elections (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (31)
  • Culture (29)
  • Racism (26)
  • Law (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Education (22)
  • Economy (22)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Media (20)
  • Politics (19)
  • 2016 (19)
  • Environment (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site