Legalizing Prostitution

The question is relevent because before discussing prostitution, a person has to consider what is being prostituted. Who understands the question of the female body enough to explain it to their fourteen year old daughter?

I once initiated a thread on a secular interfaith site called "God the Pornographer." At that time sexting was beginning to become an issue. Young girls were taking nude or partially nude photos of themselves and sending them to their boyfriends.

No one knew what to say to a young girl about sex or the body other than the usual clichés so the practice became more fashionable.

People decided that the kids have to be arrested for spreading pornography. By definition it means that a young girl's body is pornographic. If you believe in God it means then that God a pornographer for creating the body as it is.

I've never experienced such nasty attacks from secular Interfaith as with this observation. Rather than try to contemplate the issue as a whole, the whole thread sunk into attacks about child abuse for not protecting children. The question of our ignorance in matters of sex was completely ignored.

It was obvious then that since parents had no idea what to say to a young girl, that it must be concluded that their body is pornographic and sexting must become a legal issue. Parents don't know so cannot teach their young so decide that their bodies are pornographic. OK

It became clear that secularism has no idea other than clichés how to discuss sex. It is rare for parents to understand how to deal with their young daughter about the value of their body. Instead, these exponents of secular Interfaith prefer to refer to the act of sending a naked pictures of themselves to their boyfriend as an act of spreading child pornography with legal consequences. What a thing to say to a fourteen year old girl.

Since then it has become clear to me that it is a minority of parents that could deal with the question of sex and the young female body. Secularism prefers passing the buck and defining their bodies as pornographic

So, as an atheist, I'm curious what you would say to your young daughter about entering prostitution or the practice of sexting. Why not?

How we teach our kids is one thing. I basically agree with you; attitudes to sex are misguided and children should be taught better, since the consequences are phenomena like sexting.

But how people teach their kids has nothing to do with prostitution being legal or not. Either way, we should teach our kids better. So please keep my (theoretical, non-existent) kids out of this!

On pain of being accused of constructing a strawman, I think Nick_A is just running away from the fact that he's trying to moralize:

It's not a matter of rights but rather giving the young and in this case women, the opportunity to acquire inner quality.

You can say let them choose what they want. This is what is happening now. They are following the calling of advertising and a society that seeks to suck out their worth for dollars their secuction can produce. ... I prefer to be part of the efforts that seek to encourage women to develop for themselves and for society their unique potential for the psychological grasp of inner quality rather than selling themselves cheaply which is the definition of prostitution both physical and psychological.

What he's running away from is the fact that we cannot simultaneously "encourage women to develop for themselves," i.e. of their own free will, and demand that they believe in Nick_A's version of "inner quality." Hence, he is really just advocating an authoritarian society.

Assume you have a sexy looking fourteen year old daughter and she is being tempted into prostitution. What would you say? Would you advise her to wait until she's legal and then go for it. There's good money to be made. Are there any other options you can offer other than standard cliches so as to help her to "understand?"

Once again, my personal preferences and decisions are largely irrelevant to public policy rationale. If prostitution is legal, I will still suggest to my daughter that other careers paths will likely be more fulfilling and financially stable. This has been explained to you numerous times already Nick_A.

On a personal note, however, I could, at least in theory, be convinced that my daughter would sincerely enjoy prostitution, and pursue it as a career in a responsible fashion. In this case, I would definitely not forbid her from doing so--in fact I'm not sure if I would advise against it at all.

Since then it has become clear to me that it is a minority of parents that could deal with the question of sex and the young female body. Secularism prefers passing the buck and defining their bodies as pornographic

First of all, "secularism" does not "prefer" anything. You don't get to generalize about an idea's repercussions just because you found ignorant people who subscribe to it on the internet.

Second, this answer, as pjkeeley says, is not really definitive. We all think parents should not be stupid, immoral, or otherwise bad at moral communication. So why is it relevant to the legality of prostitution?

Assume you have a sexy looking fourteen year old daughter and she is being tempted into prostitution. What would you say? Would you advise her to wait until she's legal and then go for it. There's good money to be made. Are there any other options you can offer other than standard cliches so as to help her to "understand?"

(Nick-A0

It's unlikely that any daughter or granddaughter of mine would be persuaded by Nick or religionists like him to not become prostitutes. The approach to sexual health that depends upon the commands of God simply does not work in the UK, and I have heard reports that it does not work in the US either.

If the 14 year old was capable of weighing up pros and cons, I'd point out that prostitution to be a successful career requires the talented pro to be extremely good at people management.Also ,of course the rigorous health meaures she has to adopt, and the depths of poverty she can fall to if she fails in her chosen career.

If the 14 year old were a little subnormal I'd deal with her by rewards and punishments for complying or not complying with my wishes that she not become a prositute, as she could not cope with the demands of the profession. If she were determined, I'd police her movements myself. There is no such person as a successful professional dumb blonde.

Pj, Alun, Belinda

So the bottom line is that you see nothing wrong with prostitution so naturally would not be adverse into welcoming your daughter into it. Obviously then it is naive in your eyes to keep it illegal.

I contend that we have prohibitions and legal restrictions on physical dangers such as smoking. As I said, since we don't understand the nature of sex, sex energy, and the body, we do not understand the psychological reprucussions either for an individual or society.

We don't know how to deal with this issue other then through legality. Rather then admitting our ignorance, we prefer to accept it under the guize of freedom without preparation.

You can put a tamed animal into the wild and it will starve since even though free, it is no longer prepared for freedom. We've deprived the young of understanding this most basic drive leaving them psychologically unprepared, and then tell them to be free. Common sense would suggest questioning how to grow in our understanding so as to convey something meaningful for the young but we prefer to argue legality. This may be normal for secularism but I see nothing to be proud about with this mindset.

Yes, we're being "secularist" by suggesting that current law is unfair. Therefore we're ignorant and should just let the law stand while we contemplate our inner sex energy. Great argument.

Yes, we're being "secularist" by suggesting that current law is unfair. Therefore we're ignorant and should just let the law stand while we contemplate our inner sex energy. Great argument.

Yes Alun, this is our difference. You are concerned with laws and I maintain that it is naive to refer to laws without understanding the issue.

Secularism is only concerned in what we DO. It creates laws to direct what we DO according to its standards.

However, the issue of sex, sex energy, and the body is a concern primarily for what we ARE so outside the domain of secularism. Understanding the nature of sex clarifies what we ARE which I maintain should be a primary ingredient for considering the legal question.

Since we no longer are concerned with what we ARE or even what it means, it is easy to accept prostitution and invite our young into it. A buck is a buck so why not?

Pj, Alun, Belinda

So the bottom line is that you see nothing wrong with prostitution so naturally would not be adverse into welcoming your daughter into it.

Stop being intellectually dishonest. Nobody said that they would welcome their daughters into prostitution. It is not inconsistent to want prostitution legal and also to discourage people from becoming prostitutes.

Pj, Alun, Belinda

So the bottom line is that you see nothing wrong with prostitution so naturally would not be adverse into welcoming your daughter into it.

Stop being intellectually dishonest. Nobody said that they would welcome their daughters into prostitution. It is not inconsistent to want prostitution legal and also to discourage people from becoming prostitutes.

Why wouldn't you encourage your daughter to become a prostitute? There is a good buck in it. If it is OK for others, are you asserting that your daughter is too good for it compared to these others? What does that mean. Please clarify.

Yes Alun, this is our difference. You are concerned with laws and I maintain that it is naive to refer to laws without understanding the issue.

It is naive to apply your standards for what people "ARE" to what people "DO." See look, I can make unsubstantiated assertions too; what fun! Ooh, while I'm at it, how about this: Your insistence that you know better is arrogant, at least intellectually. Why cannot others find out what they "ARE" in their own way, instead of "DO"-ing it your way?

You guys must be kidding! This is the most amazing example of male chauvinism I have ever encountered in my life. This coming from a person who once believed having a dumb, barefoot and pregnant wife was the only way to treat a woman.

You actually have the temerity to invoke that it is intellectually dishonest and arrogant for someone to state that since they would not want their wife, daughter, sister or mother to become a prostitute since it is degrading and disgusting (men are pigs, after all, not all of us have a standard of cleanliness, whether inwardly or outwardly, that can be considered desirable) and therefore would not want any woman to find themselves in that circumstance that he is somehow inconsistent, not rational or intellectually grounded by not wanting it legalized? That he believes sex to be special and something that society should promote as special by not inviting more social inequity and acceptance of demeaning behavior by not legalizing or decriminalizing prostitution. That this stance makes him somehow insensitive and uncaring?

The hypocrisy of the bleeding heart liberal is astounding!!!!

Why wouldn't you encourage your daughter to become a prostitute? There is a good buck in it.

Not revelant. The question is whether prostitution should be legal, not why I wouldn't encourage my (hypothetical, non-existent) daughter to become a prostitute. We could make a thread with the title "why I wouldn't encourage my daughter to become a prostitute", but it wouldn't be philosophy.

If it is OK for others, are you asserting that your daughter is too good for it compared to these others?

I'm not encouraging anyone to be a prostitute; not my (hypothetical, non-existent) daughter, nor anyone else's. It's not a matter of it being too good for some people and not for others, and I never suggested as such.

You actually have the temerity to invoke that it is intellectually dishonest and arrogant for someone to state that since they would not want their wife, daughter, sister or mother to become a prostitute...

Nobody said that. Now you are the one who is being intellectually dishonest.

I called Nick_A intellectually dishonest because he insists on putting words in my mouth. I would not encourage my (hypothetical, non-existent) daughter to become a prostitute, but Nick_A continually implies that I, and anyone who wants prostitution legal, would do so. That is intellectually dishonest. I have stated my position and he ignores it.

I never said his opposition to prostitution is intellectually dishonest or arrogant and neither did anyone else, Juice. I respect his views, but I disagree for reasons that have already been made clear.

No PJ! You guys are saying that him asking if you would want any female (loved, and cared for, or not) member of your family to become a prostitute does not have any relevance to the discussion, and each of you have made the decision that the question is dismissive and somehow not relevant. And it is!!!

Let's put it an other way;

Why wouldn't you care if a person you cared about became a prostitute?

It's because we all know that prostitution is degrading and disgusting. That for the most part people who have the need to "use" prostitutes do so since they are so loathsome and repulsive that they are unable to engage in normal human interactions when sex is an issue. That the thought of a strange person, who you have no idea what their sanitary habits are, want to mix bodily fluids with someone you care about is unmanageable to desensitize.

Yet we are flippant and insensitive enough about the subject to convince ourselves that it is a perfectly healthy activity for someone we don't care about.

No wonder this world is collapsing around our ankles!! We just kick it all out of the way making things someone else's problem.

Juice is the only one that seems to get it.

People speak of freedom and rights all the time but rarely of the obligations that sustain existence of freedom and rights. Somehow that just takes care of itself. It cannot. When you don't take care of anything it falls apart. This includes freedom.

People are willing to protect their daughters from prostitution but seek to make it legal for the great unwashed to enter it. Rather then consider why it is so and why they sell out in this way, they just refer to freedom.

In my thread on Metaxu, Simone Weil gives examples that are necessary to feed the inner man necessary for a quality of understanding necessary to sustain a free society . One of these is "obedience."

Obedience comes about through the free consent of all members of the society that are affected. There is obedience to rules and to those who enforce the rules and exercise authority over others. When these are obeyed through a free and open consent, there is not servility but obedience. Consent is the heart of obedience — since obedience out of fear of punishment or hope of reward breeds servility. She notes that in her own time, men are starved for obedience — yet there are those [read Hitler] who have exploited that fact and enslaved men instead.

There will be laws that we voluntarily consent to because we know they have merit. Laws against prostitution for the sake of a culture's metaxu and the young are a good example.

We don't understand it because we don't sincerely admit what we find objectionable about it for our child. Perhaps if we did, we would better appreciate what is being prostituted. We don't and rather then encouraging rising above it through the voluntary obedience to laws, we seek to abandon laws and assert "freedom" without the awareness of obligations.

Nothing good can come of it but what is so surprising that even the first step is offensive. Nothing seems more insulting then sincerely questioning why we don't encourage our daughters to enter a business where she will make a good buck yet look the other way in regards to the great unwashed. The bottom line is that we don't know how to answer such questions so consider them insulting. Yet if we did have a better understanding of sex, sex energy, and the body beyond the normal superficial cliches, we could appreciate a culture's striving to maintain a quality of metaxu through the voluntary support of laws against prostitution