Politics and Morals of Prostitution

[Holden Caulfield]

to start a thread of sexual politics i think it is safer to use this new group to save it from being dragged down to angry femimnis vs male chauvenism, so..

Is prostitution in this day and age in places like the Nederlands, an act of liberated women to earn a living off what is essentially an enjoyable act? Prostitution can be seen as being a situation where women have the power over the males and where the women is looking after her own needs individually and exploiting the society we live in for her own benafit.
Or is prostitution still what it always has been seen as historically, women resorting to degrading themselves, through desperation and lack of other viable opportunities. In this way the males are the dominant ones in the 'relationship', as although they are paying, they are treating the women as mere objects, as wage slaves to their own desire. Not to mention the fact many of the 'bosses' of the women will be males.

Does mainstream society frown down upon prostitution as they are repressed, or victims of their own in-grained morality?

(im not saying all prostitutes are women, i know there are males ones, but it was easier to stick with writing women the whole way through)

[Schrödinger's Cat]

It's safe to say capitalism exacerbates prostitution by placing women in awkward positions where they are having to live in costly population centers with jobs that don't even pay for a decent living. I would argue that prostitution is simply another instance of wage slavery - certainly one that is much more dangerous than frying burgers on the grill, but essentially the woman and Fry (http://z.about.com/d/animatedtv/1/7/2/fry.jpg) are stuck in the same, abject position where they have to sell their labor for a petty reward. Comrades should freely embrace sexual freedom for women, while reminding others that giving away sex for money is a problem with capitalism.

I personally believe prostitution should be legalized and regulated in contemporary society.

[Comrade Rage]

Comrades should freely embrace sexual freedom for women, while reminding others that giving away sex for money is a problem with capitalism.That's essentially my view. I have no problems wih prostitutuion being legalized, so long as we (as a society) don't go further down the road of viewing women as objects of sexual satisfaction.

It's a better alternative than the current system in America, where prostitutes are literally slaves of pimps.


Fry (http://z.about.com/d/animatedtv/1/7/2/fry.jpg)That was a pretty good show.:cool:

[Peacekeeper]

I'm completely opposed. It is a direct product of capitalism, a detrimental effect on societal conditions. Fuck the Netherlands.

[mykittyhasaboner]

i agree with the posts so far, and i think that women are abused, and enslaved by prostitution. But is it not possible, that in a country where prostitution is legal, that prostitutes who arent owned by pimps and operate their own business, exploit men(and other women) by creating monopolies of prostitution?
i mean, prostitution isnt exactly something you need, but if the demand is there(alienation in society-lack of sexual relations, tourists looking for cheap fun, etc)then the prostitutes could exploit that demand. Prostitutes who have more money, more status, and a larger client base, could easily make prostitution imppossible for others who have exhausted all other means of income, thus controlling the business.
this situation of course would imply that the 'bourgeois' prostitutes, dont need to be prostitutes, and are exploiting other peoples desires for profit.
EDIT: i dont support the any attempts to make prostitution illegal, as long as the person wants to be a prostitute. if your owned by a pimp and dont have a choice, then your a slave. So im opposed to that kind of prostitution

[Peacekeeper]

i agree with the posts so far, and i think that women are abused, and enslaved by prostitution. But is it not possible, that in a country where prostitution is legal, that prostitutes who arent owned by pimps and operate their own business, exploit men(and other women) by creating monopolies of prostitution?
i mean, prostitution isnt exactly something you need, but if the demand is there(alienation in society-lack of sexual relations, tourists looking for cheap fun, etc)then the prostitutes could exploit that demand. Prostitutes who have more money, more status, and a larger client base, could easily make prostitution imppossible for others who have exhausted all other means of income, thus controlling the business.
this situation of course would imply that the 'bourgeois' prostitutes, dont need to be prostitutes, and are exploiting other peoples desires for profit.

Wow. I'd never even considered that before. Even more reason for me to oppose this despicable practice.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I'm completely opposed. It is a direct product of capitalism, a detrimental effect on societal conditions. Fuck the Netherlands.

Prostitution existed long before capitalism, so it cannot be a direct product of it.

What are the detrimental effects of prostitution, that don't exist with any other form of wage labour? I guess a shouldn't be surprised that a Muslim takes a reactionary stance on sexual matters.


But is it not possible, that in a country where prostitution is legal, that prostitutes who arent owned by pimps and operate their own business, exploit men(and other women) by creating monopolies of prostitution?

no more than a banana monopoly would exploit those who eat bananas.


i mean, prostitution isnt exactly something you need, but if the demand is there(alienation in society-lack of sexual relations, tourists looking for cheap fun, etc)then the prostitutes could exploit that demand. Prostitutes who have more money, more status, and a larger client base, could easily make prostitution imppossible for others who have exhausted all other means of income, thus controlling the business.
this situation of course would imply that the 'bourgeois' prostitutes, dont need to be prostitutes, and are exploiting other peoples desires for profit.

That already happens in prostitution (and other industries) independantly of any State sanction - You have the high-class prostitutes who can cost anywhere up to £1000 a night, to the cheap "streetwalkers".

Regulation of prostitution enables proper checks and balances to be ensured, as opposed to black market activity which is completely unregulated.

[communard resolution]

I'm completely opposed. It is a direct product of capitalism, a detrimental effect on societal conditions. Fuck the Netherlands.

Is prostitution a direct product of capitalism? No. It has been around long before capitalism.

Do only prostitutes use their sexuality to gain something (money, favours, ...)? No. Most of us do sometimes, even if that only means smiling at someone in an ambiguous way. Or "getting your foor in the door" because you're good looking.

Is there anything immoral about prostituting your genitalia? Not more so than prostituting your hands, your brain, or other parts of your body in "normal" jobs.

Is prostitution better paid than most labouring jobs? Yes, much better. Unless you work for an asshole pimp.

Is prostitution less safe than most "normal" jobs? Yes.

Is there an foreseeable end to prostitution? No.

So what are we to do? Legalize it, get rid of pimps and traffickers, provide a safe and controlled working environment for women who choose this profession.

These are just my suggestions, but ultimately I would say shut up and let the women themselves decide.

[Os Cangaceiros]

even if that only means smiling at someone in an ambiguous way.

Like Tito's smile? :lol:

[Post-Something]

I'd be against legalizing it. I'm not a big fan of lust, to say the least. I'd oppose it on the grounds that it's exploitative in our societies anyway.

But would it be in a communist society? Would you have a "communal whore"?

[black magick hustla]

Anyone who is against the legalization of prostitution is a reactionary. Sex workers do their job precisely because its better than the alternatives they have, you aren't helping them by cracking down on their jobs.

[RHIZOMES]

I'd be against legalizing it. I'm not a big fan of lust, to say the least. I'd oppose it on the grounds that it's exploitative in our societies anyway.

Yeah so let's keep it illegal so it can be even more exploitative!

[Os Cangaceiros]

Anyone who is against the legalization of prostitution is a reactionary. Sex workers do their job precisely because its better than the alternatives they have, you aren't helping them by cracking down on their jobs.

100% correct.

[BobKKKindle$]

Women do not consent to being prostitutes - they enter the industry because they do not have any other way to generate income, except by selling sexual pleasure to clients. However, under capitalism, all wage-labour is coercive, because if someone refuses to sell their labour power, in the absence of an alternative source of income, they will not be able to purchase food and so will eventually starve. Therefore, the fact that prostitution is not something which is freely chosen cannot be sufficient grounds for banning it.

Prostitution should be legalized, so the women employed in the industry are able to draw attention to the problems they face without fear of being arrested, and legalisation will also enable women to organize and fight for improvements in working conditions.


I'd be against legalizing it. I'm not a big fan of lust, to say the least.

Why are you not a "fan" of lust? People are always going to want to have sex, and sex is an enjoyable activity for many people, and so why would you be opposed to expression of human sexuality? Would you object if someone had multiple sexual partners at the same time?


I'd oppose it on the grounds that it's exploitative in our societies anyway.

Working in a factory or fast-food outlet is also exploitative - do you also advocate the banning of these forms of labour?


I'm completely opposed. It is a direct product of capitalism, a detrimental effect on societal conditions. Fuck the Netherlands.

What detrimental effects arise which are specific to prostitution? Your reactionary religion is evident in your posts.

[communard resolution]

Like Tito's smile? :lol:

Of course!

"Nina & Svetlana Bazan (twins)

Tito comes to Sankt Petersburg to visit Nina, whom he met on his winter vacations in Datov, Sibiria, with Olja Kutina, student of economy, and he already slept with Nina there. Upon his return to Moscow with Olja from the winter vacation, he goes directly to Nina in St. Petersburg and never comes back. Nina wants to marry him, he is 25 years old at that time. Both Nina and her twin sister Svetlana practice piano every day. He becomes aware of Svetlana as well, but on his walks he looks after Neva, too. Doctor Bazan notices the money is missing from the family safe; Tito is then already engaged to Nina and quarrels about this money. Later he spends three days he with Svetlana... then both sisters feel sickness; both are pregnant, but Svetlana agrees with Tito to say that she is pregnant with one of her professors... Then the October revolution starts, he is put in prison and sent to Sibiria because he has no papers."

He must have had something. Read more about Tito's exploits here:

http://www.titoville.com/women.html

[Post-Something]

Why are you not a "fan" of lust? People are always going to want to have sex, and sex is an enjoyable activity for many people, and so why would you be opposed to expression of human sexuality? Would you object if someone had multiple sexual partners at the same time?

I think it's a real shame that love is sometimes forgotten about these days. I think that's a big problem over where I live, because teenagers grow up thinking love is something you just fall into, and they just give themselves away because they think that's the norm. I think that deep down, everyones goal is love, to have that security, you know? But a lot of people are getting confused between Love and Lust, and it's not a good thing for society I think. If prostitution was legalized, men would just see women as objects even more than they already do. And that leads to exploitation as you know.

And, about having more than one partner at the same time; I absolutely fucking hate it! I can't see how anyone would allow that for themselves, but I guess I would still allow it. I would never ever personally do it though.

The thing is, I believe in God, so you can take everything I say with an enormous mountain of salt if you want. I believe in "good" and "bad"; so I would actually view the act of sex with no connection, or love as a bad one.


Working in a factory or fast-food outlet is also exploitative - do you also advocate the banning of these forms of labour?

Erm, I'm a communist...so yeah, I think wage labour isn't the best thing in the world...

Plus, wouldn't the service sector be reduced a hell of a lot in a communist society?

Or were you meaning that the act in itself is exploitative?

If that's the case, they are exploitative for different reasons. I don't think you can compare them really.


Anyway, how would prostitution work in a communist society?

[BobKKKindle$]

And, about having more than one partner at the same time; I absolutely fucking hate it! I can't see how anyone would allow that for themselves, but I guess I would still allow it. I would never ever personally do it though.What is wrong with people having multiple partners, and why do you look down upon those who do? Some people enjoy having sex but don't want to have to deal with the obligations that exist in a relationship - and so they enter free sexual relations with others, with the mutual understanding that having sex is not indicative of a desire for a long-term relationship, or the expectation that the sexual partner will not have sex with other people. What is wrong this pattern of behaviour? Why do you find it so hard to accept that some people want to have multiple partners?


The thing is, I believe in God, so you can take everything I say with an enormous mountain of salt if you want. I believe in "good" and "bad"; so I would actually view the act of sex with no connection, or love as a bad one.If you are religious, what are your views on homosexuality and abortion? The bible contains passages which indicate that homosexuality is "sinful" and the emphasis on the sanctity of life has been interpreted as a moral tenet opposed to abortion. Why do you believe in god, given that there is no evidence to support the view that a supreme being exists?


they just give themselves away because they think that's the norm. By "give themselves away" do you mean someone losing virginity outside of a committed relationship? What is wrong with this?


But a lot of people are getting confused between Love and Lust, and it's not a good thing for society I think

What detrimental effects does this have for society? Why, in your view, should sex only occur between two people who are in a committed relationship?



If prostitution was legalized, men would just see women as objects even more than they already do. And that leads to exploitation as you know.Do you have any evidence to show that the legality of prostitution has a significant effect on the way men see women?


If that's the case, they are exploitative for different reasons. I don't think you can compare them really.Why can't you make a comparison? Working in a factory is the same as working in a prostitute are the same, in the sense that both are forms of wage-labour, performed by people who sell labour power as a commodity, because they have no alternative source of income. Why do you advocate the banning of prostitution, and yet accept that other forms of wage labour should remain legal?

[communard resolution]

Some people say romantic love is a social construct, others say it's a chemical reaction in your brain that comes easy and goes easy. Whatever the case, I don't think romantic 'couplism' is something to aspire to as an ideal of love. I too believe in love, but as in 'solidarity and love between all people'. Who says you cannot love more than one person at the same time? The fact that mainstream films, music, and other media are so hellbent on preserving the notion of romantic couplism as the ultimate goal in life makes me all the more suspicious of it. It's as if they're trying to control an energy that could get very dangerous once it leaves the privacy and isolation of one's own home.

I can see where you're coming from in regards to our looking for security in a one-on-one relationship. Maybe at this present stage we simpy have no time to dedicate our love to more than one person at once because we spend most of our time slaving away. A relationship at least takes the edge of the daily grind when we come home. Still, we are effectively limiting our potential to love, which is not something to aspire to or hold up as an ideal.

I also think people seriously limit their sexual potential when they restrict their sexuality to only one person, or one person at one time respectively. I don't think sexuality needs to have anything to do with romantic love. If two or three or more people desire each other and the situation is right, why shouldn't they all have a fun time together? It's all just about giving each other pleasure and making each other feel good, which certainly beats the opposite. There's nothing dirty or shameful about lust. It's a beautiful feeling.

Also, I absolutely see nothing wrong with looking at someone as an object when it comes to sex. Maybe it's me, but even if I love a person I don't think about my romantic feelings for them when I have sex with them - I think about sex and nothing but. I look at them as an object, but once the sex is over I look at them as the person I love and/or respect. By the same token, I don't mind being looked at as a sex object myself in certain situations. I think it just happens naturally and it's fun.



I think it's a real shame that love is sometimes forgotten about these days. I think that's a big problem over where I live, because teenagers grow up thinking love is something you just fall into, and they just give themselves away because they think that's the norm. I think that deep down, everyones goal is love, to have that security, you know? But a lot of people are getting confused between Love and Lust, and it's not a good thing for society I think. If prostitution was legalized, men would just see women as objects even more than they already do. And that leads to exploitation as you know.

And, about having more than one partner at the same time; I absolutely fucking hate it! I can't see how anyone would allow that for themselves, but I guess I would still allow it. I would never ever personally do it though.

The thing is, I believe in God, so you can take everything I say with an enormous mountain of salt if you want. I believe in "good" and "bad"; so I would actually view the act of sex with no connection, or love as a bad one.



Erm, I'm a communist...so yeah, I think wage labour isn't the best thing in the world...

Plus, wouldn't the service sector be reduced a hell of a lot in a communist society?

Or were you meaning that the act in itself is exploitative?

If that's the case, they are exploitative for different reasons. I don't think you can compare them really.


Anyway, how would prostitution work in a communist society?

[Lector Malibu]

Not all prostitutes are women for starters.

[Post-Something]

What is wrong with people having multiple partners, and why do you look down upon those who do? Some people enjoy having sex but don't want to have to deal with the obligations that exist in a relationship - and so they enter free sexual relations with others, with the mutual understanding that having sex is not indicative of a desire for a long-term relationship, or the expectation that the sexual partner will not have sex with other people. What is wrong this pattern of behaviour? Why do you find it so hard to accept that some people want to have multiple partners?

By partner I thought you meant relationship. I think a relationship between two people is a very precious bond, and that bond can only really be between two people. I think since it is one of the most basic of human needs, then society should take that into consideration, and help to keep that bond as important as it is. I don't really care if people want to sleep around, I just think that if you commit yourself to someone, than that's a different story. I think I just misunderstood you to be honest.


If you are religious, what are your views on homosexuality and abortion? The bible contains passages which indicate that homosexuality is "sinful" and the emphasis on the sanctity of life has been interpreted as a moral tenet opposed to abortion. Why do you believe in god, given that there is no evidence to support the view that a supreme being exists?

Well, I was really hoping I wouldn't have to discus my religious beliefs on here, but I guess that is unavoidable. My belief in God is just that. A belief. I think it's my business and I shouldn't have to justify myself for something I am not enforcing on others. I choose to believe in God because it provide me with the stability I need. Life is tough, and I prefer going through it feeling that I have a really firm backbone. We could go on and argue about the rationality of it, copy and pasting Aquinas and Nietzsche; but that's not really what my belief in God is about. I personally like the idea of a higher power, and since there is no proof that goes directly against that notion, I found it was beneficial in my life, so I adopted it. I'm not preaching my beliefs around here, and in no way do I look down on anyone else for disbelieving.

On homosexuality, I couldn't care less. I have no control over what somebody else wants to do, and especially not what kind of person somebody was born as. Just because my religion advocates a stance, it doesn't necessarily mean that I uphold the view. By the way, I am a Muslim, not a Christian.

On abortion, I am actually going over this myself at the moment. For the last couple of years I was pro life, but seeing a couple of arguments on here I'm beginning to change my mind. I'm still reasoning in my head what is the right side to take, so I'd appreciate it if we left this out for now. I'd also appreciate not getting restricted for stating that I used to be pro life.


By "give themselves away" do you mean someone losing virginity outside of a committed relationship? What is wrong with this?

Where I live, we have fourteen year old girls chasing twenty year olds in sports cars, throwing themselves at anyone over eighteen. Half of the time these kids don't even really want to do it, and regret it afterwards. I spoke to a girl who had twins when she was fifteen not long ago, shes nineteen now and she regrets her lifestyle when she was younger. I'm not sure what you view as "wrong", but that has to be detrimental to society.


What detrimental effects does this have for society? Why, in your view, should sex only occur between two people who are in a committed relationship?

See above.

Sex can occur between two people who aren't in a relationship; I just think it shouldn't be a business.


Do you have any evidence to show that the legality of prostitution has a significant effect on the way men see women?

No, sorry, nor do I know of any way I could produce that evidence.

What I can say is that if you walk in the center of Aberdeen at 3AM, you will hear cries of "are you looking for business?". you'll realize these are prostitutes, and that they are normally in an extremely bad condition; socially. These girls don't do it because they want to, they do it because they are forced into it, for drugs or whatever. They are allowing themselves to be exploited for whatever need they have. I have to point out it's not a sexual need; most of the customers are fifty something year old impotent perverts. I have heard debates on the radio about this very issue, and the people debating it were just that, fifty year old perverts. They treat women like objects. The purpose of a prostitute is sex; and they take away that aspect that makes sex human, "love". All that is left is lust, right? Lust is comparable to greed, it's not good for society, and must at least be regulated in some way.

Actually, I know this is just an anecdote, and that doesn't amount to anything, but nonetheless. I went out with a girl a while back who's sister was a prostitute. She had the worst life ever. And she ONLY did it for the money to get drugs. She had lots of sexually transmitted diseases, and she hated her life. If we lived in a communist society, it is quite obvious she wouldn't be a prostitute. She was exploited by her clients, not the other way round. I think legalization of it doesn't change that fact.


Why can't you make a comparison? Working in a factory is the same as working in a prostitute are the same, in the sense that both are forms of wage-labour, performed by people who sell labour power as a commodity, because they have no alternative source of income. Why do you advocate the banning of prostitution, and yet accept that other forms of wage labour should remain legal?

I dislike them both. They are both exploitation, and both shouldn't be allowed. I don't accept other forms of wage labour; that's the point. That's why I want to see the capitalist system collapse. Why do you want to see even more forms of wage labour?

Both are treated as objects, your argument is why should we allow one and not the other, well why should we allow any?

[Post-Something]

Some people say romantic love is a social construct, others say it's a chemical reaction in your brain that comes easy and goes easy. Whatever the case, I don't think romantic 'couplism' is something to aspire to as an ideal of love. I too believe in love, but as in 'solidarity and love between all people'. Who says you cannot love more than one person at the same time? The fact that mainstream films, music, and other media are so hellbent on preserving the notion of romantic couplism as the ultimate goal in life makes me all the more suspicious of it. It's as if they're trying to control an energy that could get very dangerous once it leaves the privacy and isolation of one's own home.

Love between two people is different from the love you have for the community. The love I'm talking about is the joining of two people essentially. All emotions are shared, unbreakable bond etc. And it does exist, I know it exists. If you want to have that bond with more than one person, if you think you can place that much trust, by all means go ahead. What I'm talking about is the absence of that bond.


Also, I absolutely see nothing wrong with looking at someone as an object when it comes to sex. Maybe it's me, but even if I love a person I don't think about my romantic feelings for them when I have sex with them - I think about sex and nothing but. I look at them as an object, but once the sex is over I look at them as the person I love and/or respect. By the same token, I don't mind being looked at as a sex object myself in certain situations. I think it just happens naturally and it's fun.


Ok, I think this is an entirely different topic. Your views on sex are your own. Though I'm not sure how you can separate your feelings of love for that person when you are having sex.

[Vanguard1917]

Women do not consent to being prostitutes - they enter the industry because they do not have any other way to generate income, except by selling sexual pleasure to clients.


May be true in some cases, but by no means true in all. Many women make an active decision to enter the sex industry - which is, in many respects, a relatively lucrative industry to be employed in. The idea that women enter the industry as a last resort is definitely valid in some cases, but it's not a universal truth.

Compare it with the drug dealer, for example. You can make more money selling cocaine than by working at a supermarket or building site. You take more risks, but is it really true that you're in the illegal drug trade because you have no other way to generate income if there are jobs available elsewhere?


Prostitution should be legalized, so the women employed in the industry are able to draw attention to the problems they face without fear of being arrested, and legalisation will also enable women to organize and fight for improvements in working conditions.

Yes, this is the only progressive demand. Full legal rights for all women employed in the sex industry.

[Marsella]

I think it's a real shame that love is sometimes forgotten about these days. I think that's a big problem over where I live, because teenagers grow up thinking love is something you just fall into, and they just give themselves away because they think that's the norm. I think that deep down, everyones goal is love, to have that security, you know? But a lot of people are getting confused between Love and Lust, and it's not a good thing for society I think. If prostitution was legalized, men would just see women as objects even more than they already do. And that leads to exploitation as you know.

And, about having more than one partner at the same time; I absolutely fucking hate it! I can't see how anyone would allow that for themselves, but I guess I would still allow it. I would never ever personally do it though.

The thing is, I believe in God, so you can take everything I say with an enormous mountain of salt if you want. I believe in "good" and "bad"; so I would actually view the act of sex with no connection, or love as a bad one.

PEOPLE HAVE SEX BECAUSE THEY LIKE IT. YOU DON'T NEED TO BE IN LOVE TO HAVE SEX. I WOULD BE MORE WORRIED OVER A TEENAGER WANTING TO GET INTO SERIOUS RELATIONSHIPS THAN THEIR 'LACK OF LOVE.'

[Holden Caulfield]

i think most people agree with your claim 'Tiger',
i dont think the opinions of a God-squadder on the subject of sex (in any of its forms) can be taken too seriously on a revolutionary leftist forum,

chances are they might not have even experienced its wonders still waiting for marriage and anointment from god and state

[Lector Malibu]

Did everybody miss the part when I said not all prostitutes where women?:lol:

There are actually quite a few male prostitutes.

And do people here actually know any prostitutes?

There are several levels to the "sex industry" it's also true that not all who wind up there are there because of drug addition or no way to make ends meet.

The women I have known in the industry usually opt to become escort girls as they can make a ton of money that way and they are not dependent on a pimp

The traditional prostitutes I have known are usually drug addicts and have gotten to this stage because of that.

And when I was a drug addict I knew several men and women that would do all kinds of things to get money for smack or what have you

[communard resolution]

Love between two people is different from the love you have for the community. The love I'm talking about is the joining of two people essentially. All emotions are shared, unbreakable bond etc. And it does exist, I know it exists. If you want to have that bond with more than one person, if you think you can place that much trust, by all means go ahead. What I'm talking about is the absence of that bond.




Ok, I think this is an entirely different topic. Your views on sex are your own. Though I'm not sure how you can separate your feelings of love for that person when you are having sex.

As for "unbreakable bond", I think we've all seen sufficient proof for the fact that monogamy doesn't work and never will. It's an artificial construct that runs roughshod over people's natural desires, and I believe ultimately it's a plot to control people. A lot of it probably has to do with the wish to possess another person (which I believe is wrong), some may have to do with what I hinted at in an earlier post (in regards to repressing people's potential to love/limit and isolate love to couples and households).

As for "all emotions are shared" - not meaning to be rude, but do you really believe this?

Look, if your belief in true love/no sex without love/etc makes you happy - I will not try and force my views on sex upon you. My problem is that you seem to be arguing from a religious perspective, and whenever I hear the word religion, I reach for my rev... um, I meant: whenever I hear the word religion, I'm pretty sure that someone is about to inflict their reactionary sexual morals upon everybody else.

If you're prepared to let people enjoy their lives exploring their sexualities with whoever they choose to and as much as they choose to, and by the same token let them love as many people as they can, then I'm happy to let you live your life in the belief that a romantic couple relationship is the alpha and omega of love and sexuality. Can we agree on that?

If you cannot agree with me on that, I will do everything within my power to destroy your repressive sexual ideology.

[communard resolution]

[quote=Lust is comparable to greed, it's not good for society, and must at least be regulated in some way.[/quote]

This is exactly what I meant. You hold certain sexual morals -probably to do with your religion- and wish to impose them upon everybody else.

[DustWolf]

I think one little fact has not been mentioned enough here. Prostitution essentially, legal or not, is a dangerous job. It has many harmful effects both physiological and psychological. If you legalized it, and you had any safety rules for the business remotely comparative to what we already have in other professions, then it is quite possible that a woman (or otherwise) could only do 3 or 4 jobs per year without imposing a health hazard. Would the profession as such still exist at that point?

If it is indeed nothing but abuse, it would not. I think this is what would happen.. as prostitution even if enjoyable is not only a major health gamble probably has profound psychological effects. I wouldn't go into mammal mating behavior theories here, but consider that while science in this area mostly does not exist, if it were all legal could quickly determine many hazards and warn about them even if they were minute or rare, just like it happened in other fields of business.

[communard resolution]

That's right, Lector Malibu, we've completely forgot about the male prostitutes.

I couldn't agree more: there are several levels to the sex industry. As for do I know any prostitutes, I used to know several girls who were doing it for drugs and they clearly didn't enjoy it. Of course, this wouldn't have happened if heroin were legal. At present, I'm friends with one woman who works in pornography and is very happy with it. If prostitution (and the entire pornography market) were fully legal, controlled, and safe, nobody would be forced to work there if they didn't wish to do so.

If we're talking about an ideal socialist society, I think men and women who enjoy that profession would still do it. But people wouldn't do it for lack of other options or because other jobs pay so crap. It would just be a matter of personal preference.


Did everybody miss the part when I said not all prostitutes where women?:lol:

There are actually quite a few male prostitutes.

And do people here actually know any prostitutes?

There are several levels to the "sex industry" it's also true that not all who wind up there are there because of drug addition or no way to make ends meet.

The women I have known in the industry usually opt to become escort girls as they can make a ton of money that way and they are not dependent on a pimp

The traditional prostitutes I have known are usually drug addicts and have gotten to this stage because of that.

And when I was a drug addict I knew several men and women that would do all kinds of things to get money for smack or what have you

[Post-Something]

As for "unbreakable bond", I think we've all seen sufficient proof for the fact that monogamy doesn't work and never will. It's an artificial construct that runs roughshod over people's natural desires, and I believe ultimately it's a plot to control people. A lot of it probably has to do with the wish to possess another person (which I believe is wrong), some may have to do with what I hinted at in an earlier post (in regards to repressing people's potential to love/limit and isolate love to couples and households).

As for "all emotions are shared" - not meaning to be rude, but do you really believe this?

Look, if your belief in true love/no sex without love/etc makes you happy - I will not try and force my views on sex upon you. My problem is that you seem to be arguing from a religious perspective, and whenever I hear the word religion, I reach for my rev... um, I meant: whenever I hear the word religion, I'm pretty sure that someone is about to inflict their reactionary sexual morals upon everybody else.

If you're prepared to let people enjoy their lives exploring their sexualities with whoever they choose to and as much as they choose to, and by the same token let them love as many people as they can, then I'm happy to let you live your life in the belief that a romantic couple relationship is the alpha and omega of love and sexuality. Can we agree on that?

If you cannot agree with me on that, I will do everything within my power to destroy your repressive sexual ideology.

I told you, I'm fine with that, I couldn't care less if people slept with whomever they wished, I've already said that. I think the debate was on prostitution, not love. All I'm saying is if there was a referendum on making prostitution legal; even though it already is over here, I would oppose it. I have stated my reasons why.

Anyway, why is lust a good thing? If everyone was lustful we would just fuck all the time, and we would all be diseased. Sex would be meaningless, and we'd have a stupidly fast growing population. I don't think I'm opposing itt on religious grounds.

[DustWolf]

Anyway, why is lust a good thing? If everyone was lustful we would just fuck all the time, and we would all be diseased. Sex would be meaningless, and we'd have a stupidly fast growing population. I don't think I'm opposing itt on religious grounds.

From a scientific perspective, your doomsday scenario is unlikely. Several species of monkeys do just that and they're fine.

I guess more than of objective truth, it's a matter of what is truly natural to a human being.

[eyedrop]

Anyway, why is lust a good thing? If everyone was lustful we would just fuck all the time, and we would all be diseased. Sex would be meaningless, and we'd have a stupidly fast growing population. I don't think I'm opposing itt on religious grounds.
We have prevention methods for pregnancy. Lust is not an infinite thing. Tell me if you would still feel lustfull after hypotethically fucking 50 times in a row. I would be quite sick of sex for a while.

Diseases are not such a problem as you make them out to be. It could be solved anyway by asking your partner to check themselfes for sexual diseases before having sex. Or demand to se a certificate, it could even be standard costum. And offcourse specialised dating servises for disease victims, like it is for HIV victims novadays.

[communard resolution]

I told you, I'm fine with that, I couldn't care less if people slept with whomever they wished, I've already said that. I think the debate was on prostitution, not love. All I'm saying is if there was a referendum on making prostitution legal; even though it already is over here, I would oppose it. I have stated my reasons why.

Anyway, why is lust a good thing? If everyone was lustful we would just fuck all the time, and we would all be diseased. Sex would be meaningless, and we'd have a stupidly fast growing population. I don't think I'm opposing itt on religious grounds.

Lust is a good thing because it gives us pleasure and joy and doesn't hurt anyone as long as sex is consensual.

The institution of monogamy and the ideology of "no sex without love" (whatever the latter may mean) doesn't do our natural desire justice. I want people to be free to explore their sexuality in whatever way they wish and don't want their sexuality to be restricted by somebody's moral code. I'm also not buying into your idea that sexuality automatically becomes meaningless when experienced outside of a 'loving' monogamous relationship. Sexuality is complex, has many variations, and many meanings, not just one.

I guess if you say you would allow everybody to do whatever they want, there's no problem. One of your statements (along the lines of "lust is bad for society and must be regulated) left a very bad taste in my mouth, that's why I'm dwelling on it so much.

Now back to prostitution if you wish.

[Post-Something]

We have prevention methods for pregnancy. Lust is not an infinite thing. Tell me if you would still feel lustfull after hypotethically fucking 50 times in a row. I would be quite sick of sex for a while.



Exactly, tell that to a prostitute. It's obviously not because they want to be in the trade that they're doing it.

[communard resolution]

Exactly, tell that to a prostitute. It's obviously not because they want to be in the trade that they're doing it. I don't get up in the morning and get my ass kicked at my job because I love working so much. I do it because I have to live off something, and I happen to be better at what I'm doing than I would be at being a prostitute. Other people are better at prostitution, and there's nothing worse about selling lending someone your genitalia for money than lending someone your hands, your brain, or (insert body part) for money. Abolish wage slavery generally? Yes. Abolish prostitution on the grounds of it being somehow more 'immoral' than other jobs? No.

[Post-Something]

Lust is a good thing because it gives us pleasure and joy and doesn't hurt anyone as long as sex is consensual.

The key word in that sentence is consensual. It's all fair and well if it's consensual, I agree. So is "rational self interest". But what if these go out of hand? What if there is too much? Well, as a communist you should know fine well that too much self interest makes a person greedy and selfish; they exploit others to remain at the top. If there is too much lust, the fear is that consent isn't an issue anymore. People will just go around for a nice rape now and again. That's what happens if there is too much lust. People don't think when they're horny. That's obviously taken to the extreme, but you get my point.

[communard resolution]

The key word in that sentence is consensual. It's all fair and well if it's consensual, I agree. So is "rational self interest". But what if these go out of hand? What if there is too much? Well, as a communist you should know fine well that too much self interest makes a person greedy and selfish; they exploit others to remain at the top. If there is too much lust, the fear is that consent isn't an issue anymore. People will just go around for a nice rape now and again. That's what happens if there is too much lust. People don't think when they're horny. That's obviously taken to the extreme, but you get my point.

Maybe there would be less non-consensual acts if people had more opportunity to fully channel/express their sexuality without repression? "Each according to their need". There's no point in combating lust. Even in very sexually repressive Islamic societies, there will be 'adultery', the difference being that the 'adulteress' will be stoned to death for what is perfectly natural behaviour. Rape is rampant in such societies as much as in ours.

To say that a liberated sexuality leads to rape strikes me as similar to saying that "to be allowed to eat any variety of food you desire automatically leads to stealing food from your neighbour."

I haven't got any rape stats for different societies - can somebody else take over here?

[Post-Something]

I don't get up in the morning and get my ass kicked at my job because I love working so much. I do it because I have to live off something, and I happen to be better at what I'm doing than I would be at being a prostitute. Other people are better at prostitution, and there's nothing worse about selling lending someone your genitalia for money than lending someone your hands, your brain, or (insert body part) for money. Abolish wage slavery generally? Yes. Abolish prostitution on the grounds of it being somehow more 'immoral' than other jobs? No.

Have you ever met anybody who wants to be a prostitute? Have you ever met a prostitute? I have never met a prostitute who enjoys what they do. Probably 99% of prostitutes do it because they have to. It's a horrible lifestyle, they stay up every night until about 4AM, out in the freezing cold. They put themselves up for exploitation because they have to. It's not a choice. Why would you allow that exploitation to happen? Why would you allow people to get used even more than they already do? Prostitution is not a something you do because you want to do it. Prostitutes put themselves up for sale. One person buying another is just like slavery really. It's human trafficking, and I can't see it as legitimate business.

[Holden Caulfield]

taken from a post by awful reality, thought it would be nice to read..



"PROSTITUTION"

Prostitution is a kind of oppression that is compelled on the women in the capitalist society, and, therefore, struggle against prostitution is vital to restore the humane respect of women in the society. In the present societies, poverty, lack of social assistance, legal and practical limitations on the way of women employment and, thus, in the way of their independence, male- chauvinistic attitude and the manner and behavior of men as privileged sex in the society are the causes of prostitution to be established, maintained and spread. As the experience of Iran under the ruling of the Islamic Republic has well shown, religious trainings and prejudices have resulted in spreading the male-chauvinistic attitude and the privileged position of men and, on the other hand, the minor position of women in the society; this, in turn, is a good dissemination of prostitution among people.

Uprooting the prostitution demands struggle against all of the above causes. Moreover, in order to fight against prostitution, the following undertakings are urgent. The government must support the victims of prostitution economically, and provide educational facilities and employment possibilities for them. Procurers must be prosecuted by law and be punished by severe sentences.

[Post-Something]

Maybe there would be less non-consensual acts if people had more opportunity to fully channel/express their sexuality without repression? "Each according to their need". There's no point in combating lust. Even in very sexually repressive Islamic societies, there will be 'adultery', the difference being that the 'adulteress' will be stoned to death for what is perfectly natural behaviour. Rape is rampant in such societies as much as in ours.

To say that a liberated sexuality leads to rape strikes me as similar to saying that "to be allowed to eat any variety of food you desire automatically leads to stealing food from your neighbour."

I haven't got any rape stats for different societies - can somebody else take over here?


Oh man, I'm making no friends here, hahaha :lol:.

Oh well, rape statistics are misleading anyway, don't bother. I've heard accounts that 1 in 30 girls are sexually abused as children over here, I dread to think what it is in America...

Some people have some very striking sexualities. Each to his own, but need I remind you about things like pedophilia? Or how about Josef Fritzl? In fact, I just finished watching a documentary last night about a guy who stored a women under his bed for seven years. My point is Jefferey Dahmer kept going after his first murder because he was legitimately "exploring his sexuality". Like it or not, sex is a "the more you get the more you want" thing; and it is based on lust, as we covered. The more lustful someone is, the more likely they are to ignore "consent". Therefor lust isn't a good thing in excess.

[communard resolution]

Yes, I have met several prostitutes. I'm referring you to an earlier post in which I stated that I used to know a couple of street prostitutes who did it for drugs and weren't happy because they were forced into it by unfortunate hard drug laws. I'm also currently friends with a woman who works as a hardcore porn model -which you will agree is a form of prostitution- and who is very happy with it. No one forced her into doing it, the pay is great, and she enjoys it a lot more than the 'normal' job she quit. She also tells me it boosts her confidence, and furthermore she feels she's really the one who's exploiting men who will give anything for a bit of pussy. On bad days, her job can be almost as monotonous as her previous day job, but on good days she has fun and gets a real kick out of it. So here's a real life example for you.

Another poster (the Lector) referred to similar examples: he knew a few drug prostitutes who didn't want to be doing it, but also a few high class escorts who chose this profession.

Why would I allow this exploitation to happen? I don't really want to allow any exploitation to happen, and that includes 99% of jobs there are on the market - we are all prostitutes because we don't own the means of production. I just don't agree with your singling out prostitution as being inherently more exploitative than most other professions just because it involves your genitalia rather than other parts of your body. I think the root of your belief is the notion that to use certain parts of your body to earn money is more immoral than to use others - which I don't agree with.

They don't sell their body for good. They use it in exchange for money, same as you use your hands/brain/whatever to earn money. I oppose human trafficking as much as you. No one should be forced into doing it, women should have a choice and -more importantly- not be owned by anyone, i.e. a pimp.


Have you ever met anybody who wants to be a prostitute? Have you ever met a prostitute? I have never met a prostitute who enjoys what they do. Probably 99% of prostitutes do it because they have to. It's a horrible lifestyle, they stay up every night until about 4AM, out in the freezing cold. They put themselves up for exploitation because they have to. It's not a choice. Why would you allow that exploitation to happen? Why would you allow people to get used even more than they already do? Prostitution is not a something you do because you want to do it. Prostitutes put themselves up for sale. One person buying another is just like slavery really. It's human trafficking, and I can't see it as legitimate business.

[DustWolf]

taken from a post by awful reality, thought it would be nice to read..

What do they say about male prostitution?

[Post-Something]

Yes, I have met several prostitutes. I'm referring you to an earlier post in which I stated that I used to know a couple of street prostitutes who did it for drugs and weren't happy because they were forced into it by unfortunate hard drug laws. I'm also currently friends with a woman who works as a hardcore porn model -which you will agree is a form of prostitution- and who is very happy with it. No one forced her into doing it, the pay is great, and she enjoys it a lot more than the 'normal' job she quit. She also tells me it boosts her confidence, and furthermore she feels she's really the one who's exploiting men who will give anything for a bit of pussy. On bad days, her job can be almost as monotonous as her previous day job, but on good days she has fun and gets a real kick out of it. So here's a real life example for you.

Another poster (the Lector) referred to similar examples: he knew a few drug prostitutes who didn't want to be doing it, but also a few high class escorts who chose this profession.

Why would I allow this exploitation to happen? I don't really want to allow any exploitation to happen, and that includes 99% of jobs there are on the market - we are all prostitutes because we don't own the means of production. I just don't agree with your singling out prostitution as being inherently more exploitative than most other professions just because it involves your genitalia rather than other parts of your body. I think the root of your belief is the notion that to use certain parts of your body to earn money is more immoral than to use others - which I don't agree with.

They don't sell their body for good. They use it in exchange for money, same as you use your hands/brain/whatever to earn money. I oppose human trafficking as much as you. No one should be forced into doing it, women should have a choice and -more importantly- not be owned by anyone, i.e. a pimp.

First of all, porn isn't prostitution, and it's a different topic.

Well, prostitution isn't on the market, what I'm saying is why do you want to bring it in? If you and a group of friends fell in a pile of shit (here comes epic analogy) and forgot how to get out, and another friend walked past, would you tell him to come in and sit with you because that's only fair? No. So why should we allow it? Exploitation is intrinsically wrong. And it is human trafficking.

Slaves didn't technically get sold for good either. There was loads of them that got out of it. But it's incredibly hard. A prostitute probably isn't going to work their way out of prostitution, and definitely not with all the drugs and crime that goes on. So, you pretty much are selling yourself for good.

[Post-Something]

No one should be forced into doing it, women should have a choice and -more importantly- not be owned by anyone, i.e. a pimp.

You know that will never happen.

[communard resolution]

You know that will never happen.

Not as long as prostitution is illegal and uncontrolled - that's when the pimps, drugs, crime, etc come in.

Escorts aren't owned by a pimp, only by themselves. Let's make the same thing happen for every prostitute out there.

Porn may be a different topic from the consumer's perspective, but not for the women/men employed. Same here: some may be forced into doing it, others choose it for all kinds of reasons. Some love it, or at least prefer it to regular jobs. Again: some environments in which porn is produced are safer and more regulated than others. Let's improve on these and make the same happen for all such environments.

I've got to get going now. To be continued tomorrow.

PS - don't worry about "not making any friends" - it's all in the spirit of healthy debate. :)

[Peacekeeper]

I guess a shouldn't be surprised that a Muslim takes a reactionary stance on sexual matters.

It's entertaining how Leftism has become synonymous with bourgeois liberalist social values.

[communard resolution]

It's entertaining how Leftism has become synonymous with bourgeois liberalist social values.

It's entertaining how some 'leftists' are unable to engage in any train of thought the ground rules for which haven't been set by Comrade such-and-such 60 or 70 years ago. It's also entertaining how certain 'leftists' think beating up people for the way they dress is a "sort of revolutionary justice" (see Peacekeeper's post in "emos" thread). If I were to fight alongside people such as Peacekeeper, I might as well go for the real deal that is Benito Mussolini.

[RHIZOMES]

You know that will never happen.

Prostitution is legal in New Zealand and that is PRECISELY what happened.

[black magick hustla]

It's entertaining how Leftism has become synonymous with bourgeois liberalist social values.

Its funny that you accuse him of liberalism, while your whole postmodern "leninist, queer,sharia supporting muslim" mismash is pretty much the kind of liberal eclectisim you expect of new left hippe-liberals. To be honest, I think you are a troll, or crazy, because there is no way you are serious with your politics.

[Post-Something]

Its funny that you accuse him of liberalism, while your whole postmodern "leninist, queer,sharia supporting muslim" mismash is pretty much the kind of liberal eclectisim you expect of new left hippe-liberals. To be honest, I think you are a troll, or crazy, because there is no way you are serious with your politics.

...

You're a Muslim feminist...

[black magick hustla]

omg someone fell for it

[communard resolution]

Its funny that you accuse him of liberalism, while your whole postmodern "leninist, queer,sharia supporting muslim" mismash is pretty much the kind of liberal eclectisim you expect of new left hippe-liberals. To be honest, I think you are a troll, or crazy, because there is no way you are serious with your politics.

I can't help thinking that Peacekeeper is just a provocateur. He always comes up with some completely absurd statement apperently designed for the sole purpose of pissing everybody else off and derailing the discussion, then he disappears from the thread.