We’re off air now, but you can follow the debate below and listen to our podcast. Please keep adding your comments…
SHOULD WE LEGALISE PROSTITUTION ?
Prostitutes exist – fact. Prostitution exists – fact. Men use prostitutes – fact. They may not sell their wares on your street, outside your front door, or around the corner from where you live, but they’re out there, somewhere, doing their thing – for money. We’re not asking about the morality of selling sex, we’re not asking for your opinions on the rights and wrongs of selling sex, of working in this, the worlds oldest profession. No, we’re asking should it be legal.
The Women’s Institute (yes, the jam-making, cake-selling, charity-workers of a certain age – cliché ? ) Women’s Institute says if it was all legal, then the women would be safer. Prostitutes are exposed to all sorts of dangers, from hard drugs to violence, from long hours to sexually transmitted disease.
But, the logic says, if it was legal, then all those risks would be lessened. Slight fine tuning of our debate today: we’re asking you about legalising it. We will, we suspect, get into the argument about decriminalising prostitution as well.
Now, these are two distinctly different concepts. Legal prositution means women working in specific areas and very probably in in specific properties, in a structured work-place.
Decriminalising prostitution is something totally different – that means it’s not against the law – anyplace – and the women can work for themselves. Some of the women who World Have Your Say has been talking to have already told us that this second option is better, because with decriminalising comes a reduction in the level of people trafficking.Why? Because the women can, and do, work for themselves, so the shady networks of people who traffick women, all over the world, has no need to get involved in the first place. This aspect to the “profession” withers and dies, because there’s no need.
What do you think ? If it was legal would the girls be safer ? Would you accept a legal brothel next door to your house, next door to your childrens’ school ? Would you talk to a prostitute if you knew what she did for a living ? And if she felt empowered by being “legal”, would you have a choice, but to live with it ? Accept it ?
Is this debate about the women, or is it about our attitudes towards them — the prostitutes.
Let us know via the blog, e-mail or text.
DID WE GET IT WRONG YESTERDAY ?
Just a little point of WHYS housekeeping. As usual yesterday’s debate flew, we had many many people who didn’t get on. But some of our e-mailers today think we got the question wrong. They seem to think we SHOULD have been saying ‘whats wrong with us adults’, to lead to the kind of radicalisation we mentioned on Thursday. Fair point maybe.
One of our e-mailers sums up the other stance, the other way of looking at yesterday’s debate thus:
“It’s not what’s wrong with our youth; it’s what’s wrong with us. Our children are in the coaches as we drive the train down scary tracks. At any one time a bunch of us are killing some other bunch of us, because we’ve skillfully neglected effective communication, even while chatting away for the last 100K years, or so. The children are frightened. They are able to do simple math. They can estimate the likelihood of finding food, water, career, spouse, energy supply, quite place away from wild-eyed pistol wavers, cure for the next pandemic, haven from the flood of immigrants wearing odd clothes and chanting weird chants, etc. etc. Unfortunately, for an ever growing number of children, the sums are starting to come up on the minus side. They don’t see a bright future.”
Discuss ?
As ever:
WORLDHAVEYOURSAY.COM
TEXT: + 44 77 86 20 60 80
PHONE: + 44 20 70 83 72 72
Later, Peter 
RSS feed
Prostitution is one of those funny “moral” regulations we humans, and especially the up tight westerners created. It is, contrary to popular belief, the second oldest profession. Hunting is the oldest profession. Since it is a service profession I can not be the oldest.
We allow institutions such as dating, one night stands, and the worst offense of all, marriage to exist. these are all prostitution in different forms. A friend and I once sat down and average how many time we had sex compared to those expense we encured trying to keep our mates happy enough to have sex with us. our figures were on the conservative side. IT still worked out to be around $1500 per encounter. for that kind of money you can actually get one to act like she likes you.
Opponents will say prostitutes are often the victims of physical abuse, drug use, and STD’s. First I say so can marriage. But secondly, that is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The same was said about alcohol when it was made illegal in the 20’s. creating a black market draws people with unsavory morals, victims afraid to talk and expose their own illegal activity, and more prosecutions that put people in prison.
Legalising prostitution will remain problematic in many countries as this will be against their upheld cultural values. It will mean encouraging sexual freedom as a trade whereby the body is the item. Prostitutes are still a source of shame to their families. In some Middle Eastern countries women (married or unmarried) are killed for the family’s honour just because they seen or suspected of having an affair. In such countries, prostitutes should at least practise their profession away from home. In the Gulf States like Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, there seems to be a shortage of local prostitutes, so prostitutes are imported from other Arab countries like Egypt, Lebanon and Morocco. Some women go there of their own free will. Others are lured in going there by being offered in their home countries jobs like maids, hairdressers or waitresses to find themselves trapped into a prostitution network. Ironically, these countries posing as conservative and even strictly Islamic never officially admit such practices or they have thousands of prostitutes, especially from Arab and Asian countries.
Legalising prostitution in countries where sexual freedom is taken for granted needs other legal measures, like prostitutes displaying different prices for their different services, declaring their income, and getting social security like anyone practising a trade legally. They can be self-employed or create an association that can grow into a big company. We may hear in the future of prostitution international conferences where prostitutes exchange experiences on how to make their work more appealing. But one of the drawbacks of this profession is that the majority of prostitutes have to retire in their early forties, a relatively early age. Not being skilled in any work they will have to live on a pension and/or the money they have saved from their trade.
If this job is legalised, it means it won’t be criminal to deal with it as a trade. This means there will be qualification centres for prostitution giving would-be prostitutes advice on how to practise their trade safely without running the risk of falling into the paws of networks that will exploit them without guaranteeing them any rights.
One last point, society shouldn’t continue to be hypocritical about this issue. Prostitution is one of the most lucrative trades. Without which many services can’t operate like tourism, hotels, and bars and so on. Prostitution is a fact. No legislation has so far succeeded in fighting it altogether. It’s there around us. Prostitutes are in the corner or simply on the internet. They have developed their means to attract their clients. But societies like to keep this hypocritical attitude in the hope that one day it will be totally eradicated. But as long as sexual conduct – such as adultery – hasn’t changed despite time and different aspects of civilization, prostitution will be there. Societies which have accepted same sex marriage, doesn’t penalize incest, should be more foreword and legalize prostitution. After all, legalizing it will not mean an increase in the number of prostitutes, but it will transparently reflect a trend still regarded as a taboo.
Given that marriage is dying out, I don’t really see many alternatives. I cannot tell you how many commitment phobic women there are out there too. My last girlfriend confessed she’s a commitmentphobe, and I figure it’s from all of her abanondment issues from her dysfunctional family life, all of her mom’s marriages and divorces, etc. The tradition life, if it ever were real, and I think now it’s just brainwashing, is gone… People may be monogamous, I’m not sure, but if they are, they are serially monogamous. One relationship right after the other. I’ve give up myself on the prospect of ever being married. When I see how commitmentphobic men and women are (I’ve seen more of this from women), when I see all the poor decisionmaking, all of the unhappy couples, all of the divorce, etc, I think people are going to say enough is enough and realize we weren’t meant to live this way. I still think they will never legalize prostitution in the US. But it’s not just the west that is uptight. I really doubt you’ll find legalized prostitution in many muslim countries. I just think everything I was told was complete bull. I’m just figuring it out later than most people unfortunately. Marriage is dying out, and I think even relationships will eventually die about because of people are becoming colder, crueler and more self absorbed.
I agree wholeheartedly with Dwight. My goodness, he really laid it out perfectly. Prostitution in some form or another happens everyday. In a sense, we are all prostitutes. Everything we do, we do, to increase the chances of us having sex. When we want sex and can’t have it, we go stark raving mad. Thus, the profession of sex-giving should be legal.
If one were to get a wound that one could not heal…one goes to a doctor.
If one’s house sustained damage that one could not fix…one hires a carpenter.
If one has mental issues that can’t be worked out…one goes to a therapist.
So, why should it be any different that when one needs to satisfy sexual needs, that one be able to seek professional assistance there as well.
Again, don’t be mistaken. Everytime you buy a gift, pay the bills, go on vacation or do anything positive for your cherished one, you’re doing it for sex. You’re doing it in a subtle way, but you are still buying sex.
People should be able to do what they want to, as long as it doesn’t harm others, PERIOD.
lol, I would like to correct one thing. There is a difference between prostitution and marriage. You get married in order to have access to a suitable partner that may result in sex. To maintain that constant secure available source of gratification you have to do stuff that may incur more then just monetary losses. You might have to go to in-laws, watch dumb movies, listen to boring gossip, or eat bad cooking.
A prostitute you don’t actually pay her for sex, you pay her to leave.
Dwight, fortunately my last girlfriend wasn’t materialistic, but I know of women who compplained that the husband didsn’t spend over 10k dollars on an engagement ring, constantly demanding new and more things. Wanting bigger and better houses. These guys shell out so much money, or mostly money they don’t have, explaining part of the huge debt problem in the US. And it’s based on the never being happy with what you have mentality here. If I had this, then I’d be happy. So it goes from i want an condo, now I wand a townhouse, now I want a McMansion. I want it with granite countertops. I want an SUV, all my friends have an SUV so I want it. So it’s spend spend spend. The funny thing is, so many marriages are sexless these days that it’s money exchanged for no sex, so the guys who see prostitutes are at least getting some. Happy marriages are rare. If the divorce rate is 50%, are the remaining 50% happy? Nope. A minority of marriages are happy. That’s why I think it’s a d ying institution.
stefan in prague says,
prostitution is legal here in czech republic. pimping is illegal. there are brothels, private adverts, massage parlors, escorts, and a few streewalkers. sometimes it’s a bit much, and yes there are abuses such as traficking, but overall it is far more positive a situation with very low rates of rape, sexual abuse, and HIV. it’s a fair commodity and trade one should have the right to use in a free, healthy and positive manner.
Prostitution should not be legalised.
The dangers that prostitutes currently face are unfortunate, but they do have an upside: they act as a powerful deterrent to some women who might otherwise sell themselves.
Proposals to legalise prostitution are always presented as humane acts for the good of the prostitute. But since when did the well-being of society’s outlaws merit such consideration? Prostitution is inevitable, but human beings have generally, in a variety of societies, with very few exeptions, instinctively felt that it was degrading and shameful, for both the prostitue and her client. I think that instinct is a healthy one. Legalising prostitution would undermine the sense of its wrongness and leave the society in question a little more degraded morally and soiled in its character. Values may be intangible but they are as real as any material thing. A society that legalises prostitution is one that is officially endorsing disdain for women, contempt for human dignity, and disregard for respectable work and respectable workers.
The practical benefits that are claimed for legalised prostitution are illusory. Organised criminals will have as great a share of legal prostitution as they did illegal. Men skilled in the use of violence will continue to coerce women into prostituting themselves, but now the pimps and slavers will have the law on their side. As long as a terrified woman says that she is consensually working in a brothel the police will be powerless to intervene, while the organised criminals, working through front-men and front-women, will count their now untouchable profits. Legalisation will turn out to be a criminals’ charter.
It is fantasy to imagine that legalisation will take prostitution off the streets. It will not affect the lowest class of prostitute, the homeless, the drug-addicted, and the diseased, i.e. those who will not be licensed under any legalised regime. Similarly with the minor pimps who lack the resources to control a legal brothel but who do have the means to terrify 3 or 4 girls into working the streets for them. And there will always be a class of client who will fear using an official brothel under any circumstances, and will prefer the greater secrecy and anonymity of the street.
Legalisation will coarsen social standards on sexual matters. It will encourage young women to become prostitutes by treating a moral and personal disaster as an ordinary profession, comparable to that of a nurse or care-worker. It will further sexualise our already over-sexualised society, most likely pushing us down the slippery slope of lowering the legal age of consent and perhaps taking a more tolerant view of bestiality and paedophilia, given the ease with which standards and limits crumbled in the case of prostitution. It will encourage a materialist and commercial view of human beings that is incompatible with respect, care, love or any of the feelings that make one human. It will mean the continued – and probably increased – infliction upon women of treatment that can only damage them morally, mentally, and as sexual beings, until they are as dehumanised as any commodity that is bought and sold.
Legalisation will bring very few benefits – except to the state, which will now become a super-pimp – while damaging society, women and prostitutes in many ways.
I went to Europe when I was 19, in 1975, and lived in a small town with a brothel. It was all new to me coming from a small, and prosperous town in Southern California. It made total sense to me. the male college students got the experience they craved, I was safe from unwanted advances, and the men were safe from STD’s since the prostitutes all had to have health cards. When I came back to California a year later, I was shocked by the pressure from the men. It was really uncomfortable. I would rather hear the men talk of their exciting experiences than have them want something from me when I was not ready for such things. Hearing the men also educated the women.
VictorK, there are going to be daily mass shootings with there being sexually frustrated, awkward people in an instant gratification society. Legalizing prostitution would actually save lives. Do you honestly think Cho would have gone on a rampage had he seen a Prostitute that morning? The guy likely died a virgin, and he was enraged and bitter about it. Because of the sick society we live in, we need to do things to prevent this, even if it means going against your morals. Wouldn’t you rather have prostitution be legal than have to read about another Virginia Tech massacre?
Legalizing prostitution will allow for regulating prostitution as well as taxing prostitution. Both regulating and taxing prostitution have benefits for our society.
With regulation comes better safety for the people doing the job (safety procedures can now be enacted to protect against abusive clients). With regulation comes better safety for the customers buying the service (health inspections can now be mandated of the prostitutes).
With Legalization, the negative elements of prostitution fade away. People would now be free to run such services out of their homes. The concept of a “pimp” would disappear. Because the activity could be dispersed instead of having to exist in some common area, the drugs, public drunkenness, and other negative behaviors, would also disperse and be lessened.
And then there are the taxes to be collected. With legalization, cash is no longer the required currency. Visa and debit can now be used thus allowing for better tracking (and taxing) of revenues.
There is no logical downside to legalizing Prostitution. The only reason it has not been legalized is strictly on moral grounds. And unfortunately such lack of reasoning is very short sighted and causes the issues with prostitution that we see today.
It’s unlikely that a woman with a respectable income will find it bearable to sell her body. Prostitutes are human beings in the first place. Only those driven by special circumstances accept prostitution as an alternative to a failing marriage or to strenuous jobs offering them starvation wages or pay. Many see it as a gate opening for them the world of luxury they wouldn’t otherwise have access to if they don’t use their body for such an access.
Legalising prostitution in poor and rich countries will make prostitution an aspect of economic exchange between them. Poor countries will offer prostitutes and rich ones offering clients. Is this a good way for getting a respectable income?
It’s unlikely that a woman with a respectable income will find it bearable to sell her body. Prostitutes are human beings in the first place. Only those driven by special circumstances accept prostitution as an alternative to a failing marriage or to strenuous jobs offering them starvation wages or pay. Many see it as a gate opening for them the world of luxury they wouldn’t otherwise have access to if they don’t use their body for such an access.
Legalising prostitution in poor and rich countries will make prostitution an aspect of economic exchange between them. Poor countries will offer prostitutes and rich ones offering clients. Is this a good way for getting a respectable income?
Steve: I prefer things as they are. It’s illegal but it happens. Any man who wants to visit a prostitute can, and if he’s discreet he won’t earn the attention of the police. Assuming that sexual frustration was Cho’s problem – and it’s not too farfetched an explanation for certain instances of homicidal violence, not least of the Jihadist stripe – I suspect that part of his difficulty would have been that he was too shy to visit a prostitute (a function of his particular cultural background). It’s not as if prostitues weren’t available in his locale.
This is one case where hypocrisy is the best approach: condemn it, give police the power to control and attack it where it threatens to get out of hand, but recognise human nature and accept that some men will always want to buy what some women will always want to sell. Deplorable but unavoidable; but not unavoidable and therefore to be treated with respect and consideration. An ineradicable social ill, like prostitution, can still be managed, stigmatised and contained for the benefit of society.
Prostitution has been legalized for a very long time only it goes under a different name, it’s called politics. One trip down the House of Commons and you’ll know it. In fact just watch Prime Minister’s question time and you’ll know it. Instead of an MP asking; “Does my right honorable friend agree with me that the new public loo in the town square of my constituency will make life more comfortable for the public and I’d like to invite him to its dedication ceremony where the new public pigeon perch statue of Sir Something will be unveiled for the first time,” why doesn’t he ask him how the government can justify committing the equivalent of one billion US dollars for an 80,000 seat temporary stadium for the Olympics when there are already so many other suitable stadia in London and whose only rationalization is the convenience of those attending opening and closing ceremonies when Britain has people on waiting lists for medical services from the NHS? Because the obvious answer is simple, the “politutes” have sold out their constituents and the rest of the British public to those who will profit from the stadium. And it’s all perfectly legal.
The short answer is yes, for a number of reasons.
For the women who participate, it would increase safety, give them better access to health care, counseling and offer legal protections that currently are not currently available. We have proven time and again that prostitution will always be with us, regardless of the amount we spend on law enforcement and moralizing against it.
From an economic standpoint, it makes a great deal of sense. As a legal trade, it can be regulated and taxed, increasing safety and health for all participants as, as well as (potentially) providing a revenue stream to the regulatory entities. It would also eliminate law enforcement expenses associated with arresting and prosecuting women, the cast majority of whom serve no time.
Social impacts are harder to define, but with the right regulatory framework, there would be reductions in the drug use, pimping and
physical/psychological abuses we associate with prostitution.
Legalization of consensual prostitution (a contract between
individuals) would enable law enforcement to utilize limited resources to target more odious aspects of the sex trade – child prostitution, trafficking of women and children and sex slavery.
Jim in Portland
I’m for the legalization and regulation of prostitution. Doing so will increase tax revenue,
reduce corruption, and improve the situation of the workers as well as the patrons who use their services.
VictorK, there would be no jihadists if they wren’t sexually frustrated, but sinc ethey are so religious, they simply wouldn’t partake except in sex in marriage, etc, so we have to bare the consequences of that. But we can prevent it for cases like Cho. That’s rather selfish that you would rather have it be illegal than save lives. If you are so opposed to prostitution, then please don’t visit them. Nobody say syou have to use them. But let those who want utitilize them. It will save lives. Again, it seems human life is less important to “moral” people than what would make the baby jesus cry.
I think the only downside to legalizing prostitution is that it will just give more freedom for women to make bad decisions. Most women simply cannot handle casual sex, it makes them non functioning basketcases that become even more emotionally damaged for the rest of their lives. They will not be able to handle a relationship even when they leave the profession. But then again, if they are adults, they should be free to make all of the stupid decisions they want, so long as they only blame themselves rather than blaming everyone else for their own stupid decisions. I’ve seen countless women in my life making incredibly dumb decisions, but only a tiny minority of them could take responsibility for the stupid decisions. The rest would blame others for their own decisions.
But there’s no shortage of women out there that basically have sex in exchange for something. Some even argue marriage is legalized prostitution. But any guy out there who does cocaine knows that very few women other than celebrities actually pay for the cocaine they use, they get it other ways, if you catch my drift. So basically, if you’ve had sex in exchange for something of value, you already are a prostitute.
Anonymous, Belgium
If there are health checks, then prostitution should be legalised
If we do not consider morality, then it should definitely be legalized. Some of the people on the program spoke about encouraging women to quit the sex business, about legalization increasing prostition, etc. But I found this odd. It’s like they’ve agreed to not say the word “morality”, but everybody still have it as the basis of their arguments.
If we do not consider morality, why would we want them to quit? Who knows. Maybe they like the job they are doing now. As for there being too many prostitutes, what is the problem? We may want more women to give it a try. In school career day, some people from the business may want to come and encourage girls to consider it as a vocation. BTW, if you don’t like what I am saying, just keep in mind the proviso “if we do not consider morality”.
Lastly, why are we sexist. Why consider women only. Can’t men be prostitutes as well?
Everyone grow up. Legalize it, unionize it, tax it. Just like any business.
Any of the talkers have a reason why men would pay for sex? Is this a men only issue?
As a public health issue, there is no reason to punish prostitutes. Still, it is imperative that we remove the structural causes of prostitution. Poverty, sexual violence, addiction, exploitation, and sexism must be confronted in order for a society to allow prostitution in the open.
Are MEN unable to be in or just unrecognized from field of prostitution??? They too can rent their bodies.
As well, the pornography industry which is regulated and condoned is nearly the same thing, the only difference is that they film themselves
Nevada, USA has legalized it in some areas, I suggest they should be consulted about how bad or well it works for all involved.
Steve: you’ve completely misread my position.
Men use prostitutes now, even though it’s illegal. I dislike prostitution but I’m not ‘opposed’ to it. I accept its existence as one of the many imperfections of the world and of humanity, but do oppose any attempt to make it official or more respectable. Liberals too often look at issues like this from an atomistic point of view, in this case the welfare of individual prostitues. But there is also a corporate interest, namely the consequences for an established society of legalising prostitution, and for me the consequences for the great majority of ordinary law-abiding families count for more than the putative benefits that will fall to a handful of sexual outlaws.
Cho’s problems were probably deeper than sexual frustration, since he lived in a highly sexualised society with easy access to prostitutes or even ‘emancipated’ women. To claim that legalised prostitution would, in his case, have saved lives is a leap of logic on your part for which there is no evidence, besides being redundant since he could have had then everything that legalisation would have given him.
There is nothing wrong with considering oneself a ‘moral’ person – even if you don’t see yourself in that way. And what would ‘make the baby Jesus cry’ is no bad standard for judging most actions: rape, murder, genocide, povery, war, etc would all have brought Him to tears. But clearly you’re no fan of Christ. Pity: your loss.
On another note: the stance of Western feminists on this issue (invariably pro-legalisation) shows just how frivolous and decadent the feminist movement has become: silent about gender apartheid in certain religions but clamorous about legalising the sexual commodification of women.
Legalising prostitution in Nigeria is going to be a hard sell. Firstly, in Nigeria, people tend to be holier than thou, but their moral capital is less than impressive. Secondly, due to this aforementioned attitidue, the general mentality is that such things arent acceptable culturally and religious-wise, so it would be foolhardy for a bill or law to be passed legalising prostitution.
Legalising prostitution in Nigeria wont be necessary, covertly, they are protected
Hello everyone,
I’ve met loads of female sex workers. I don’t know if that was legal or not, they are just people I met, and they are great people. Maybe not everyone involved in the industry is great people, but these ladies seemed to be good at what they did, and they liked sharing that with others like myself.
I think they have a service to offer in our society. Better to have adults recognized in the industry, instead of having older men preying on underage kids. Thank you.
Joey
Colorado, USA
I just tuned in to the show and wonder if anyone has mentioned the issue of human trafficking re: sex industry?
From various international aid reports, reports to the U.N., etc. human trafficking has a direct link to prostitution and the making of money thereof. Except that the women and children do not, in fact, get the money, even if they wanted it. They are kidnapped, forced, deceived, threatened, etc. And treated brutally.
I do not see how legalizing prostitution and/or decriminalizing it helps at all.
Prostitution is one of the consequences of sexism. By all means legalise prositution, but also help men to give up our sex addictions. This can be very effective by, for example, working on early sexual memories.
No country has legalised theft.It too is problematic in the same way,been with us for same time. There s other work if one wants. Safia (text)
I was 23 when I was visiting Amsterdam for the first time. My friend and I were staying
with a social worker who was very proud of how well his country took care of women
who were working as prostitutes. He offered to take us to the red light district and I
went with a very open mind. Seeing the women behind the glass windows, under the
colored lights, preening and posing… I ended up uncontrollably bursting into tears, and
I couldn’t stop – I couldn’t stay there – they had to escort me out – I couldn’t see to walk
for all my tears… It is so sad that some women are ever virtually forced to do this “work”
to survive… We do need to help them… If the “cleaned” up version is still so upsetting,
I know the illegal version is so much worse…
How can you get statistics for all the illegal goings on?
I called, but I think I’m just as well off sending an email
I’d just like to throw out the point that here in the US, I don’t think we’re ready for it. In theory it’s a great idea, but if it was actually put on the ballot, it would be political suicide. We’ve set aside a state where it’s legal, and as a result, we’d like to just put our heads in the sand the minute any wider debate is on the table.
To the point just made on the phone, I would say that the only time statistics can be actually collected is *after* it’s decriminalized/legalized, etc. There is no credible way to collect statistics about an illegal activity.
Steve – more women than you know can handle casual sex, but society makes them outcasts. Prostitution is one of the avenues where they can be honest about why they want a relationship.
I agree that girlfriends who insist on dinners, rings or other material goods are prostitutes. Any woman who gives a man sexual favors and gets something in return is practicing a form of prostitution – we just don’t call it that. Sex between 2 consenting adults, no strings attached, no goods to be traded is the only non-prostituting actions. Models sell their bodies, wives sell their bodies, it’s all in how you look at it. It’s just a matter of the price you put on your body. Either play the game of being “upstanding” and not being honest about the fact you’re selling your body to gain something from the man – or get honest that all situations where a woman gains something either material/emotional she is practicing a form of prostitution. Some women are just more honest than others.
VictorK, you are wrong. Cho didn’t have easy access to prostitutes. He lived in Virginia, a southern state, where they are incredibly strict. He was socially awkward, so these “emancipated” women you talk about were busy with the cool guys, the jocks, the whatever set Cho off. He saw everyone but himself getting laid. He became inredibly bitter and resentful to the point, compounded by his mental illness, he snapped and killed 30 people. Had he had the option of legal prostitution, of some woman that woudln’t reject him because he was socially awkward, because he has no “game” etc, he wouldn’t have been sexually frustrated, he wouldn’t have had the rage, and wouldn’t have killed those people. Those 30 would be alive today if prostitution were legal. It wasn’t, and they’re dead. Sexual frustration along with being bullied and whatever else happens to guys who cannot get sex is the cause of these rampages. If you’re fine with rampages, then a ban on prostitution should be good in your eyes. But legal prostitution would simply save lives.
Do you think Klebold and Harris would have shot up Columbine had they had sex that morning instead of gone bowling? Please..Come on, quit thumping the bible and actually care about the lives you people pretend you care so much about. If prostitution is morally repugnant to you, then don’t see a prostitute. Just like i fyou don’t drink you don’t have to ban everyone else from drinking because you don’t drink. At least with prostitution there’s no issue like drunk driving.
Imagine legal prostitution in a place where 1 in 7 are hiv positive. how does this make it safe to make it legal. tracy portland or
If we legalize prostitution, are we also legalizing male prostitution?
As I see it this is a two-part issue–the first should be unanimous, to get the women currently in prostitution because of drugs, abuse or coercion off the streets. There is rampant disease, cruelty, and misuse of women happening every day because of pimps and poverty. This should be unacceptable in any society, and equated with care for the homeless or otherwise destitute.
The second issue is whether or not to establish safe, clean, well-run institutions for women who choose the job. This would require licensing, taxation, unions, and legal recourse for the girls if a client or business owner gets abusive. This is a situation that is happening in several countries including certain districts of the USA, and should be an option for women to work and men to patronize these places. Morals aside, this is a business that is in demand in all countries.
Blanket legalization would do nobody any good, just as blanket illegalization has not.
Scott – while we are focusing on the female side, the male side applies. Maybe if we legalized it for all who Choose to participate would reduce the scandals of senators tapping their feet in restrooms. ^_~
Hey Mark!
Sounds to me like you didn’t get drunk enough, or the coke was pants…
Well put sir we are degraded by our weenies! I wouldn’t feel so bad if women would pay me.
I keep on hearing comments read on the air about women being “forced” into prostitution. That’s total garbage. These women make the decision unless they were kidnapped to do it. Nobody held a gun up to their head to get into that window in Amsterdam. They made the decision. You know, there are many guys who are poor, who have problems, and they don’t even have that option. They would probably be homeless. It’s more of the victim mentality women have, their own decisions are never their responsibility. Victim this, she was forced to that. I know one woman who used to be a prostitute, she only left because I yelled at her enough about it, and she willingly chose to go into prostitution, it didn’t bother her, it in fact bothered me more than it bothered her, despite her bad background, and sexual abuse, she still chose to do it rather than work a job in an office. It was HER decision and she accepted responsibility other than blaming her family for not stopping the abuse. But she becamse a prostitute YEARS after this had happened. When I hear the guest on the show saying “forced” into it, I get angered because they CHOSE to go into it. You need women to take responsibility for their actions, they aren’t always some kind of victim. If I make a stupid decision, then it’s my responsibility, i’m not forced to do it, right?
Linda, if society makes them outcasts, and women are a majority of society, aren’t women then at least somewhat to blame for society making promiscuous, casual sex women outcasts? Remember, women are a majority of society. I seem to only see other women calling each other “sluts”, and the most basketcasey women I’ve known have been the most promiscuous, casual sex types. I don’t believe they can handle it. They think they can, but then do the typical things women with zero self esteem do. You know, eating disorders, cutting, self loathing. They don’t exactly advertise this, but I don’t think you really believe what you wrote. The emancipated woman me think she can be a man, and act like a man (heck, I’m a men and I cannot handle casual sex, maybe I’m no ta real man)? But the women who think they can handle it, really only think they can, and actually become bigger bastketcases because of it.
So long as they can take responsibility for it, to blame only themselves, I have no problem with them making poor decisions. Problem is taht others bare the consequences. I’ve dated women that have gone down the route of making stupid decisions, and it impacted me. If I knew I was damaged, and unstable, and unable to make a commitment, I wouldn’t get involved with someone who wanted stability and commitment. Then again, I’m not selfish.
How sad that a sensitive man would somehow have to defend his position of wishing something better, more respectful, more caring for women.
Sadder even to hear that some women, like the ‘Madame’ you have on air, have so trampled their own feminine, sensitive, intuitive nature, to end up defending the position that drugs and other dependencies have placed them into.
Legalize it and watch the mafia take it over completely… Is that what we really want?..
(Mr.) Denis Guiet
Switzerland
from Rosemary, Granby, Connecticut, USA
What government agency will protect unwitting wives or partners from the various diseases that can be contracted and spread, regardless of “protection”?
Steve, yoo da man. You and Dwight have it right on point. Everyone else is still living in a fantasy. There wouldn’t be rampages and these children would be left alone if all the outcasts out there could get their rox ov.
I just had to add my 2cents. I went to lunch with the company and missed the whole damn program.
I’m happy to see that men are debating prostitution. I sent this e-mail to Peter Dobbie: This debate should be about men as consumers of sexual services provided by women. And the questions are: Should men be able to buy sexual services? Why? Should sex be considered a commodity by which to make money? Why? Do men really want sex devoid of any other context such as affection? Why? Why do men think that sex with a woman implies ownership of that woman? Do men think they are “entitled” by God, human nature, (whatever), to sex with women? If they do, why do they think that? If men feel such a strong need for sex with women, why do they hate the fact that they have this strong need? Does having a strong need imply that that need must be satisfied at any cost? When are we going to hear a debate from men about this? Would there be a sex industry if men didn’t have a lot of disposable income to spend on it? Do men consider marriage a form of prostitution? If so, why? Are there other societally-accepted unions of men and women which are considered prostitution by men? What are they? Do men, in fact, feel that they have to pay for any sex they receive anywhere? And is that, in fact, true?
I have one further question for men: Define sex.
Steve: I thought that only liberals believed that if you pass a law then from the time of its passage reality becomes whatever the law says it is (e.g. mandating racial or gender equality, or outlawing prostitution). Conservatives know that it just aint so.
You cannot seriously believe that there is no prostitution in Virginia or the South? There is a distinction between outlawing something and having a puritanical attitude to it. In late Nineteenth century England homosexuality was a criminal offence; but it was customary when a man was to be charged under the sodomy laws to give him the chance to flee the country. Oscar Wilde was prosecuted because he didn’t take his chance to run. Though the law in relation to this particular sexual irregularity was exceptionally harsh, the sentiments of the men who upheld that law it were far less severe, and were even compassionate (within limits). So with prostitution. Abdelilah has, in an early post, given the example of Islamic societies, who rave against prostitution but who also have a community of sex-workers in their midst. Societies are complex. Laws are not the only sign-posts to understanding them. This is the point I’ve been trying to get across and that you are unwilling to grasp. That’s why I commended a ‘hypcritical’ stance on prostitution. Condemn it and make it illegal, but allow its continued existence as something that cannot be eradicated but which can and should be kept within bounds.
Since Southerners are not puritans and have a conservative understanding of life’s realities, I suspect that Virginia’s attitude to prostitution is close to what currently prevails in England: deplorable but unavoidable; to be policed but not as a priority; punish those clients and prostitutes who are reckless (and stupid) enough to be caught, but with light sentences.
Even if you are right about Cho and the Columbine killers, it’s to very little purpose. Self-control and discipline are expected of every functioning adult in Western societies. to lack something – including sexual gratification – is not an acceptable reason for going on a rampage. There are lots of people not getting laid or not getting as laid as often as they would like who don’t turn into wide-eyed rampaging killers. You are acting as an apologist for murderers when you essentially argue that it was repressive laws against prostitution that led to the deaths at Columbine and Virginia Tech, and not depraved and irresponsible criminals. And where will your argument end? Every man should have a right to sexual relief (most rapists would agree, and would probably suggest that rape be de-criminalised too)? Getting laid should be a human right recognised in the UN Charter for the good of society and of the overly horny? And as the icing on the cake, chastity and sexual continence should be criminalised since they are both potential sources of genocide and nuclear war? These are only marginally more absurd than your no-sex-much-murder thesis.
The most salient aspect of Cho and the others you mentioned was probably not that they were sexually starved but that they were poorly socialised. Cho came from an inward-looking and self-referential ethnic sub-culture that didn’t prepare him for interacting with other, more confident, young people, especially females. The Columbine killers were, as I recall, typical of a certain kind of self-absorbed, self-important, emotionally stunted teenager. All cultures and societies produce these misfits and failures, some more than others. But most of these people, with a few more years experience of life, overcome their social awkwardness and become properly integrated. At is only the exceptional cases who become killers, yet these are the ones that you make the basis of your argument! Bizarre. There is no need to forge a link with prostitution to explain the results of immaturity, under-socialisiation and criminality. (But remind me, was Columbine also in Virginia or was it in some other part of the Jesus-loving South?).
And as to bible-thumping, remember that you were the one to introduce religion into this with your gratuitous sneer about the baby Jesus, to which I merely responded. I don’t think I have anywhere claimed to ‘care’ (a liberal cant word) about the lives of prostitutes. I care about the moral and cultural health of society, and view proposals to legalise prostitution with that in mind. Nobody in the developed world needs to be a prostitute. Anyone who wants to be one does so knowing the risks. And the law is on the side (with varying degrees of effectiveness) of those unlucky enough to be coerced. But the risks attending criminalised prostitution, though they may lead to harm to individual prostitutes, benefits society as a whole by deterring the incidence of prostitution and keeping prostitution as a demi-monde without any claims to respectability. An acceptable state of affairs, as far as I’m concerned.
BTW, debates like this about prostitution only confirm (albeit mistakenly) the opinion of the Jihadists, Islamists and Shariaists that the West is utterly degenerate and ripe for conquest. Muslims use prostitutes like other people; but I respect them for not trying to normalise and confer respectability on it. The proper view of this debate is that it underlines the degeneracy and moral bankruptcy of Western liberalism, which now exists to defend, celebrate and promote what is deviant, unrepresentative and diseased in our culture. A woman in a burqua is less repulsive and closer to female integrity than a state-approved prostitute. Liberalism is more destructive of Western society than Jihadism.
Sounds like Viola is playing the ol’ violin. Maybe you should read the other comments b4 you post one, dear.
VictorK: I will respond fully later. First, of course there is prostitution in Virginia and the South. There is prostitution everywhere, probably even in saudi arabia, But it’s illegal. If you get caught, you get prosecuted, and humiliated. There are places where they put your picture on a website or in a newspaper to humiliate you.
Sure, Cho and whomever else were poorly socialized. But what does that lead to? It means being shunned by women, and then that makes them have no sexual release and then they become sexually frustrated, and then lash out in violent ways. Ever seen the pictures of the guys in Pakistan protesting, how virulently angry they are? Do you think any of them are not sexually frustrated? I bet most of islamic extremism would die out if these guys would just get laid. But because of their beliefs, it won’t happen, so it’s pointless to discuss it. However, in the west, we can limit, though not eleminate violence if guys had sexual outlets. Face it, you don’t see many female mass murderers. There are other factors in it, but as virtually everyone knows the saying, women get as much sex as they want, men get as much sex as they can get. That means if you are poorly socialized and have no “game” as much sex as you can “Get” is ZERO. So these guys are going to be sexually frustrated.
I’ll write more later.
Chris, there would still be some rampages, just legalized prostitution would eliminate most. In germany, they have legal prostitution, but they still hav eshootings. Not many, but they have them, yet these guys could have utilized it. Maybe they couldn’t afford it, in that case you’d be still be sexually frustrated, but I think some people are so mentally ill they would kill. But I think sexual released would end most mass murders.
The University of Texas shooter in the 1960s was a married men, I can guess he had some sexual outlet, though they say his brain tumor somehow contributed to him killing those people, so prostitution probably would have made no differenc ethere. But my point is, if legalizing prostitution can save families the heartbreak of them losing their children, then it’s worth legalizing. If you have moral objections to prostitution (VictorK) then don’t see prostitutes.
Point taken. I concur.
It goes with everything…
If you don’t like something, don’t do it.
Leave everyone else alone.
Where’s that Viola? She seemed to have a lot to say about the matter.
All joking aside, if your marriage is based solely on sex, it probably won’t last. As a matter of fact I recommend that you marry somebody who is smart even if they are ugly. We are living longer today, and when she is in her 60’s and 70’s, well you are going to wish you had somebody smart to talk to. Even now, sex only takes up about 10 min. of the average married life per week. The rest of the time you have to talk to each other. You don’t want a partner who is a dummy.
Plain and simple, Sex is a commodity. Like alcohol, tobacco, and McDonalds burgers they come with considerable health risks. If it is legal, the business is conducted out in the open. There are governing agencies that oversee their business practices. Yes some slip through the cracks. Some alcohol and tobacco outlets sell to minors. Some McDonalds aren’t the cleanest places in town. They eventually get caught and pay the consequences.
Since sex is a product or service, it is subject to the laws of economics. There is a supply and a demand. Legalizing prostitution will remove some of the negative cost and encourage more people to go into the business, and hence more supply. More supply alone will drive quite a few of the lower valued prostitutes out of business. (we call them crack ho’s here in the states) More competition will cause prostitutes to add value to their product. If they make sure they are clean and disease free, they will be more appealing then their competition.
One sure way to drive up demand with out reducing supply is to make something less available, and/ or taboo. I am an American, so I can not tell you for sure. However, I am told that a good Honduran or Puerto Rican cigar is as good as most any good Cuban. However, since they are illegal her in the states you can expect to pay about 10 times more for a Cuban cigar of the same quality as you would a Honduran. Simply because they are harder to get and Taboo.
Prostitution is much like Alcohol. They tried to ban it in the 20’s here in the states. The problem is with some grape juice and bakers yeast you can make it anywhere. The sex business can be conducted anywhere. You can’t illegalize something that somebody can do in their kitchen sink. With it’s illegalization so came out the underbelly and corruption to support it.
We don’t accept violence against a masseuse in a massage parlor, nor do we accept that you can have a maid come to your house and abuse her. How is that different then expecting a prostitute to conduct business the same way?
In the kitchen sink? Whoa!
lol, sometimes that urge just takes you away. Next thing you know you are balancing over the kitchen sink with the garbage disposal running to add to the thrill. a few months latter you end up with a batch of home brew.
It is difficult to find a sustainable argument without running into contradictions in this debate, with the exception of the following few. VictorK’s reasoning is well thought out and possesses the rare quality of consistent logic. Abdelilah of Morocco’s post displays commendable frank and open honesty, as does Elle’s of US. Holly of US asks a pertinent and salient question, while Viola Anderson’s reality check of take-a-look-at-yourself questions, do put in a very neat perspective all that revolves around the sex industry. Chirs has, in responding to a different post, unwittingly provided an all-encompassing and correct answer to Viola’s questions, when he states: “chirs – US Nov 9th, 2007 at 6:55 pm:
” … we are degraded by our weenies! I wouldn’t feel so bad if women would pay me.”
Viola’s hard-hitting questionnaire and Chirs’ response say it all. If it were not for the undisciplined sex drive of the male species, there would be no prostitution industry, no girlie gloss mags with centrefold bunnies, no pornography industry, no paedophilia problem, no rape statistics, no gender descrimination and far less raunch in cinemascope with a zero to nil sexual undertone to advertising – in other words there would be zero sex crimes/issues to boot. What are the statistics for women perpetrators of sex crimes? Makes you think doesn’t it? Sweden has got it right by introducing penalties for the pursuers, rather than for the pursued, i.e. males and any associated who solicit females for paid sex are criminalised. I think this is the right direction – root out the cause, rather than penalise the manifestation.
Linda intelligently observes “other” forms of prostitution by women, who use their bodies without necessarily providing sexual favours, to gain “trinkets” and/or a better lifestyle, such as dating and professional modelling, etc. etc., but makes the erroneous judgement that therefore this justifies legalising sexual prostitution. Since when did two wrongs make a right?? To prostitute oneself can occur in any profession, occupation, public office or personal relationship without the necessity of exchanging sexual favours. It is obviously misguided to limit the occurrence of this ‘more moral’ form of prostitution to the female gender alone and even more misguided to suggest that it is acceptable – is not to many of us. Perhaps she means it is not illegal and therefore why should the sexual prostition be made illegal? As Mark’s post suggests, his “politute” politicians prostitute their own personal values every day to stay in Government, as do many others in business in their quests for power/fame/recognition and more dollars and we all decry such moral prostitution. Note too that the word in this context has been quoined from sexual prostitution to strongly denegrate the “other” form of social “usery”. So why has the original form of prostitution from which we have quoined this parody, suddenly become so very morally acceptable that we would want to legalise it?
Steve kills all of his own logic in one inadvertent fell swoop, when he reveals that even he has an inherent sense of morality in this telling sentence: ” …I’m a man and I cannot handle casual sex”. Overall Steve’s argument is horribly flawed. If we legislated for the majority to accommodate the imbalances of the minority – such as Cho – our social structure would be a chaotic nightmare. This is the mistake political activists and minority lobbyist groups make – they seek to turn the general silent majority on its head for the sake of a few. It is unfortunate that the few have their problems and we should do what we can for them, but I wish minority groups could realise they mostly advocate throwing the baby out with the bathwater, rather than just getting rid of the dirty water and keeping the baby. It is not rocket science – just common sense.
The truth is that the Agenda of those who will advantage from legalising prostitution have preyed upon the weaker intellects among our lobbyists and leaders, including those among them who don’t support legalisation, but who must prostitute their personal morals, because they are aligned with a party which does supports it. Those pushing this Agenda have effectively been able to fly the argument that two wrongs, (if you cannot prevent them), will make a right. We can’t ultimately prevent many murders, robberies, frauds, assassinations, corruption, money laundering, rape, paedophilia and all the sordid activities and by-products that go with them. Does that mean we should legalise them too?
Dinger, I meant I would prefer not to have casual sex. Because I don’t want it doesn’t mean it should be banned for everyone. Just like I don’t like tomatoes, and would never eat one, but I don’t think anyone else should be deprived of tomatoes because I don’t like them. Facts are, in the countries where prostitution is legal, and men have some kind of sexual outlet, there is less violence like Virginia Tech. Feel free to deny it, and when you find yourself the victim of a gunman (note, it won’t be a woman because women aren’t sexually frustrated, and if they are, it’s by choice, possibly being overselective, they at least have options, whereas guys like Cho had none), maybe you wouldn’t have been shot if he had some legal outlet to relieve his sexual frustration. I don’t know if you people read, especially freud, but just about everything we do has some sexual basis for it. Some guys cannot get women at all. These guys will eventually become a menace if they have no outlet. If your morals wish to forbid them from having a legal avenue, then that’s on you, but so also are the deaths that result.
Actually, Chris, I didn’t say anything. I only asked questions. If you consider questions to be commentary, that is your problem. I did read the post; thus, I opened my comment by saying, “I am happy men are debating prostitution.” I meant that and even though some of my questions were answered by some of the comments, all of them weren’t. For instance, the reason I asked men to define sex for me, meaning the sex act, is that the argument is sometimes made (it is in this blog) that if young men like Cho had access to cheap, readily available sex, they might not commit so much violence against others. So I need someone to define the sex act and sexual release and how a man gets that, as none of you consider masturbation, apparently, as an acceptable alternative to sex with a woman (again, what kind?). I read an excellent short story a long time ago, written by a man, that has stuck with me and made me think, although I believe the story was aimed at men. This story was about a young married man who wants to have sex with his wife, but finds to his chagrin that it is as if she returns to virgin status after every sex act, so that he must persuade her each and every time he desires sex, instead of just doing it, which is actually what he would prefer. What would be your interpretation of that story? You first, please. Then I’ll have a go.
Steve, using your own logic, a case could be made for women going on the rampage and murdering randomly if they are unable to get a man to take care of their financial needs.
Sorry viola, but there is no link between financial needs and violence. It’s scientific fact that sexual frustration leads to violence. Try a little harder viola. Take China for example. They will have a major problem in the future with sexual frustration, and the one child policy, with many of the girls being aborted, meaning there will be very few females for the males.
When looking for connections between sex and violence, do a web search for the Bonobo chimpanzee. The female hold the dominate power position. they have sex to quell aggression between two males. they are the promiscuous primate community know. They are also considered the most peaceful.
This is what one website found here (http://www.zoosociety.org/Conservation/Bonobo/WhatIs.php) “One special feature observed in bonobo society is the low level of aggression between individual bonobos. Bonobos are less apt to engage in physical conflicts and confrontations with other groups of bonobos. Their generally peaceful society is attributed to the evolution of a highly complex social system.”
“genital contact functions as social appeasement during times of group tension.”
I know my household gets more flowery and less tense after an encounter.
Come, now, Steve. How can you say there is no link between financial need and violence? Don’t pimps use violence against their girls if they get out of line and threaten their profit by which their financial needs are met? Don’t armies go to war for financial gain? This sex or violence thing smells like blackmail to me.
Viola, if you look at the average soldier in the US army, they don’t make much money. A Private might make $16,000 a year. You can make more working at Starbucks and not have people shooting at you, so I don’t see them raking in the money from fighting wars. They aren’t allowed to loot or anything like that. some people might commit some crimes because they are poor, like how Jean Valjean stole bread to feed is family. However, financial conditions don’t lead people to bring in multiple guns and lots of ammo to a university and murder 30 people. Sexual frustration does lead to that, and you will see more and more of that in the future, and the culprit will 9 out 10 times be a socially awkward guy, who was teased, taunted, and women wouldn’t give him the time of day (hence, very sexually frustrated). You can choose to deny it, but people will still die, but you can deny that too if you’d like, doesn’t make it any less true though. Why don’t you read up on the shooters? They’re virtually all sexually frustrated males, angry at women. Ever heard of Marc LePine and the Ecole Polytechnique shooting in montreal? He targeted only women.
Many causes can be attributed to violence. Mental cruelty is one, the threat of starvation is another, fiscal greed is another, religious and cultural differences are a couple more, political fanaticism is yet another … the list is endless. Sexual frustration hardly holds a monopoly. Should we legalise everything that is likely to cause violence??? It is a silly logic and totally unsustainable. I think you are dodging the issue of the real problem behind all of the above, namely that there is an inherent instability of and inability by the perpetrator to exercise self-discipline within the confines or acceptable social norms. It would be difficult to argue that the users of prostitutes constitute the global majority, so why legislate to please a minority or to safeguard an industry which is not considered desirable? As I said, two wrongs don’t make a right.
If your testosterone is bursting at the seams, find ways to manage it to fit with social norms, but don’t try to impose your sexual norm upon everyone else who doesn’t have your problem. If necessary, take up a highly exertive sport. Wives of hard training athletes tell us their husband’s libido falls dramatically at these times. Try it!
I wonder why, when economies go bad, the first thing done is to hire and train more police? Could it be because hungry people become violent? I agree, women as a rule do not become violent in such circumstances, but even that does not always hold true. Sometimes more law enforcers are hired before the economy crashes. Read some history about war, Steve, and how it has been conducted in the past, and how much looting and rape goes on. Your argument does not hold up. Your mention of anger and sexual frustration are not news to me. I’ve read of all the instances of violence you mention. It really sounds as if you are trying to lay the blame on all women for selfishly withholding their favors when they could save the world by sacrificing their bodies.
But, you know, it is fruitless to get into this kind of argument. I am genuinely interested in why men believe their sexual frustrations are caused by lack of women when it is obvious that simple sexual frustration can be relieved by masturbation. I think it is a convenient, male-accepted way of avoiding saying that they are lonesome and need human contact and acceptance. It also smacks of a toddler throwing a tantrum because she needs that candy.
Viola, when people are poor, they usually have no legit means of obtaining things. That’s not the same as an excuse for rioting and looting. If you’re dirt poor, and you wind up stealing TV sets and stereos for your own personal use or even for selling, it’s just that you’re a criminal. If you break into a grocery store because you are starving, it’s because you were poor and couldn’t eat food. They aren’t really comparable, but still both are breaking the law, but I think a jury woul dbe more sympathetic to the person who stole food. Yes, rape and looting has taken place during war, especially during WW2, with the Soviets and the Germans, but the point of war wasn’t so that soldiers could loot and rape. It was because of political differences between the countries, or one country wanting the resources of the other. That’s no the army gaining, it’s the ruler, like Hitler. He needed oil, so he invaded, he needed “lebensraum” so he invaded. It wasn’t “I need my soldiers to steal silverwear from Mrs. Potemkin’s house.” Please..
Viola, there are some men that have no ability to get sex other than for paying for it. Given you’ve never been a male, you don’t know that no masturbation is equivalent to sex. Don’t embarrass yourself, please. A guy who realizes that his only “outlet” is masturbation won’t cut it for him. Just you saying that shows how clueless you really are. I remember my introductory psychology professor’s statement “You may not need sex to survive, but you will surely lose your will to live if you don’t get it.” Remember, women get as much sex as they want (just lower your standards) and men get as much sex as they can get (some men can get none due to their personalities, their lack of social skills, etc). Viola, you simply don’t know what you’re talking about. It would be like me talking about PMS or bloating, or having a period. You simply cannot talk about something you don’t understand, so please stop, okay? Just look for more mass killings, and most could have been prevented if the shooter had a sexual outlet. Thinking masturbation is going to stop that shows you don’t know what you’re talking about. I have a feeling that Mr. Cho probably set world records following your advice.
Answer me this. If Klebold and Harris had seen prostitutes the morning of their rampage rather than having gone bowling, do you think they really would have done it?
Well, thank you for enlightening me, Steve. Hey, how about that joke–I wish my wife was as dirty as my car? How about that Woody Allan and “Do you think sex is dirty?” His reply, “It is if it’s any good.” Is that man-type thinking? I understand that. And, yeah, I think they would still have done it once they figured out that sex with a prostitute didn’t get them what they actually wanted, which was to kill someone.
The rush to “legalize” sins is ill advised.
It destroys the nation or empire that attempts it.
Legalise Prostituition …..
is a start towards trouble among
the people that will think they can
bring in people under 18 to do it…….
Dennis from Madrid, U.S.A.