Dutch launch sex workers' first union.

[serge]

If you're good with your hands and other body parts why the fuck not?

url

Spare me the 'sex is evil' discussion.. sex is the driving force of our existance and evolution. As far as 'this is degrading to women'.. I'm not so sure now.. is this (in it's lawful, orgazined fashion) more degrading compared to women picking up your dirt for minimum wage?

[Griff]

I'm for decriminalizing the trade. It seems like the best way to address the health and saftey problems surrounding the activity. I guess the real question is...will hookers get as surly as truckers and teachers and how will that impact business.

i personally am all for legalizing prostitution. honestly, there are just some women (and men) who lack the skill set required to make what we would dub "an honest living." so they resort to fucking for money. and that's what it is. it's not making love. it's fucking. and sometimes, everyone needs to get fucked. some people can't do this on their own. so they pay for it.

i, personally, have never used a prostitute. and i likely never will. but i can understand that some people might want to. i can also understand that some people would like to have that as a "career" or just a part-time job. whatever.

if it was legal, the government could (and would) tax it, and we wouldn't spend any money trying to shut it down. face it - sex for money, in its most basic form (that is, i give you money, you lick and suck my erect penis until i achieve sexual gratification, i leave, you brush your teeth and then sit and wait for the next guy), has no downfalls. the real problem comes with things like pimps, girls being forced to sell themselves to support a drug habit, etc. with regulation from the government, as well as brothels operating like a business, i think it would be good for all involved. a woman would become licensed, go to work for a business, and wahoo. every month she has to be tested for disease. must use protection at all times. they make money, they pay taxes, our taxes go down, it's all good. no one hurt.

i've held this viewpoint for a few years. my friend andrea has given me the most opposition. "it's degrading"... uh. not really. as the original poster pointed out, it's just doing something that WE ALL LIKE TO DO. i like to have sex. i'll have sex tonight. i won't feel degraded. neither will jenni. yes, ours will be different. it won't be "fucking" - it will be "making love." but she wouldn't feel degraded in fucking either. and neither would i. besides, i know PLENTY of girls who like to play around, like to play rough. no one would be FORCING these women to do it - they would do it by CHOICE. i don't see how this can be degrading.

anyway... i'm running for president in 2016. probably on the republican ticket with a platform of legalized drug use (at least marijuana, although i do not smoke it and never will - same rule applies though - government regulation == better stuff == money for us == no drug cartels), legalizing prostitution, cleaning up the cities and protecting the rights of the citizens. vote david ham for president.

[Undertoad]

I have nothing to add except, D, you've got my vote fer sure...

[tw]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
i've held this viewpoint for a few years. my friend andrea has given me the most opposition. "it's degrading"... uh. not really. as the original poster pointed out, it's just doing something that WE ALL LIKE TO DO.

Your friend Andrea still has views that threaten the basic structure of American democracy. Does it harm anyone else? No. Does it affect her? No. But instead, like religious right extremists, she would ban something because their acts violate her emotions?

In the Libertarian perspective, laws make things illegal when they harm others. Does prostitution harm others. No more than having your daughter sign up for the Army.

These are the prinicpals on which this country was founded. Puritans came to America to practice wife swapping. Oh-h-h, disgusting? Maybe to me. But then their wife swapping does not attack or threaten anyone else nor the integrity and fiber of American society. In fact, starting with typing for organ transplants, wife swapping is so common that 20% of all kids are not fathered by their father - today as it was back in the prudish 1950s.

What is scary to me is that Andrea does not understand how anti-American her viewpoint really is.

well, specific to andrea, i think really the problem is that she holds sex as something sacred. which is fine. but even recently, she'd been talking about wanting to "sow my wild oats." i don't think she was talking casual sex, but it was about not being tied down. which is okay. some people just take it to the "extreme." but, like i said, they don't really. they just do it a little different.

in truth, america really is about having those freedoms. they're essential. the bill of rights doesn't say "yeah yeah, americans can speak freely and shit." it says "government can't fuck with their right to speak freely." big difference. these freedoms are what america is based upon. i find it mind boggling that so many people forget them, getting locked into their own little view point. my grandfather once told me "keep an open mind" - it's the best advice i've ever gotten. it's so obvious as to warrant a response of "i know"... but yet, it's some of the best advice there is...

i'm not sure if any of the posters/readers have ever seen "orgazmo". funny movie, but that's not the point. i brought it up because there's a short conversation in there that raises a good point. a woman says to ron jeremy (i'm paraphrasing here, i've only seen it once, and that was a year ago) "porn exploits women." and he says back "no, it exploits men, because it feeds on their desires." well, it's the same thing with prostitution. it's taking advantage of the man because it's feeding off one of one of the basic human instinctive NEEDS: to ejaculate in a woman's vagina (the fact that they're not actually reproducing is irrelevant - we are the way we are because we need to reproduce - the act of reproduction, i.e. ejaculating in a woman's vagina, feels good so we will do it often).

i'm willing to say, however, that prostitution, at its basic form (as described above, in my earlier post), hurts no one. it is a simple "i give you money, you give me service" arrangement. it differs from having a plumber clean your pipes (no pun intended) in only two ways: 1) the actual act itself and 2) the taboo of sex we have in our society.

i'm really losing my point here, but let me bring up something else interesting: i've heard it said by people, refuting my argument, that sex should only be with someone you love. says who? if you extend that, then all sex should be "making love". and therefore, we are not allowed to have any desire to fuck? so all sex must be pious, and for the express intent of procreation? i assume, then, that you do not masturbate, never use birth control and have only had sex when you and your partner were attempting to achieve conception? everyone has desires other than having "wholesome" "clean" sex. it's natural. and we're getting out of touch with who we really are.

i think it all really goes back to religion. religion makes people feel guilty about their "sins". we feel shame for being human. why? because some people a long time ago decided we should. probably so they could increase their power. sorry, but i don't. and you shouldn't either. the desires we have are perfectly normal. and if you can act upon them without hurting anyone, then that's OK.

this brings us back to our nation being founded on freedom. "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"... as long as it doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights.

i get head, she gets money. i'm happy, she's happy. no crime committed.

that's why i think our condemnation of prostitution is silly and, as tw put it, unamerican.

[elSicomoro]

Sure, make it legal:

--Make all prostitutes register, as you would register a business
--Make them pay either the food/entertainment tax that many businesses currently pay or levy a special rate.
--Require an HIV/STD checkup every 3 mos. Your results on this are contingent on getting your license renewed or keeping it. (kinda like a health inspector checking a restaurant)

dham brought up the taboo of sex in American society. We love to read about it, see it on television, talk amongst friends about it. Yet our government (and some of the general public) play hear-no-evil, see-no-evil. Jesus...sex can be fun! Get over it...

[jaguar]

Good old negative and positive rights eh tw?

Heck, why not, its *the* oldest business after all.
Hit the nail on the head dhamsaic.

As for sex being held sacred I have to say in some way there is something in that. I’m going to make an absolute botch of saying this but...(and feel free to reply to this, I’m curious for older opinions) Relationships tend to be a kind of journey, in the sense of getting closer, physically getting *ahem* allot closer can be a bloody big waypoint on that journey, least at my age. Girls (particularly) who sleep around invalidate that which makes it harder to have a deep relationship) at the same time there is nothing wrong with a casual fuck every now and then...(he says to cover himself). By doing less it makes everything mean allot more.

The thing that always got me (and some female) friends is that a guy who gets around is a legend, but a chick who sleeps around is a slut, not really fair is it.

The whole sex only with someone you love really is a very outdated case of social conditioning.

What is scary to me is that Andrea does not understand how anti-American her viewpoint really is.

Considering something like 97% of American is Christian and we know by existence of the Republicans that there are allot of very religious people out there, wouldn't it be American? You define what is American by what the majority think or by what's in the constitution or something?

Originally posted by jaguar
Considering something like 97% of American is Christian and we know by existence of the Republicans that there are allot of very religious people out there, wouldn't it be American? You define what is American by what the majority think or by what's in the constitution or something?

uh... I'm a Republican. I am not Christian. And we sure as shit aren't 97% Christian. Consider the fairly large community of Islam, as well as the agnostics, as well as the athiests (such as myself)... Maybe 80%, but no way 97%...

America was founded on the principles of freedom. Some of us still see that. That's what America is about. And things restricting that or demonizing that are un-American.

[serge]

I was going to point out the same thing by finding appropriate census.org url but I know that even that data is very misleading. Think about how many people put down "Christian" on the form when they never go to a church, etc. But those number can't really be factually proven.. plus the disinformation Machine that is the u.s. government (especially under boy george's reign) combined with general lack of will to honestly inquire about such things......

[jaguar]

I always thought that figure was a tad sus but there sure does to be alot more hardcore christians than in most of the western world...Or mabye i'm falling for media overhype again.*sighs*

As for the republicans, the virtualy mainstream anti-abortion movement etc kinda gave me that impression. Not to mention that all-round fuckwit Ashcroft.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by jaguar
I always thought that figure was a tad sus but there sure does to be alot more hardcore christians than in most of the western world...Or mabye i'm falling for media overhype again.*sighs*

Well, there's no doubt that the US is overly Christian. Unfortunately, you only hear from a few of the wacky ones like Oral Roberts, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell. They by no means represent the majority of those that are Christian and American. Oh, and let me not forget the Moonies. As the bumper sticker says, "The Christian Right is neither." I'd say it's more hype than anything...and $$$.

As for the republicans, the virtualy mainstream anti-abortion movement etc kinda gave me that impression. Not to mention that all-round fuckwit Ashcroft.

Ashcroft is a premium tool. Period. He lost his Senate seat to a dead guy last year. (God bless the spirit of Mel Carnahan.) *thinks for a minute* The only good thing I remember him doing as Governor of Missouri was repealing the Blue Laws (which banned most businesses from operating on Sundays in the state) in 1987. His state attorney general won a big anti-abortion case in the US Supreme Court that had the pro-choice crowd concerned, until another case from Louisiana (I believe) overturned it.

Republicans come in many shapes and sizes. While there is the stereotypical one (white, wealthy, Christian, suburbanite, pro death penalty, anti-abortion), some are pro-choice (Tom Ridge, our former governor, and the new Secretary of Homeland Security is one). We now know dham is not Christian. And (although I cannot even fathom why), some Republicans are Hispanic (George P. Bush, George Bush's nephew) and African-American (Rep. J.C. Watts of Oklahoma).

One interesting note regarding Republicans though: During the Presidential primaries last year, the state of Virginia had voters sign a (non-binding) notice stating that they would vote Republican in the November election. The rationale for this was that Virginia had only a Republican primary, and many Democratic voters were planning to go in and vote for John McCain (b/c while the primary was for Republican candidates, the primary itself was open to all voters).

[jaguar]

My point, while kind of lost now (and this should be a thread in itself) is do you define the values of a nation (such America ) on what it was founded on etc or what it is today, what the majority of the population think etc. I’ve come across the same argument with where governments we would hate and some have said we should overthrow are the view of the majority of the population. While leads into the whole thing with absolute rights and wrongs. Oh god am I rambling on today..