Craigslist Removes Its Controversial Adult Section

Cyrus writes "The online classified website Craigslist has removed its controversial Adult Services portion of its website. Technology blog TechCrunch was the first to report the section had been blacked out with the word 'Censored.'"

Comments

oh darn

[ravenspear]

now all the prostitutes will post in casual encounters

Re:oh darn

[ravenspear]

I agree completely and have nothing against prostitution, it's just that this will clog up the casual encounters section for people that aren't looking to pay money for sex. That's why it made much more sense to have a separate section for it.

Re:oh darn

[FuckingNickName]

If the girl herself wants to do it, there's no "victims".

Oh, that old argument.

Look, there are many good arguments for the legalisation of prostitution per se (even for minors, although the person paying for services would then likely be breaking some statutory rape law).

But it's without foundation to bring up the "lots of women want to do it" argument. And "want to do it", whatever the tedious capitalist he-may-be-interned-in-a-factory-but-at-least-he's-not-dying-in-the-fields armchair philosophers will tell you, must not be confused with "is desperate for money and willing to do it because there is no viable alternative". I have not read any evidence that a majority of prostitutes work because they enjoy being prostitutes. Have you?

Stop being a "prostitution is no initiation of force therefore it should be legal therefore it is OK" libertard and instead ask "Is it moral in general to pay for prostitutes?" Don't use the exception of the $xE6/year professional dominatrix with a fancy web site living in Hollywood and servicing the stars. Consider the average prostitute.

Re:oh darn

[Man On Pink Corner]

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

I have not read any evidence that a majority of prostitutes^Wfast-food workers work because they enjoy being prostitutes^Wfast-food workers. Have you?

Re:oh darn

[FuckingNickName]

I've read through your post 3 or 4 times to try to work out what point you're trying to make. Possibly:

1. The initial hypothesis was that people may be prostitutes because they enjoy it, perhaps a specific case of the general "all jobs are voluntary so people surely do them because they enjoy them" nonsense. You've given another example of a job which people don't necessarily do because they enjoy, so I guess you're attempting to provide evidence against that hypothesis.
2. Fast-food work is as physically dangerous, emotionally debilitating,
   unregulated, lacking in any benefits, controlled by highly abusive bosses and as associated with severe social stigma as prostitution.
3. Fast-food workers across the world are typically as desperate for money as prostitutes.

Re:oh darn

[FuckingNickName]

You've managed to misread my post in so many ways that you may be trolling. Let me break it down like I did to the "other poster":

1. There was no argument made that sex is immoral. Sex is not the same as paying prostitutes.
2. There was no argument made that prostitution should be illegal. I pointed out that there are good arguments to make prostitution entirely legal.
3. Morality and legality are not the same thing. Even insane chain-smoking cult leader Ayn Rand understood this.

Re:oh darn

[Anonymous Coward]

the point was, that people do all kinds of things when they are desperate for money, and they aren't illegal. so why single out prostitution as being somehow worse than the other ones? whether or not they *want* to, they are *willing* to in order to make a lot of money in a very short period of time.

Re:oh darn

[fredmosby]

When people were working in factories under horrible conditions for little pay they didn't solve the problem by making working in factories illegal, the workers unionized and the government passed minimum wage and safety laws. If we banned all the jobs that people only do for money there wouldn't be very many legal jobs.

Re:oh darn

[migla]

You're kind of right. Being able to hire people who need the money to do a shitty job is exploitation. But there's a big difference in being fucked by the exploiter figuratively and literally. Sex is intimate and can screw with you worse than the boredom and aching feet (or whatever) that flipping burgers entails. There are similarites between prostitution and other kinds of "wage slavery", but the two are generally in different leagues of fuckeduppedness.

Re:oh darn

[JWSmythe]

    Have you talked to many escorts to come to this conclusion? It really doesn't sound like it.

    Have you talked to your average worker in a fast food restaurant or big box store? Unless they're just out of high school, they're miserable.

    Stop forcing YOUR morality on others. It's a choice, both by the service provider, and by the customer. One way or another, we're all in the same business. We want something, and we give something for it. So your morality may say that you need to spend money on fancy dinners and expensive trinkets, coming to a climax where a lavish party is thrown because you put a multi-carat diamond on some poor girls finger. It's all down hill from there. Will you cheat on her? Will she divorce you and take half of what you have?

    Prostitution, under it's various names, is far more honest. You negotiate the fee for services rendered, and then you each get what you wanted. Simple. The same concerns apply in the interaction with her, or a girl you met elsewhere. Wear a condom, and keep track of your wallet.

    They made the choice to go into the industry. Their customers made the choice to get services from the industry. It's simple. I've known a few women who work in the industry, and they refuse the option of taking a "normal" job, for a fraction of the pay and losing flexibility with their life. Those of us who work in an office don't get the choice of saying "I have a headache, I don't want to work today", or "I have other things to do, pay me for Saturday night instead." None of them were forced to do it. Very few look back at a "regular" job with any sort of passion for it.

    I won't say that there aren't bad elements in the industry, but if you look at how many corporations work you'll see worse behavior. You have overworked, underpaid disgruntled people wondering if they have a job tomorrow. Will I get fired? Will the company be downsizing? Will the company fold? I've seen a lot of good hard working 9 to 5 people suddenly find themselves without an income, because they came into work, just to find that they didn't have a job any more. Maybe you're independently wealthy, and don't have to worry about such things, but for the rest of the world, we have bills to pay.

    Because of people like you, who have forced your morality on others, it's put these working women in danger. Legalization and acceptance of the industry is the only way to remove the bad elements of the industry.

Re:oh darn

[Man On Pink Corner]

It'll be interesting to see you justify a single assertion in that post without resorting to religious arguments, or without projecting your own personal moral hangups on the rest of humanity as a whole.

The truth is, prostitution is not a particularly dangerous job when it's kept above-board and regulated by health authorities. This move on Craigslist;s part will instead drive the trade farther underground than it already was.

Re:oh darn

[phantomfive]

So your morality may say that you need to spend money on fancy dinners and expensive trinkets, coming to a climax where a lavish party is thrown because you put a multi-carat diamond on some poor girls finger. It's all down hill from there. Will you cheat on her? Will she divorce you and take half of what you have?

Of course, some people mature from their early 20s sex-insanity, realize that sex isn't everything, and then actually love the person they get married to, and have a nice life after that. Not everything in life is a direct result of sex.

This really should be obvious on Slashdot, where half of us would rather code than have sex :)

Re:oh darn

[Anonymous Coward]

How about this simple argument: if person A wants to fuck person B, and person B wants to pay them to do it, who the fuck are you to tell them that they're not allowed to?

Re:oh darn

[snowgirl]

I speak from anecdotal evidence, so I know this does not apply to everyone in the field. There certainly are women who don't really want to do the job, and these people certainly deserve a path out of their professional field, but there are a number of people like that in almost all careers.

You'd be surprised that it doesn't take a big stretch for a woman to get to the 6 figure mark, or at least what would be a 6 figure income if their pay is used as "take home", and we extrapolate what they would be earning if they were paying their proper taxes, etc.

I know one particular former call girl who willingly and knowingly entered into the field of her own free will, and felt more honest about her earnings than when she was working as a computer programmer.

Most people object to prostitution on two grounds: human trafficking, which should be wrong anyways, mistreatment by their pimps, or the dangers presented by clients. Most people who are against prostitution are not against the prostitutes themselves. They see them as "trapped" in a position where they have a high likelihood of harm. Yet, if we legalized it, then human trafficking would still be wrong, mistreatment by their pimps could be handled by police and other governmental authorities, and protection against clients is guaranteed the same way.

In Sweden, prostitution is not illegal, but being a pimp and frequenting a prostitute are illegal. Imagine the wonderful nature of your transaction of: "if you stiff me, I can call the cops, and they'll arrest you, and I walk away." Clients won't screw their prostitutes in this case. The same with pimps. "Go ahead, slap me... I'll call the cops, and they'll haul you away, and I can admit openly that I'm a prostitute, and I won't get taken away."

How about making prostitution a SAFE profession, rather than demanding it be illegal to stop people from doing it? If you're concerned about their health from the sex alone, either physical and/or mental, then when shall we expect an intent to make promiscuity itself illegal?

Re:oh darn

[Dhalka226]

Stop being a "prostitution is no initiation of force therefore it should be legal therefore it is OK" libertard and instead ask "Is it moral in general to pay for prostitutes?"

Gee, I wonder if you've made up your mind in advance at all? "Stop being a retard who disagrees with me and instead ask a question that I will only allow you to conclude the same as I do without being insulted!" Hey, thanks! If you think that position is wrong, then the onus is on you to explain why.

If your hypothesis that most women are only prostitutes because they are desperate for money and there is no viable alternative is correct, then all you have done is criminalize what even you describe as their only choice to make money. At best, in your world, you stop them from doing the only thing they can do to survive. At worst they do it anyway and are criminals in addition to paupers, with all of the stigma and danger associated with any criminal activity. At least if it were legalized, there could be some protections in place both for the prostitutes and for the Johns. When "hope you don't get beaten and robbed" or "hope your pimp is a nice guy" are your only protections, there's something wrong.

So, the six-figure-a-year celebrity hookers probably want to do it and they're making money hand-over-fist, so I don't see an argument to prevent it from that extreme. The opposite extreme (buying into your argument) is that the women don't really want to do it but have no other choice to survive, making legalizing it a slightly better alternative to a terrible situation that actually has very little to do with prostitution and more to do with hopeless economic conditions. Somewhere in the middle are women who aren't sexual millionaires but either want to do it, don't care either way or don't particularly want to do it and don't need to but consider it easier or faster money than the available alternatives. I'm seeing an entire spectrum where not a single data point would lead me to the conclusion that prostitution should be illegal.

In fact, the only reason I can think of is the one supposed by your question: Imposing my set of morality on other people. My answer to your question about whether or not it is moral to pay for sex is "why the hell should I care?" If it doesn't involve me I don't find it to be any more my business than whether or not your wife or girlfriend (or boyfriend) is kinky in the sack. If it does, then I can exercise my own morality to my own actions and relations -- exactly as it should be. I wouldn't date a hooker, whether it was legal or not. I don't respect the behavior. It doesn't mean I need it to be criminal to prove my moral superiority.

Now, legalizing prostitution isn't simple; it's something that would need to be done carefully to achieve any of the potential benefits and avoid a clusterfuck of potential problems. Very probably other laws would need to be created or changed. But all in all, if "I don't approve of what you're doing with your body" is the best I can come up with to stop you... fuck me. No pun intended.

Re:oh darn

[Man On Pink Corner]

Slavery is already illegal, and should be.

Illegal immigration is already, well, illegal, and there are various arguments either way on whether it should be.

These are both entirely orthogonal to the question of whether prostitution should be legalized.

Re:oh darn

[Kitkoan]

ask "Is it moral in general to pay for prostitutes?"

How about asking "Is it moral for me to tell others how to live and what they can and cannot do?" What ever happened to freedom? Freedom of choice and to chose? Just because you don't approve of it doesn't magically make it wrong. Consider that some things you do are no doubt considered morally wrong to others.

Yes, there have been cases of woman being abused/forced into prostitution, but if you look, every job has cases were people have been abused, with a much higher degree of these problems when the job/service is forced underground. Same thing happened during the prohibition, suddenly places that served alcohol had more problems/issues.

As for prostitutes being happy with their job, there are reports that woman choose to do it, and are happy doing it. The only problems come up when people feel this burning urge to demonize them and their job choice. As for it being morally wrong, where do you get this opinion/information from? How is it morally wrong if both people are consenting adults that are quite happy and fine with the choice that they are making?

Re:oh darn

[FuckingNickName]

Have you talked to many escorts to come to this conclusion? It really doesn't sound like it.

The "escorts" you're probably thinking of are not representative of the global prostitution industry. I know this is /. and an awful lot of lonely men have paid $200+ for an escort and assume that "talking to an escort" (who you are paying to say what you want to hear) is somehow singular for "data", but it isn't.

Stop forcing YOUR morality on others.

Knee-jerk. Arguing that funding the prostitution industry may be immoral is not forcing anything.

It's a choice, both by the service provider, and by the customer.

All work is free choice to the extent that you also have the options to lie down on the streets and starve or jump off a cliff and die more quickly.

So your morality may say that you need to spend money on fancy dinners and expensive trinkets, coming to a climax where a lavish party is thrown because you put a multi-carat diamond on some poor girls finger. It's all down hill from there. Will you cheat on her? Will she divorce you and take half of what you have?

You are bitter and angry, and it's showing. Not that your bitterness and anger detract from the worth of your argument, but you're not presenting a decent argument anyway. Healthy human relationships are continually symbiotic, not about paying to seduce a woman and then crying because she doesn't give you what you want.

Because of people like you, who have forced your morality on others, it's put these working women in danger. Legalization and acceptance of the industry is the only way to remove the bad elements of the industry.

You're about the 5th poster to assume that I was arguing for the banning of prostitution, even though I started the argument by acknowledging that there are good arguments for legalisation and making clear that "moral" is not the same as "legal".

Prostitution should be legal and well regulated. "Acceptance" is another matter. For example, let's say you're in an evil socialist European state and there's a job opening for a prostitute - should you lose unemployment benefits if you don't take the position? Geeks are so accepting of the scientific method except when it comes to studying humans themselves - in this particular case, no psychologist will argue that the effect of fucking 50 strangers a day is generally as benign as serving 50 burgers a day. But are you arguing that, and what is your extraordinary evidence?

Re:oh darn

[khallow]

"Is it moral in general to pay for prostitutes?"

Yes, because not paying for prostitutes is theft of their services. Second, the real question is, "Should it be legal to engage in prostitution and pay for the services of the prostitution." That's clearly yes, since as has been pointed out before, there is no harm committed.

Re:oh darn

[PietjeJantje]

It is an urban legend that these women have no other options than prostitution. At most locations, this is false, they have. The other options don't pay as well though. These girls prefer relatively well-paid prostitution over working 10 hour shifts at a factory or selling food stuff on markets. If there are no other options, all the ugly girls and lowly educated men would die of starvation. Yes they are exploited, but how did they get there? All the high-profile stories about human trafficking and prostitution slavery, in the end it's only a small minority.

Re:oh darn

[Kilrah_il]

My opinion is that the concept of prostitution is not bad. A woman (or man) that chooses to go this way as a job is free to do it. Some of them prefer it to work at McDonald's. I know law students that work at prostitution because it's a very high-paying job and the hours are flexible. The problem starts when the prostitutes are not doing it out of their own free will. Many of them are exploited and most of the money is taken by pimps who leave them with petty cash* or hook them on drugs to keep them working. Sadly, many of the prostitutes today (especially those on the streets) are the exploited type (Sorry, no citation).
The solution is not to stop prostitution or to make it illegal. I think prostitution should be legal. It's just that law enforcement agencies should spend their time stopping the exploitation, and not the act itself.

* Someone is sure to come with the example that my boss also takes the lion's share of what I bring to the company, but at least I am free to quit my job (and many of those prostitutes are not) and he doesn't keep me working by making me a drug user (Although a case can be made for the coffee machine).

Re:oh darn

[Jafafa Hots]

I would never pay for sex. Hell, I'd never even go in a strip club, I consider it degrading for both the stripper and the patron. (Hint - guys, she's DOESN'T like you.)

But I also have a problem with the government saying when and why two consenting adults can have sex.

Of course though, exploitation of women is rampant, and the situation is pretty grim except in some places perhaps where there's serious regulation, mandatory health screening, benefits and crap.

Possible solution - don't tell a woman (or man for that matter) they can't ask for money (instead of a dinner, some coke, or "let me crash here for a few days") in exchange for sex, because why someone chooses to have sex isn't the government's business... but

outlaw PIMPING. Or, because prohibition doesn't usually work well, make it legal but regulate the living fuck out of it.

I mean, prostitution is illegal - so when pointing to the problem of prostitution and how horrible it is, it really doesn't necessarily follow that the solution is to make it illegal - it already is. Must not be working?

Re:oh darn

[xtracto]

There's one reason why some people call prostitution the oldest profession...

I think the main reason why prostitutes exist is because there is demand for it. And I believe there will always be.

The fact that in today's society it is "morally incorrect" to sell sexual services is just a temporary (in the hundreds of years span) thing.

But even if government would be able to ban all prostitution the only thing that would happen is that the service would become more expensive, and the people who provide the service would have less rights.

However, if prostitution was completely legal, open and accepted then it will only be a matter of calling a private number and safely providing/consuming those service at home.

The fact that some people choose to be prostitutes is because it gives them a certain amount of income for another certain amount of work. Sure, those same persons may be able to change their jobs but that would mean doing more work for less payment.

BTW, I remembered an interview a guy in Mexico made to 2 "male prostitutes" (Gigolos) from Mexico City. The two guys were professionals, one of them was a doctor. When asked why did they decide to prostitute they answered that it was because they earned a high salary doing this job whereas doing their day job was not profitable enough *for their lifestyle*

 

Re:oh darn

[FuckingNickName]

but many times that I have sex with a "normal woman" I become somewhat poorer (although usually not 200$)

Every time I've had sex, it's been a progression of a friendship into a kissy relationship into a fully sexual relationship. I've never targeted anyone - certainly not by buying anything. I've never counted up how much I've spent in some way benefitting that person up to the point I first had sex with them. I've not considered having sex a goal, or the end of anything. It just happens. It's nice but it's not essential.

It's weird to see so many people here talk of sex as the result of an investment. Perhaps well regulated prostitutes would be the moral option for them if it were established that the prostitutes were physically and mentally healthy and had full freedom of choice. Or perhaps they need a fuck buddy. Or friends who will take a tenner and give you a BJ. I'm not sure.

Re:oh darn

[JohnFluxx]

Why doesn't anyone just say "I don't care about the welfare of the fast food work as long as I get my food"?

I don't see why you keep singling out prostitution when your arguments apply to most jobs.

Re:oh darn

[FuckingNickName]

Oh, that's definitely a shitty thing to do too. A symbiotic partnership, simple fuck buddy arrangement or even mutually honest one night stand seem far healthier.

But enjoying physically and psychologically harmful working conditions day after day and believing (correctly or otherwise) that there's no way out is likely more harmful than hearing one lie about how pretty your eyes are. And johns ought to ask whether it's okay to pay to support that environment rather than playing the pseudo-libertarian "no physical force => legal => moral" card.

Re:oh darn

[mwvdlee]

We could also ask porn sites to move to the .xxx TLD, ask spammers to mark their mails with "[SPAM]" and ask black hat hackers to set an evil bit in all their packets.
The prostitutes will post where their posts will be read the most.

Re:oh darn

[noname444]

Are you saying that sex being more intimate than flipping burgers is a religious argument?

Re:oh darn

[drinkypoo]

All the high-profile stories about human trafficking and prostitution slavery, in the end it's only a small minority.

Small comfort if it's your daughter on the milk carton. I don't think we need to stamp out prostitution, but I do think we need to stamp out all forms of slavery. This country probably has relatively little slavery prostitution. Some nations, on the other hand, are known to be quite full of it.

Re:oh darn

[AmiMoJo]

You can't equate prostitution with serving fast food. The former carries all sorts of risks, even when it's a licensed and regulated brothel. You think every customer is going to have a HIV and STD test first? Condoms are 100% effective? Sleeping with some disgusting old lard-arse who could never get a real date because you need the money has no psychological ramifications?

Sure, there are high class places where conditions are better, but unless the girl happens to be pretty good looking and lucky enough to land that kind of job they are not going to deal with all that stuff. It is far far different to working in MacDonalds.

Re:oh darn

[flyneye]

You shouldn't come here then, we have a sgt. on the local military base who's been going around spreading AIDS at swingers events and I guess he has for a couple years now. They have him locked up on base pending action while they are trying to get names of people he screwed. He knew he had it too. I specifically wouldn't put my unit anywhere near a swinger in this city.

Re:oh darn

[Jawnn]

By your logic, lots of dangerous occupations should be made illegal because they are dangerous or psychologically stressful. Of course, this is complete rubbish and we're left again with nothing but the puritanical notion that sex is "dirty" and that sex for money is especially dirty, which also, of course, is complete rubbish.

Re:oh darn

[HungryHobo]

It's a dirty job.
So?
There are people in this world who as part of their jobs have to spend all day surounded by human faeces working sewer maintainance with all the dangers of infections that entails.
There are people who work jobs where they can lose a limb to a saw blade.
Or be crushed in an industrial accident.
I know a girl who had a job where one of her duties was to put down the animals at a lab which used animal testing, think that has no psychological ramifications?
My father at one point worked in a slaughterhouse cleaning the grizzle, blood and brains off the walls and equipment. any psychological ramifications there?

There are high class office jobs where conditions are better, but unless the person happens to be skilled and lucky enough to land that kind of job they're not going to get those.

But sure, if sex is in any way involved then its special and it can't be considered in a reasonable adult manner.

Re:oh darn

[vakuona]

When did work become a bad thing? For kids. How is it a bad thing to encourage your kids to develop a good work ethic? Of course, kids should have time to play and rest and enjoy their childhood, but I am sure those kids who see their parents work, and who work alongside them in their family businesses genuinely respect their parents efforts and learn from their parents the value of godo honest labour. Terrible that!

Re:oh darn

[HungryHobo]

"Because if my life is shitty, her life should be even shitter."

So you think a prostitutes life would be better if she couldn't get any clients?
really?

It's an unpleasent job which few people are willing to do and for which there is a high demand which as such tends to pay well(unless someone else like a pimp is taking the income).

Re:oh darn

[mangu]

Sleeping with some disgusting old lard-arse who could never get a real date because you need the money has no psychological ramifications?

How is that different from feeding some disgusting old lard-arse who could never get a real meal because you need the money?

Re:oh darn

[PietjeJantje]

Yes, I pity the enslaved kidnapped prostitutes who were advertising themselves on Craigslist.

Re:oh darn

[Wizard Drongo]

I don't see where you show that prostitution is unhealthy. Sure, street-workers, usually heroin addicts or trafficking victims, that's obviously unhealthy.
But how are the higher class escorts unhealthy? They have sex, for money. Nothing unhealthy in and of itself with that. They almost always use protection, which is a lot more than you can say for a lot of girls you can pickup in a bar for a one-night stand. Escorts are professional, tend to work with security people to ensure their safety, get medically tested from time to time and take care of themselves.

I don't know how things stand in your neck of the woods, but here in Scotland, their job isn't illegal, the police ignore them if they don't cause a mess (like brothels can become a nuisance for the community, but escorts generally don't) and they pay their taxes. They also get paid very well for something a lot of us find a pleasant activity anyway.

I don't know many escorts (and I've never had any "professional" dealings with one) but I knew a couple of girls who plied the trade for a while and they loved the job. Their only caveat was that because some people are a bit bigoted, it can make it tricky when people ask what you do for a living

Re:oh darn

[Posting=!Working]

There are plenty of jobs that have a similar list of risks. Some are worse.

For example, welding at a shipyard - Do you think they like getting burned everyday? Climbing up a 30 foot ladder to find it's not tied off at the top and one side is a half inch from freefall? Do you think the riggers have actually double checked every single time the crane picks up a huge sheet of steel that passes over your head? Crawling through a disgusting, stinking crawlspace under the floor of a barge while someone might start welding on the same piece of steel that your entire backside is pressed against? Having my safety depending on some dumb ass who couldn't get a job that required knowing how to read or do math? I think your chances are better with the condom.

I'll give you that working at most McDonalds is not nearly as bad, but all McDonalds are not the same.

Crappy McDonalds in crime ridden area- Ever had a gun shoved in your face while getting robbed? Ever been sprayed with mace for just working the drivethrough window? Had a smelly crazy homeless guy cough on you while ordering and try to pee on you when done? Been badly burned by fry grease?

I'm not saying prostitution isn't a crappy way to have to make a living. I'm just saying there are legal jobs that people take that carry a similar level risks and discomforts, and many people have no other choice but to take them.

I'm only talking about those who prostitute themselves for economic reasons. I am not including physically forced prostitution in any of this, that's slavery, and horrible.

Re:oh darn

[DerekLyons]

Have you talked to many escorts to come to this conclusion? It really doesn't sound like it.

Talking to escorts about the world of prostitution is like talking to McDonalds CEO about the world of fast food workers. Try talking to the girls down on the low track instead.
 

They made the choice to go into the industry.

Yeah, the same way someone who can't find a job making a living wage and with a future 'chooses' to go to work with McDonalds or Best Buy.
 
You, and many others answering here, have a seriously rosy view of the world.

Re:oh darn

[clarkkent09]

no physical force => legal => moral

I would put that as "no physical force => moral => legal" actually, with two qualifications: (1) it applies to responsible adults only of course, and (2) physical force can take many forms. For example theft and fraud are forms of physical force. Can you explain what is wrong with it? Either those women have a choice or they do not. If they do, then where is the problem? You are one human being, they are another. You don't have any more right to decide what they should do than I have to decide what you should do as long as you are not harming somebody else. If they do NOT have a choice and only do it because they will genuinely starve if they don't, then what kind of a monster are you to suggest that it is immoral to hire a person who will die of hunger if you don't? If they don't have a choice because another person is physically forcing them to do it then that is a very serious crime already and we have laws dealing with kidnapping, slavery etc.

Re:oh darn

[Hatta]

Those girls are poor this is how they live. They don't love sex anymore than you love working.

Sounds like a job. What's wrong with that? We allow people to do all sorts of awful, dangerous things for money, why not sex? Poor working conditions are a case for increased regulation, not prohibition.

There is *no* reason for prostitution to be illegal except for a perverse notion of sexual morality associated with religion. None.

Re:oh darn

[Hatta]

You can't equate prostitution with serving fast food. The former carries all sorts of risks, even when it's a licensed and regulated brothel. You think every customer is going to have a HIV and STD test first?

Ok, compare prostitution to steel workers, coal miners, or fishermen. There are lots of dangerous jobs. Either ban them AND prostituion, ban neither, or accept that prostitution is illegal for reasons of sexual morality and not safety.

Re:oh darn

[canadian_right]

Most prostitutes do it because they are poor. Making it illegal just makes it more dangerous for the woman and ensures pimps take most of the money.

Canada has bizarre laws regarding prostitution. Prostitution is legal. Communicating in public to procure the services of a prostitute is illegal. Running a bawdy house if illegal. Being a pimp is illegal. This means street prostitutes, mainly drug addicts, are poor and abused. "Escorts" who are self employed or work for small companies generally are not abused and make good money. Many of the girls at "massage parlours" are recent immigrants being taken advantage of by "snakes" (human smugglers).

Prostitution should be legal and regulated to make it safer for the women and to prevent the violence and abuse that so many of these women face.

And don't kid your self that you are doing a poor Thai women a favour by buying her services - she is most likely a prostitute due to extreme poverty, and would much rather be in a normal relationship, and hold down a normal job

Re:oh darn

[ScrewMaster]

She's a friend of a friend, and comes over every night around 12:30 (well, AM...). Hell, she's asleep in my bed right now, poor soul! I'm on Slashdot (afterglow?)! If she wants to set up a payment system I might not be averse...

Like most such "sins", if you remove the pseudo-morality involved, the current governmental stance against it doesn't hold up. If you permit and regulate it (like any of the other common vices in this country), I believe that many of the associated problems will disappear, not to mention that you'll increase your tax revenue if all those high-class girls start declaring their currently illicit income.

The Prohibition Effect is very real, and invariably occurs when there is a tremendous demand and significant law-enforcement resources are devoted to restricting the supply. As other posters have pointed out, there are few absolute moral or ethical constraints here: much of it is simply cultural, what is considered acceptable by decades or centuries of tradition ... and what is not. Sexual repression has been a tradition in the United States since its inception, and I look at the anti-prostitution crowd as being a fading reflection of that.

Yes, I understand that prostitution can have negative consequences for those who engage in it, both for the customer and the supplier, and we'd probably be better off as a society if there were no hookers (probably, I'm not going to make an absolute statement there.) But so do many behaviors that people engage in, many of which are perfect legal. In the end forcing prostitution underground simply because some people find it offensive does everyone a disservice.

Re:oh darn

[TheLink]

> Sounds like a job. What's wrong with that?
> We allow people to do all sorts of awful, dangerous things for money, why not sex?

Yeah just like the "President of the USA" job.

1) It's a very dangerous job - nearly 10% of the workers got killed because of their job. Converting to deaths per 100000 that's 9090 killed per 100000, more dangerous than the other dangerous legal jobs I'm aware of (if you know of a more dangerous legal job let me know - space shuttle astronaut? 14 deaths per 300+? ).
2) Some say what they do is immoral.
3) Millions nowadays seem to say what they do is awful.

I wouldn't recommend anyone to be a prostitute. Only if there's no other job that you are better suited for.

Same for President of the USA, I don't think it's such a great job either - there's so much shit up there. If you try to clean too much of it up you'd probably be killed, if you try to clean it a bit of it slowly, you'd still get lots of shit on you, you'll stink and millions of people will still hate you.

Re:oh darn

[ScrewMaster]

But enjoying physically and psychologically harmful working conditions day after day and believing (correctly or otherwise) that there's no way out is likely more harmful than hearing one lie about how pretty your eyes are.

Well, I'm not really going to argue with you there. However, like smoking, drinking and recreational drugs (same thing, really), gambling or any other vice, the reality is that a certain subset of the population (any population) is going to engage in them. They create the demand, it will never, ever go away, and every society has to decide how to deal with that. We, of all peoples on this planet, should understand that prohibiting that for which there is a significant demand doesn't work. Not with alcohol, not with pot, not with prostitution, and the more you try to use force to drive [insert 'undesirable' behavior here] from your society, the more problems you tend to create.

So, you have to examine why a prostitute would be trapped, would be compelled to remain a hooker. I can tell you why: it's because the hypermoralistic types have prevented that woman from ever having a way out. If prostitution were legal and heavily-regulated as it is in some other countries, that probably wouldn't be the case. It would just be another a new job classification under existing labor laws, and the same protections afforded to every other worker would be available to your local hooker. An entire legion of bureaucrats would have to be hired to enforce those laws. Right now, a prostitute (who may very well not have entered the oldest profession willingly) is squeezed between the hoods that run the operation, and cops who have no particular mandate to help her because she's a criminal. Let more legitimate business interests run the trade ("Remember the HP Lay") and that issue will become moot. Hell, I would expect the formation of the USW (United Sex Workers) Union at some point.

True morality involves looking at the big picture, getting past one's own attitudes and doing what is right, not what feels right. Contrary to popular belief, those two are frequently in opposition. Don't think like some religious leaders who feel that dispensing condoms to teenagers is wrong because it "sends the wrong message." Sorry Reverend, those kids couldn't care less about your message, but if you give them proper advice and the right tools they may manage to survive to adulthood and become productive members of society.

Re:oh darn

[FuckingNickName]

There's nothing inherent in the sex act that makes it more emotionally damaging than other acts; that's all in your head, based on your society's enforced rules.

OOI, do you deny all applications of the scientific method or just psychology?

Re:oh darn

[BoberFett]

"I guess I evolved into a human at some point."

Based on your other closed-minded posts in this discussion, I'd say this statement is debatable.

Re:oh darn

[doctorpangloss]

...justify a single assertion in that post without resorting to religious arguments... or your own personal moral hangups

In a standard labor market, where fast food workers and fast food companies participate, there's consent. A fast food worker consents to working a shitty job, and one man's "working a shitty job" is another man's "exploitation." It doesn't matter. There's consent.

In the prostitution labor market, there are ordinary women, underage girls, children and adults bonded in the sex trade or sex slavery, pimps and their ilk, and clients. Underage girls and bonded women (unwilling members of the sex trade) do not consent to their work.

It's *entirely* an empirical question, not a moral or religious question, to evaluate the legality of prostitution: what proportion of this labor market actually consents to participating? Slavery is illegal because 0% of the workers consent; that's easy.

So what's the tolerance? How do you compute these values? It doesn't matter in this example whether or not prostitution is legal, mind you—it's legal and illegal in lots of places, and in all those places there are underage girls forced into prostitution. Enforcement may bring the proportion of non-consenting participants down, but economists will tell you that prostitution has a *structural* percentage of non-consenting participants, exactly equal to the demand for young women. The demand for young women is unfortunately very high.

We don't need religious arguments to define exploitation. Paying someone to have sex with a minor is the exploitation of that minor. Period, full-stop. We can derive notions of exploitation from either a libertarian or Rawlsian notion of consent, which has no basis in religion.

So I dissent: no amount of regulation and "above-boardedness" will reduce the structural demand for underage girls. Prostitution as a transaction, by facilitating or abetting the exploitation of non-consenting individuals, should be illegal.

At least you know why in most of the rich, industrialized, liberal democratic world, prostitution is illegal.

Re:oh darn

[CarlosM7]

(Hint - guys, she's DOESN'T like you.)

* So that's why some (granted, *very* few, but the number is still non-zero) of them stop whatever they are doing and jump to me to hug me and kiss me the very moment I step in the establishment.

* One of them asked me to take her home, and then wanted to do me, *no* charge. She even at one point danced for me, knowing that I already had run out of money, and just threw a napkin to her pile of cash, so to make the other patrons believe that I tipped her.

Some of them actually enjoy "serving" some of their *paying* customers, and some times, well, they have to eat and pay their bills, so they *have* to ask their customers for money, no matter how much they like them.

Re:oh darn

[Anonymous Coward]

Hint - guys, she's DOESN'T like you

You must be a woman. This is the argument they always make. No guy I know goes to a strip club looking for a relationship. They go to see naked women and fantasize. The pretend intimacy bullshit that strippers do is part of the game and every guy knows it. When I try to explain this to women, they look at me with bewilderment because they don't understand the importance of visual stimulation to a guy. They seem to only understand emotional stimulation and think we buy into stripper act as real rather than as part of the act.

And as we all know...

[Kierthos]

Out of sight, out of mind.

Clearly, Craigslist getting rid of their adult services section removes all such adult services from the rest of the Internet, and in fact, from existence itself.

Idiots

[BlueCoder]

Some politician says ban this section and it will all go away...

Now the personals section is going to get even more polluted.

Casual Encounters will become the new adult section but it will spill over into the normal sections. Strictly platonic will probably become the "normal" area. If this is the intelligence of state attorney generals then we must have a lot of innocent people in jail.

Re:Idiots

[snowgirl]

There is a lot of belief in politics that if we make something illegal, people will stop doing it.

This idea is retarded, and recognizably inconsistent with reality.

Re:Idiots

[DaveGod]

There is a lot of belief in politics that if we make something illegal, people will stop doing it.

They are fully aware that this is not true; but stopping people doing it isn't the objective. That's not even close to being foremost on their minds. Politicians are driven by personal power and political motives. They want to be seen to be "doing something", "being tough" and "sending a strong message".

Due to recent well covered events it's easier to demonstrate my point when discussing drugs. Whilst it obviously isn't the same issue, it's an area I think most people would agree that has many similar issues, is highly related and is subject to similar attitudes from politicians, the public and the media.

Politicians have numerous advisers with a very solid understanding of the situation. However (at least here in the UK) when the experts give actual opinions based on expertise, they get sacked. Or they get frustrated by the sole political motivation and quit.

Claudia Rubin from Release – a national centre of expertise on drugs and drugs law – said the expert should not have been penalised. "It's a real shame and a real indictment of the Government's refusal to take any proper advice on this subject," she said.

Meanwhile we rely on unelected Lords for a bit of reason. The then (unelected) Science Minister reacted furiously:

As science champion in Government' I can't just stand aside on this one.

Prof Nutt (the guy who got sacked see above) himself wrote more recently:

the niceties of legal process and proper procedure on drug classification are as nothing beside the media-driven political demand that something must be done, and done now.

(I'll point out the sources above are across the political spectrum, as far as the broadsheets go the "Torygraph" is perhaps the furthest to the right and the Guardian furthest to the left; the Independent supposedly dead-centre but generally considered to be a lefty. The government they're all criticising was the centre-left Labour Party.)

Re:Consenting Adults

[Anonymous Coward]

The person that had to pay for drinks, a dinner, and a movie and didn't even get more than a peck on the cheak and an offer to do it again in a couple nights, in hope that you might get a proper kiss. A few weeks, a dozen hours or more, and a few hundred dollars, and they "might" get lucky...
 
  People like that hate the fact that someone can spend a fraction of that money for copious amounts of sex, and not have to have formed an emotional connection.... And the women like that hate it even more, because it really draws away from their bottom line... I mean dateability....
 
  One group hate that quick and easy solution they didn't think of first, and the other hates the compitition....

:rolleyes:

[KingAlanI]

Prostitution control is about as effective as drug control and gun control.

There, I fixed it!

[Auckerman]

This is the future of the Internet. Corporate censorship at the demand of the loudest group. One by one, sites are going to filter user areas. Then content. Starting with obvious things that few will care about, like prostitution. Slowly, everything is going to be so pasteurized that sites with no filters will be considered criminal organizations.

Look, whatever you think of it is irrelevant, abused or not, the racier parts of the internet are a necessary part of freedom. Draw the line of allowed hosted content straight through what most people find offensive and leave it there.

It may not happen in our lifetime, but if we don't demand full neutrality (for host and carriers), it's going to happen.

Re:Consenting Adults

[aztracker1]

In the end, yes... not always that one, first date... but continuing to date someone, in the hopes of marriage and commitment, sex is a large part of that... so technically, even in the purest sense, dating is about sex...

Re:Consenting Adults

[RsG]

However, if prostitution were legal...

Legal and regulated. The illegality of prostitution is only part of the problem with the current state of affairs.

Prostitution carries with it some serious societal issues. Coercion from pimps, poverty, VD, and back-alley abortions have been associated with prostitution for thousands of years. None of these will go away if the laws against soliciting are lifted.

Illegality adds another problem; it forces the business under the rug, leaving hookers essentially without legal recourse - they can be robbed, raped, killed, or otherwise harmed because the perp knows the victim won't go to the cops, or won't be missed.

Legalizing prostitution without regulating it will solve the last problem, but not the rest. Keeping it illegal only removes the problems from public view, and makes the situation worse for those involved. You need to legalize it, while imposing health and safety regulations.

Stupid

[The Fanta Menace]

Someone's not thinking outside the box. They should have just spun off that part of the company and run it from another country with sensible attitudes towards sex (eg, The Netherlands or Belgium), where the US can't touch them.

Reason prostitution is illegal is State dowry-tax

[Anonymous Coward]

The State wants to collect a tax on a dowry, meaning the dowry is the reserve capital a husband pays to the woman's pimp to "draw" the equivalent value in potential children to inherit and progress the family heritage; the motivation of the State (feudal lords in America have confederated into a title of nobility known as The State since 1776) is to inject currency into the economy to stimulate the region of its invasive migrant as an invested natural body-politic as well as transfer the privilege of drafting such currencies to an ecclesiastical agency to tamper the event as an elymysonary trust-indenture (U.S. Treasury to the Federal Reserve System as estoppel to the U.S. Mint). A prostitute in-effect abates the re-productive nature of the task to a mere pleasure principle, depriving the State of alleged "necessary" revenue in the still-born birth of the foreign corporate sole/soul body-politic, and then commences a transaction on mere "private" entertainment alone without notice to the public domain. In this modern day, the States give bonus to all administrators if their Hospital-births are registered a Department of the Treasury-Social Security form 5 (if I remember correctly) as well as another bonus for the Registered birth certificate on Security Paper presented to the Depository And Trust Company which is the fractionalized from a Direct Treasury Account into the private markets through Federal Reserve System and publicy through the International Monetary Fund.

Truly, prostitution touches so-many aspects of society in religious and governmental provocitation that it is the only anchor to establish priory in averting from the Home-Rule bastards that reduce entire countries through despotism. The greatest rulers on the planet that conquered oppressive governments all were born of Prostitutes. :-)

Re:Consenting Adults

[cappp]

Yup, and frankly I imagine using sex slaves is far more work than it's worth when you're in a country where it's fine to just slap a job ad in the local paper.

Re:Consenting Adults

[jrumney]

Illegality adds another problem; it forces the business under the rug, leaving hookers essentially without legal recourse - they can be robbed, raped, killed, or otherwise harmed because the perp knows the victim won't go to the cops, or won't be missed.

Where exactly do you think the coercion from pimps, poverty, VD, and back-alley abortions come from?

Re:Consenting Adults

[mr_mischief]

Well, the victim is the 12-year-old runaway who has sex with countless strangers because her pimp is the only one who keeps her fed, or the 11-year-old girl kidnapped and shipped overseas to be sold into sexual slavery.

The problem is, that's not the only type of prostitution that's illegal. Stop the kidnappers when you can, and get the runaway back to her parents or into foster care.

Leave the adults to do what they want, and tax it and regulate it for safety. If there's a legal market for prostitution that doesn't include some of the worst abuses in the illegal market, the worst abuses will be less tolerated by those doing it legally. They'll report violent pimps, underage girls, kidnapped girls, and johns who hit or rob them much more often if they're not in fear of getting busted themselves.

And no, I am not in favor of prostitution. I've always had enough sex without paying for it, and I don't have a desire to start. I don't think it's the healthiest of activities for the whores or their clients. I'm not one to pry into the sex lives of others on a regular basis, though, and I think it's clear that banning and prosecuting prostitution makes things worse.

If they're going to do it and you can't stop them, make it safer for them to do it. Even people opposed to the practice need to be smart enough to see that banning it does no good.

Legality is not an endorsement by the state or by a town's population. We have legal tobacco products with heavy taxes that pay for press to keep people from smoking and chewing. We teach kids it is dangerous and irresponsible to smoke. Yet it's legal. Legality just means there's no reason for something to be illegal or that the benefits to legality outweigh the benefits to a ban and failed enforcement.

Re:What a stupid argument

[Man On Pink Corner]

How many fast-food workers get aids? How many people wanting to run for office have to hide their past flipping burgers? How many fast-food workers are killed by customers? How many fast-food workers are dependent on the turnout of the day for their salary? How many fastfood workers do not get sickdays etc etc (in civilized countries).

How many of the conditions you cite are consequences of the act's illegality, and not of the act itself?

The kind who says it is okay his iPod was made with slave labor because else these people would have just starved.

So who made your iPod?

Re:What a stupid argument

[Anonymous Coward]

Comparing prostitution with a normal job

See, there's your problem. How is sex work not a "normal" job?

Re:Consenting Adults

[mangu]

Oh, so the purpose of a date is to get sex, and you're a "victim" if the other person doesn't put out?

In a society where sex is regarded as a normal and important part of life, no.

In a puritanical religious society where sex is regarded as sinful, yes.

If sex were like, for instance, playing cards -- you're willing, I'm willing, let's do it -- then there would be no need for subterfuges. However, since sex demands such expensive efforts, accepting those efforts and not providing sex is fraud.

Re:What a stupid argument

[Anonymous Coward]

Comparing prostitution with a normal job

See, there's your problem. How is sex work not a "normal" job?

Ever looked at the risk assessment on 'prostitution'? Why not produce a reasoned comparison between the risks of fast food work and various categories of prostitution? Whichever way it turns out, it'd probably be illuminating to a lot of people.

As a resident of a country

[vorlich]

where prostitution is legal and regulated I have some sympathy for those of you living in less enlightened parts of the world. However do try to remember that while many architects (for example!) use the services of prostitutes, few, if any prostitutes are clients of architects.
If your simplistic model of the sex industry is that of a cosy contract between customer and vendor you probably haven't been to edge of the world and looked over.
Otherwise you would be perfectly happy for your sons and daughters, brothers and sisters and mothers and fathers to pursue a glittering career in the opportunity-filled world of the sex industry. Perhaps put in a few shifts yourself, to balance your budget in these straitened times.
Or perhaps there is another reason why clients are called "tricks" or "Gingers" in the industry patois.

Re:As a resident of a country

[cheekyjohnson]

"where prostitution is legal and regulated I have some sympathy for those of you living in less enlightened parts of the world."

If someone wants to offer someone else their body for money, I see no reason not to let them. That's their choice. While I don't like such people myself, I don't want to see it banned for no reason, which it has been. You can have sex with as many people as you want for free, why not for money?

Re:Consenting Adults

[NEW22]

People of both genders go on dates for a variety of reasons. You are defining one of those reasons as being bad/not the proper purpose. Eh... guess I don't see it.

Re:Blurring the line

[HereIAmJH]

What this is doing is blurring the line between casual sex and prostitution.

Doesn't the social norm blur the line between casual sex and prostitution? For generations men have been expected to pay for dates. Dinner, movies, theatre, concerts, etc. Seriously, look at the wives of Donald Trump or the girlfriends of Hugh Hefner. The primary difference is that women don't necessarily have to reciprocate. Of course, then you get into things like the 'third date rule' and women asking "if he buys you dinner, do you have to sleep with him?" Social pressure tries to re-balance the equation.

Prostitution simply gives men who aren't; wealthy (subjective), attractive, or personable, a social contract where they can stand on equal terms.

All the rest of this about trafficking and child porn is simply misdirection to impose a sexually restrictive morality on the general population.

I am of the opinion that the underlying factor that drives this is to keep women submissive. Despite Women's Liberation, women still earn less money in the job market. Women trying to raise families without male providers will struggle. If prostitution were legal, women would be making choices like earning $100 for a couple hours or waiting tables at $2/hr plus tips and pulling double shifts. You wouldn't have a problem getting your burger at Denny's, but there would be enough willing to work for the higher payoff that society could shift away from male dominance.

Head, meet sand

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the usual Slashdot groupthink seems to be in full effect, with basically every user^^^^man on here saying the usual anarcho-libertarian line about "mutually consenting adults engaging in a contractual transaction".

I'm probably going to get modded troll for going against the gropethink, but I'm going to pull your heads out of the sand. Life is not an MMORPG, kids. Trading cash for actions is not a morally value-neutral act, given what goes on. And I love how everyone here claims traditional religion is the reason why people think prostitution is bad. Have these people never heard of feminism?

The cold, hard facts:
Prostitution is a major reason for the modern slave trade. Wage-slavery exists in some industries, but nowhere is the actual buying and selling of people (women, and yes, girls) as open, widespread and close to classical slavery as it is in prostitution. And the welfare of the slaves is given far less care than even the slave trade of old, because the owners feel far less long-term investment in their property, who they go through in a fast pace fashion.

Mutually consenting - Mutual consent between the molester and the seller, yes. But how much do you think a prostitute's owner cares what she thinks of the molester and how enthusiastic she is to suck his cock? And yes, I am using the real words to describe what they are because the usual language of prostitution like 'john' and 'pimp' is used to soften the impact of what is actually being done. Or do you think all prostitutes are self-employed free agents?

Adults - don't make me laugh.

Contractual transaction - there's a reason why they say "money up front", it's because it's nearly impossible to get payment for a sex act afterwards if the customer won't pay. You have no leverage from which to negotiate from. The law will not help you, both because it is illegal and because the customer can claim it was consentual and free. Not to mention many owners use illegally immiigrated slaves that are afraid to go to the authorities, or cannot speak the language.

Face it, prostitution is evil not because Jesus says so, but because it is an industry that makes it very easy to(and encourages) traffic of slaves that are kept in line through fear of violence and abuse, moved across borders and kept hidden through view while the owners reap the profits. It has a bigger problem with this than other industries that abuse labor because it is far easier to use an abused, addicted, scared girl or woman who doesn't speak the language or fears talking to the authorities to make money by making them fucked by random strangers. For the owner the fucking by filthy cocks has the added benefit of making them more despairing and easier to handle, as does drug addiction.

Stop thinking with your cock, people.