Slashdot Mirror


Proposed Posting of Clients List In Prostitution Case Raises Privacy Concerns

An anonymous reader writes "An interesting case touching on privacy in the Internet age has erupted in Kennebunk, Maine, the coastal town where the Bush family has a vacation home. When a fitness instructor who maintained a private studio was arrested for prostitution, she turned out to have maintained meticulous billing records on some 150 clients, and had secretly recorded the proceedings on video files stored in her computer. Local police have begun issuing summons to her alleged johns, and have announced intentions to publish the list, as is customary in such cases. Police believe such publication has a deterrent effect on future incidents of the kind. However, the notoriety of the case has some, including newspaper editors, wondering whether the lives of the accused johns may be disproportionately scarred (obtaining or keeping a job, treatment of members of their families within the community) for a the mere accusation of having committed a misdemeanor. Also, the list of names will be permanently archived and indexed by search engines essentially forever."

40 of 533 comments (clear)

  1. Publish them all by Omnifarious · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The more names of 'important' people who are on the list, the more it should be published. Maybe then someone will actually decide that prosecuting consensual crimes like this isn't generally worth the risk.

    Though, waiting until she and her partner are found guilty might be a good plan.

    1. Re:Publish them all by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Though, waiting until she and her partner are found guilty might be a good plan.

      That's the problem here, the consequences for people who are still innocent until proven guilty. Even in this seemingly straight forward case it is possible that some of them really are innocent, for example like all the people caught up in the Operation Ore paedophile cases whose credit cards had been stolen.

      The media always publishes the names of people accused of murder, rape, paedophilia and various other crimes that will ruin their lives. When they are found innocent the same level of coverage is rarely given. Naturally they lose their jobs and probably most of their friends. The law could require that their employer gives them their job back, but often it takes years or even decades for them to be proven innocent.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Publish them all by clarkkent09 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe then someone will actually decide that prosecuting consensual crimes like this isn't generally worth the risk.

      That's not what would happen. What would happen is that other "important" people who happen to be political or otherwise enemies of those on the list would attack them for their own advantage while secretly thanking God that their own favorite prostitute wasn't the one raided.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    3. Re:Publish them all by CanadianRealist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As long as all the money in the safe is the property of the banker then your example seems fine.

      However as the money is usually the property of other people, your example is ridiculous, unless all those other people also consent. Good luck with that.

    4. Re:Publish them all by cgenman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem doesn't seem to be that Johns deserve privacy until proven guilty. The problem is that rich or important Johns deserve privacy until proven guilty, and potentially thereafter as well.

      Why are the well-to-do and well-connected being protected from losing their board positions, when the justice system doesn't bat an eye at causing factory workers and office assistants to lose theirs in similar circumstances?

  2. If she videotaped it.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    wouldn't it be pornography and be legal?

    1. Re:If she videotaped it.. by gweihir · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hey, here is a business model that could make this legal:

      1. Have a third party pay both prostitute and client.
      2. Have the act videotaped
      3. Have the client buy the tape as the sum or the original fees.

      Of course, there must not be any coercion on 3. But this could be solved by the client buying another tape before (of professionals) and only getting re-hired if he buys his own tapes afterwards. Maximum amount of trust needed on the client-side: 1 act.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  3. Has there been a trial? by hsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess that whole silly "innocent until proven guilty" is so outdated.

  4. this whole story is just sad... by acidfast7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    just make prostitution legal (and regulated) like most of Europe. You can even tax the income, while ensuring the safety of the workers and the clients. For bonus points, I grew in Wells, ME, about 10km south of Kennebunk ... and this kinda of ridiculous attention to foolish stories/details like this is one of the reasons I left (small town politics, anyone?) A john's life destroyed? Hardly, especially not by an "employer" with half a brain.

    1. Re:this whole story is just sad... by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is America, sex is bad. Violence on the other hand is cool stuff.

    2. Re:this whole story is just sad... by cold+fjord · · Score: 3, Informative

      For bonus points, I grew in Wells, ME, about 10km south of Kennebunk

      I guess you grew up there some time ago.

      just make prostitution legal (and regulated) like most of Europe.

      A very long time ago.

      Maybe it is better if the US doesn't legalize prostitution like the !most of Europe, and the part of Europe where it is legal but being moved against?

      French minister for women seeks abolition of prostitution in Europe

      France's minister for women is to organise a consultation on ways to abolish prostitution in France and Europe, she has told the Guardian.

      Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, the high profile women's rights minister and government spokeswoman, said in an interview that she would be organising a conference of experts on how to contain the sex-trade and human-trafficking and was seeking to meet the home secretary Theresa May for input from the UK.

      "Since the 19th century and the role of [the Victorian feminist] Josephine Butler, Britain and France have been the core countries in the international mobilisation against prostitution. I really hope that these common roots are still alive," she said. She wanted a meeting with May on how Britain and France approach prostitution and human-trafficking. In France prostitution is not illegal, but activities around it are. Brothels were outlawed in 1946 and pimping is illegal.

      In 2003 a controversial law against soliciting was introduced by Nicolas Sarkozy, then interior minister, making it illegal to stand in a public place known for prostitution dressed in revealing clothes.

      Last year, the French parliament adopted a resolution on the abolition of prostitution saying its objective was a "society without prostitution".

      The consultation would consider recommendations made last year by a cross-party commission of French MPs that it should be illegal to pay for sex. The MPs had suggested all clients of sex workers, meaning anyone who buys sex from any kind of prostitute, would face prison and a fine. Clients of sex-workers face prison in a handful of European countries, including Sweden, Norway and Iceland.

      Spain, the world capital of prostitution?
      In Spain, Women Enslaved by a Boom in Brothel Tourism

      LA JONQUERA, Spain — She had expected a job in a hotel. But when Valentina arrived here two months ago from Romania, the man who helped her get here — a man she had considered her boyfriend — made it clear that the job was on the side of the road.

      He threatened to beat her and to kill her children if she did not comply. And so she stood near a roundabout recently, her hair in a greasy ponytail, charging $40 for intercourse, $27 for oral sex.

      “For me, life is finished,” she said later that evening, tears running down her face. “I will never forget that I have done this.”

      La Jonquera used to be a quiet border town where truckers rested and the French came looking for a deal on hand-painted pottery and leather goods. But these days, prostitution is big business here, as it is elsewhere in Spain, where it is essentially legal.

      While the rest of Spain’s economy may be struggling, experts say that prostitution — almost all of it involving the ruthless trafficking of foreign women — is booming, exploding into public view in small towns and big cities. The police recently rescued a 19-year-old Romanian woman from traffickers who had tattooed on her wrist a bar code and the amount she still owed them: more than $2,500.

      In the past, most c

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  5. I recall... by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Somehow, I recall George Carlin's words on the topic:
    I don't understand why prostitution is illegal. Selling is legal. Fucking is legal. Why isn't selling fucking legal?
    If selling fucking were legal (as in some other jusrisdictions of the world), the criminal in question would not be a criminal, and the perpetrators of the misdemeanor in question would not have committed a misdemeanor.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:I recall... by moosehooey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What are you talking about? What two other acts, only when taken together, constitute murder?

    2. Re:I recall... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think a better argument against making prostitution illegal is that no one is harmed by it. And it's purely consensual. The cases where it isn't consensual are already covered by other laws (slavery, human trafficking, etc).

    3. Re:I recall... by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What are you talking about? What two other acts, only when taken together, constitute murder?

      Well, there is driving your car forward and telling someone to stand in front of it. Or stuffing someone in a large room and filling the same room with poison (or flame or vacuum). I could go on, but the thing you are missing is that two actions, taken together, become something different than either of them separate. Murder is lethality + against a person, and prostitution is selling + sex, and an argument that the two individual actions together are legal makes the action as a whole legal is deeply flawed. Having sex is legal, and so is being in public. Is that a good argument that sex in public should be legal? No, because society has decided that when you put those two things together, you get something that is fundamentally different from either in isolation. Same with prostitution. You can argue that society is wrong, and I think make some good arguments for that, but George Carlin's argument is, quite frankly, a bad argument.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    4. Re:I recall... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Having sex is legal, and so is being in public. Is that a good argument that sex in public should be legal?

      Yes, of course it is — as soon as you drop the idea that you have the right not to be presented with a view of the world that makes you happy at the expense of other people's freedom, which is stupid idea to begin with. You see something you don't like? Look away or otherwise don't engage. I do this all the time when I see religious fuckery up on signs, or women who have turned themselves into a canvas for extremely poorly thought-out art, or when the KKK parades, etc. That's what freedom is: not the freedom to have the world comply to your standards, but the freedom to act, say and be things as long as they don't impinge on non-consenting persons unless by their own choice to engage.

      because society has decided

      Society decided Rosa Parks had to sit at the back of the bus, too. Also that slavery was a good thing. And that god is real. Etc., ad infinitum. The whole reason we went with a constitutional republic is because society — people — can't be counted on to make the right decision. Unfortunately, due to a serious flaw in the constitution (the lack of punishment for government actors when they violate it), eventually the same problem crept into the system anyway. Still, the fact that "society decided" or "there is a law" is no worthy basis for making the argument that something should be forbidden.

      And BTW, Carlin's argument is flawless. Two harmless acts, placed together to create a third harmless act, are still harmless acts. Conflating that with the utterly false idea that combining them puts them into the same class as acts that cause harm is disingenuous and misleading.

    5. Re:I recall... by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Having sex is legal, and so is being in public. Is that a good argument that sex in public should be legal? No, because society has decided that when you put those two things together, you get something that is fundamentally different from either in isolation.

      I don't know about the rest of Europe, but Amsterdam at least disagrees:
      http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2008/mar/08031409

      In Europe, sex is ok and violence is looked down upon. In the US, violence is ok and sex is looked down upon. I leave the morality of each general consensus as an exercise for the reader.

      Disclaimer: I've had sex in public in Amsterdam, but that was in my early 20s before it was legal.

    6. Re:I recall... by devleopard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The same is said of consensual sex with a minor: anyone under legal age is incapable of consenting. A 22 that has sex with a girl 17 years old, 364 days at 10PM is a felon who must register for the rest of his life as sex offender, but if they go to a movie first and then get it on at 12:01AM he's in the clear. (I'll leave it to other commenters to come up with a snarky comment)

      (Assuming it's a state where 18 is the legal age, I know it varies)

        Kinda interesting considering that minors can be certified as adults for purposes of conviction, but not for purposes of defense.

      --
      The best thing about a boolean is even if you are wrong, you are only off by a bit.
    7. Re:I recall... by kenj0418 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      (Assuming it's a state where 18 is the legal age, I know it varies)

      The laws start being even more inconsistent in states with lower legal ages. Here the age of consent is 17. So that 22 is fine having sex with that 17 year old. If they start sexing each other instead/also - then it's child pornography.

    8. Re:I recall... by gweihir · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The funny thing is, if both participants are paid and it is filmed, then it is entirely legal again.

      This is just a historic artifact that the US due to its backwards morales cannot fix.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    9. Re:I recall... by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The same is said of consensual sex with a minor: anyone under legal age is incapable of consenting. A 22 that has sex with a girl 17 years old, 364 days at 10PM is a felon who must register for the rest of his life as sex offender, but if they go to a movie first and then get it on at 12:01AM he's in the clear. (I'll leave it to other commenters to come up with a snarky comment)

      Girl: If I'm gonna do that, the least you can do is take me to a movie first.
      Guy: At your age, I'd be crazy not to.

      But seriously, the problem with the boundary conditions is that you have a choice: set boundary conditions that are too lax and some people will get away with being dirtbags; set boundary conditions that are too loose and some people will get jailed for no good reason; set boundary conditions in the middle, and both of the above will happen.

      The better solution is to have different laws depending on the situation. For example, incest, abuse of a minor in your care, etc. are separately crimes when they involve someone under 18, period. This means that for those situations, you don't need the statutory rape laws; they're redundant. So if you beef up the law by making other always-abusive situations illegal when it involves anyone 18-and-under, the statutory rape laws become less important, and it won't hurt to weaken them so that the only absolute bans are on sex that is way over the line of acceptable behavior, i.e. lowering the minimum age and allowing moderately wide age gaps.

      Alternatively, change the law to ban prosecution without the consent of the aggrieved minor, and make evidence of any pressure on said minor by the authorities be grounds for dismissal of the charges. And give the aggrieved minor the right to accept or reject any proposed sentencing. In other words, change it to a "no harm, no foul" law—de minimis non curat lex and all that.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    10. Re:I recall... by BeanThere · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That threat is present in virtually all prostitution

      You know what's really a threat of bodily harm? A bunch of cops pointing their guns at a prostitute and forcefully arresting her in order to throw her in a cage.

  6. Publish the list... by bcrowell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...so we can deter future johns. Otherwise they'll just victimize more -- oh, wait, are the johns the victims? Or is it the johns who victimize the prostitutes? Both?

    OK, let's publish the list so that future johns will be deterred from victimizing themselves. Or something.

  7. Partial List Revealed! by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 4, Funny

    John Smith
    Bob Jones
    Mickey Mouse
    John Doe
    I.P. Freely
    Rosie O'Donnell
    Robert Jones
    Jim Johnson
    I.M. Sparticus
    Mayor Quimby
    Dave Smith
    John Johnson
    ...

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  8. I actually got a leaked copy-- here it is... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 3, Funny

    John Cooper
    John Smith
    John Baker
    John Howard
    John Davis
    John Brookhead
    John Wilson
    Juan Mendez
    Juan Morales
    Johen Schmidt
    Jean Billet
    Jean Claude

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  9. Re:Public record by larry+bagina · · Score: 4, Informative

    The johns aren't being charged with a crime.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  10. We, as Citizens, should be United. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seems to me that if I find some hot chick on the streets, and offer her (by, for example, gesturing towards my groin with a number of folded-up negotiable instruments, such as $100 bills,) and she proceeds to perform sexual acts upon my person, and then upon completion I hand her the aforementioned stack of bills, that no crime has been committed should this act have taken place in anywhere in the United States, provided the acts were between consenting adults, and occur in a private place where we were both permitted to be. The law that makes these acts of pandering and prostitution legal, in my NAL opinion, is the US Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.

    The way I understand it, the exchange of money for anything, (to wit, in that case, the giving of money without any meaningful or timely accounting of who gave it, to whom it was given, how much was given, what was promised or agreed in exchange for it, or what was ultimately done with that money, which could easily include actions that any sane society would consider election tampering, vote-buying, influence pedaling, and interfering with the good order and function of a democratic republic's most vital political organs,) is considered inviolable "free" speech, protected by the first amendment to the United States Constitution. I have even toyed with the idea of going out and hiring prostitutes, hoping to find an undercover officer to proposition, just so it can be brought to court, so that I can defend myself with the first amendment's newly endowed power (given by the Citizens United ruling,) to protect anything for which some money changes hands as "speech".

    I would say I "told" her (by handing the whore the cash,) that I would like her to suck-start my dick, then take it for a spin, bouncing her ass up and down on me until I'm ready to nut. I would argue that her taking the money constituted her "listening" to my constitutionally protected speech.

    I imagine the judge would then shoot me down, saying that that was not an allowable defense, to which I would reply, (and most likely be held in contempt of court for saying,) "so it's okay for whores in Washington D.C. to get paid to fuck people over, and somehow that's protected speech, but somehow when I do it, it's a misdemeanor? What kind of freeze-dried fucking bullshit is that, you pretentious bitch?

    If I'm going to jail for contempt, fuck, I say, might as well show it... why not piss on the judge's face? It's not like it's going to change what happens!

    OTOH, I've heard bad things about jail, and I like being able to go for walks and not being stuck in a fucking cage, so I'll let someone who's more of a tough-guy take this idea and run with it. Post back on /. how it works out! I'll check back from time to time.

     

  11. Re:ban it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If prostitution wasn't illegal the prostitutes would just go to the police if the clients or bosses did anything.

  12. Re:ban it by r1348 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Then make it a strictly state-controlled business, where legal authority releases prostitution authorizations, regularly check on the health of the operators, etc.

    As you clearly state, prostitution needs some sort of authority to prevent abuses on the operators, so make it some legitimate authority, not some improvised pimp.
    Prostitution is not going to disappear in any way, at least try to control it.

  13. Re:ban it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason prostitutes can be victimized by johns and therefore need pimps to look after them is because prostitution is illegal, if it were legal they could go to the police when their clients abuse them, when it is illegal they don't have the option of going to the police.

  14. Re:It just doesn't work by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >Walking out of a store is legal. Putting things in your pocket is legal.

    Because the act of theft is actively depriving the store.

    The act of prostitution is actively depriving who again?

  15. disease and trafficking by circletimessquare · · Score: 3

    i am not a prude. but if there were a way to REGULATE (yes, this would have to be a highly regulated business, my libertarian friends) prostitution heavily, then i have no problem with it

    so prostitutes would have to get regular screening. and the kind of human trafficking you see attached to the skin trade would have to be closely monitored and cracked down on. europe has legal prostitution. now ask europe about it's human trafficking problems. this is not a glamorous and lucrative and carefree industry, it never was. it is very easily and very often abusive and miserable. heavy regulation has to predominate

    the problem with selling sex is that it is not just sexually adventurous carefree libertines. it often and easily turns into a particularly vile form of economic exploitation. so if prostitution would ever be made legal, it would have to be regulated heavily

    regulate it heavily, i have no problem with it

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:disease and trafficking by denzacar · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So how would regulating prostitution prevent economic exploitation? If someone is in desperate enough economic circumstances to be vulnerable to exploitation, they don't become any less vulnerable if you make prostitution illegal or regulated. If anything, their situation gets even worse since they presumably were taking the best option available to them, and now either resort to worse ones, put up with the criminal types who flock to illegal fields, or starve.

      You don't eliminate the economic exploitation.
      You eliminate one particular venue for it by eliminating the market for illegal (unregulated) prostitution.
      Kinda the way you eliminate illegal trade of alcohol of questionable quality that might make you go blind, by providing a legal option of certified quality.

      You create a legal, clean and safe alternative, and there will be no market for the illegal, unclean and dangerous kind on the street.
      You know... The kind where you're lucky if you only get the clap and not a knife between your kidneys in an alley somewhere.

      As for prostitutes and vulnerability...
      Besides all the benefits of regular health checkups, safer working environment, health insurance and whatnot - they too don't have to worry about having their heads bashed in by a customer in an alley somewhere, or by their pimp.
      And both sides don't have to worry about their money being stolen.
      Cause should things get to that or worse - either side can now call the cops.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  16. Re:Stupider logic by dr2chase · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And if the women is not paid for sex, her body has a way to shut those infections down?

  17. This is only a problem by hduff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is only a problem because powerful men have their names on that list. If it were blue-collar workers, teh list woudl already have been released.

    These guys want to pay to fark some hotties who likes to make videos of her masturbating with a popsicle? The law says that their names will be published since she was arrested for prostitution?

    Let the law be the same for everybody here. Perhaps the powerful men will learn a valuable lesson.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  18. Re:The prostitutes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The act of prostitution deprives prostitutes of their freedom and of the control over their bodies."

    How is this different from anyone who earns a paycheck in a mindless manufacturing job?

    I do agree that it should be legal and regulated.

  19. Re:The prostitutes. by misexistentialist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bullshit. A a prostitute, who is generally a sole-proprietor, controls the terms and conditions of her body's use to a greater extent than most workers. Being acted on directly by another is not any more oppressive than being acted on by the work environment controlled by the boss, though of course there also jobs like contact sports entertainment. Taboos aside, working for a sub-survival wage is rationally more shameful than being paid well, unless you are doing something truly reprehensible like practicing law.

  20. The happy hooker does not exist by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I live in Holland where prostitution is legal, to the extend politicians had to decide on how to treat jobs in the sex industry in regards to job centers and people on benefits having to take any suitable job or loose their benefits. (Decision was that they are allowed to advertise but it can't be mandated as a suitable job or suggested by a consultant helping you to find a job.

    The problem is that the happy hooker is a lie, pretty woman is not reality-TV. No mentally stable, non-self-loathing woman with options will choose to be come a prostitute. There is the idea of female students putting themselves through school by selling their body but lets face it, no woman who really has a future would do it, since having a history of being a prostitute will hurt your career and social future.

    Be honest, would you date a hooker? Marry her? No? Well there you go.

    There are women who want to be a prostitute but they do it for money/laughs. Problem with that is, they want to make a decent living with it and charge through the nose. High class escort really just means "you expect WHAT per hour", they don't come cheap. I know, I made websites for them. Think 2000 euro per night and then extra for extra's. These are NOT the women who walk the streets. Hell, some escorts even are picky as to who they take as clients. Do you think a street walker or a woman working behind the glass in Amsterdam has such options?

    The reality of most prostitution is that the women has to do anything that any john asks and lets face it, nice guys don't use street hookers. And you might think a slut as being a woman who has men in the high double digits. For a hooker? Closing in on 4 digits. Think about it. Say it is 100 per fuck (a very high price). A developer might charge the same but can do it for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, all your long. That is 2016 johns in a year, just to get the same income as a crappy web developer. Remember, if prostitution is legal, you have to pay the same taxes as any other self employed person. You can do web development in a cheap t-shirt and jeans. An expensive hooker needs more expensive clothes.

    And all the time, she risks some insane person coming along and killing her off. Really want the most dangerous job in the world? Prostitution, the favorite target of serial killers.

    The simple fact is that in Holland, with legal prostition, human trafficking for the sex trade hasn't dropped at all. That is because the amount of Dutch women who have decent social protection who choose prostitution to make their living is far to low and isn't serving the low end of the market. You don't think a college girl putting herself through school who has any reason to want that diploma is going to work several johns a day for what amounts to minimum wage after they payed their pimp for protection and all the other costs?

    The porn industry is probably better known on Slashdot, check income. (and remember, this is income of a self-employed person so the prices are pre-taxes with no benefits) of actresses, the majority not the statistically insignificant few who made it to the top. A picture shoot earns as little as a few hundred, maybe 500 if she does all the site asks. A VHS tape might earn 1-2 thousand back in the day. If you are self-employed in IT, would you even bother answering the phone for such amounts? Especially knowing that the porn industry is always looking for fresh faces, so it is not as if you can do 5 shoots per day, every working day of the year.

    Yes, I know, cases such as this show rather decent amounts of money being made. They are the exception, same as some programmers on Wall Street make 1 million dollars or more. Do you make 1 million dollars or more? No? Well, then you are the street walker, no the high class pretty woman escort.

    I am not saying making prostitution illegal is the answer but making it legal in Holland has not magically fixed everything. In fact, in some ways it has become worse. It used to be possible for the police to liberate women who were

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:The happy hooker does not exist by sFurbo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No mentally stable, non-self-loathing woman with options will choose to be come a prostitute.

      I see, you know the mind of every women on earth. Or are you going to define "mentally stable, non-self-loathing" as one who does not want to become a prostitute, true Scotsman-style?

      There are women who want to be a prostitute but they do it for money/laughs.

      I see, you chose "blatantly disagreeing with myself". I suppose you will claim you didn't write any of the things I quote you for?

  21. Re:ban it by TFAFalcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But the discussion here is why prostitution is illegal. If it was legal, then there would be no problems with informing the police. And the public law enforcement wouldn't be substituted by the guards, it would just be supplemented - just like with all other private guards. A customer is less likely to start beating a prostitute if there is a 300 pound gorilla sitting outside in the lobby.