You wrote:

"The reason that I think that illicit activity will stop if the behavior is legalized is that the "victim" has alternatives. Bootleggers went out of business after prohibition ended.

I did read Kristof today, and it did give me pause.

But it still seems to me that you are denying women full adulthood by saying that they are incapable of managing their own lives, and that laws have to be passed restricting their decisions."

__________________________________________________________

Your first premise is one that is, sadly, not sustained by the evidence. As I stated before, the Netherlands CONTINUES to have a problem with sex trafficking despite legal, registered, tax paying prostitution. That, by your logic, should not happen. I asked someone (perhaps you) in an earlier post to explain why. Any theories?

The second argument for "adulthood" and choice is an interesting one but fails on two measures. First, it is common in our country to prevent people from harming themselves. For example, the mentally ill and the drug addicted can be forced to get treatment. I know that this is generally not the reason for anti-prostitution laws. These are derived from our more historically rigid moral codes. However, given what we know today about the impact of prostitution on the individual, it is an ethical stance to adopt for the good of society. I believe that Spitzer actually endorsed this part of the argument in pursuing increased prosecutions of johns.

Secondly, from a philosophical persepctive, one has to address the question of consent. Is consent free when it is driven by powerful and negative forces? Perhaps we can look around and find one example here or there of a very happy prostitute making a bundle of cash with no negative forces driving her behavior or controlling her life. Is that by any means representative of the vast majority of prosititutes? Clearly not. So how can we say that the consent is freely given when the bulk of the profession is peopled by the mentally ill, addicts, the abused and the very poor (even homeless).

When droves of college-educated, stable, and clean men and women are all clamoring to work in the sex industry, then I'll believe that it is a consenting activity. I'm a teacher with a Masters degree and I'm quite certain that Kristen made much more money than me. How come I don't envy her job?

Comprises what?

I find it amusing that some people are shifting from the broad stance of legalized prostitution. In the Netherlands, where it is legal and prostitutes are licensed, it occurs everywhere from the streets to brothels.

First, addicts and the mentally ill CAN be kept from their harmful behavior by forcing treatment if they are a danger to themselves and others. My only problem with our current system is that we can't do more to help people who clearly can't help themselves. As it stands, help usually becomes available after the criminal courts have become involved. That's sad IMO.

Secondly, the argument you make about about drug-addicted lawyers makes no sense. As has been pointed out many, many times, a majority of PROSTITUTES are: 1) victims of childhood abuse 2) addicts 3) mentally ill 4) impoverished and 5) (my fave) enter the profession of prostitution far below the age of any consent. Do most lawyers, doctors, teachers enter into and pursue their professions similarly afflicted? No way.

What do you consider to be Kristen's reasons for entering into prostitution? Do you think she enjoys sex with strange men? Hmmm. I don't believe she mentioned that in her wiretapped conversation. She was quite blunt actually.

In reading Kristen's own words on her MySpace, she describes herself as a musician and reflects on her tough home life. How come no mention of her employment, her joy of sex with strangers?

People, please. If prostitution were so great, a whole lot more people with real CHOICES would do it. People would say,"let's see: pay off dental, veterinary, grad school or prostitution and an early retirement." That's not the case even where it's legal. That's because it's sad and it sucks. For most women, even high-priced Kristen, it's just a means to an end and not a pleasant one at that. But then, it appears that Kristen knows what it's like to be used/abused and she probably figured "I survived that so nothing else can take me down." I can't bring myself to call that a choice much less a good one.

A) What are you talking about?

B) Why do you make the distinction between street and escort prostitution? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure they do the exact, same thing no matter where the sex takes place or how much it costs.

If that were true, you're license would be revoked and you'd be facing jail time for reckless driving. You see? There ARE laws to prtoect people from themselves.

In case you missed Amerigo's post, he/she compared prostitution favorably (in some ways) to being a nurse's aide. Yes, it's poorly paid (our screwed up system) but it's beneficial to others. I don't believe for a moment that many prostitutes would prefer sex with strangers over taking care of others. Or bartending, or working at Wal-Mart or child care. There are usually other factors that drive women into prostitution and it's not simply job boredom.

As an aside: What kind of world have we come to when the people who help to take care of us and do necessary work are demeaned?

When information is provided in multiple settings and you tap dance left and right to avoid the facts, it's pointless to continue discussion. Educate yourself or don't.