Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
down

Prostitution = Violence

53 posts in this topic

So I was thinking about this as I was looking online about Prostitution I can across a number of websites that claim that Prostitution is Violence.

So I just wondered what the people think about this remark? I dont really think that it is violence I think that maybe it could be done in a violent way but then again any thing could be done in a violent way. I could go shopping and be violent I could play football and be violent. So when I am with a prostitute I make sure that I am not being violent in any way and I dont use violence with my prostitute. any one else agree or any one else think that it is violence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was thinking about this as I was looking online about Prostitution I can across a number of websites that claim that Prostitution is Violence.

So I just wondered what the people think about this remark? I dont really think that it is violence I think that maybe it could be done in a violent way but then again any thing could be done in a violent way. I could go shopping and be violent I could play football and be violent. So when I am with a prostitute I make sure that I am not being violent in any way and I dont use violence with my prostitute. any one else agree or any one else think that it is violence?

Not sure what websites you're finding these references on but it's total, ignorant bollocks in my view. Any violence involved in prostitution is abhorrent, unacceptable and fairly rare I'd like to assume. Of course it happens, but it's no different to domestic abuse in my opinion which again is to me abhorrent. Consensual sex between adults whether paid for or not should be completely free from violence, if not then it's probably not consensual and therefore tantamount to rape IMO.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I read it is that any man paying to have sex with a prostitute is considered to be committing an act of violence by simply having sex with the prostitute. This is a line that is trotted out from time to time by the "moral majority" types in Society. It is also complete bollocks. It could only be construed as violence if the prostitute was being forced to work against her will. If the prostitute is working of her own free will, as I believe most are, then the sex is consensual and thus not an act of violence. It only becomes violence if the punter turns violent.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a rather radical feminist view.

Most sensible people who that when a woman makes a free choice to become a prostitute it is not violence or exploitation or whatever else these people decide to label it as!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a rather radical feminist view.

Most sensible people who that when a woman makes a free choice to become a prostitute it is not violence or exploitation or whatever else these people decide to label it as!

'Radical' in this context is a polite substitute for 'shitheaded'

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Radical' in this context is a polite substitute for 'shitheaded'

Very astute Mr Goldberg!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Highland Council's web-site ( http://www.highland.gov.uk/healthandsocialcare/violence-against-women.htm) contains this useful quasi-definition:

Violence Against Women is an umbrella term used to describe a number of different forms of abuse that are most commonly experienced by women and predominantly perpetrated by men. Types of abuse that are part of the spectrum of Violence Against Women include, abuse happening within the family such as child sexual abuse or domestic abuse; abuse that happens in the community such as prostitution, pornography and sexual harassment; harmful traditional cultural practices such as female genital mutilation, forced marriage and so called ‘honour’ crimes.

I'm sure all of us disapprove of violence towards wee defenceless women? Yes, indeed!

So, given that prostitution is, itso fatso, violence against women, you disapprove of prostitution too? Good, we are getting somewhere. So any man who pays a woman for sex (or, IMHO, takes her out to dinner at an expensive restaurant she's been banging on about all week, in the confident expectation of getting his end away afterwards by way of thank-you) is guilty of violence, and should be locked up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was thinking about this as I was looking online about Prostitution I can across a number of websites that claim that Prostitution is Violence.

So I just wondered what the people think about this remark? I dont really think that it is violence I think that maybe it could be done in a violent way but then again any thing could be done in a violent way. I could go shopping and be violent I could play football and be violent. So when I am with a prostitute I make sure that I am not being violent in any way and I dont use violence with my prostitute. any one else agree or any one else think that it is violence?

It certainly isnt violence per se in my view, but there can be violence involved depending on the situation. A violent punter or pimp for example.

Those that view it as per se violent are the femi-nazis and other antis who have their agendas. A WG if not being forced makes a free choice to become a WG for various reasons, making money being a prime one, as an adult that is her business and responsibility in my view. The media also perpetuates the image of street workers and perverted punters, as we know being more enlightened thats only one area of prostitution and already illegal, though still operating.

Until we become a 24/7 monitored society prostitution will always exist, the question is do the authorities want it to become more dangerous for WGs and punters by criminalizing all aspects of it which i have no doubt would send it underground and less safe, or do they wish to make it safer by allowing WGs to legally work together for example. Or do nothing.

I want to see the traffickers and those that are forcing women to work as prostitutes caught and severly punished, a mandatory life sentence in every case would be good to see i think. This is what i want the police to concentrate on, not persecute adults making free choices.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One extreme strand of feminism seems to regard all male/female intercourse as intrinsically an act of violence. So, given that...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those hawking this lazy, sensationalist claptrap always repeat the mantra about prostitution representing a form of intuitionalist violence against women. For a start it completely ignores that a sizeable number of sex workers are male although I suppose the majority of their clients appears to be male. It is infuriating for any independent informed sex worker to be told that we are victims and are constantly subjected to attempts to rescue us from our own choices whether we fecking well like it or not!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to the premise prostitution being violence. If I had to put my hand on my heart (and hence the name Superego), I think it is. The problem with prostitution is that we can only see it from our narrow frame of reference.

Personally, if women were the equals of men in all walks of life. The attitude to sex and definitely the attitude men have towards women would be different to how society has it now.

I aver that if women were men equals even prostitution would be different and it would not be mainly assigned to the female sex and it would perhaps even stop the question is prostitution violence and change it to a different question to one which may be based on class and/or probably race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very astute Mr Goldberg!

thank you :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I read it is that any man paying to have sex with a prostitute is considered to be committing an act of violence by simply having sex with the prostitute.

yeah thats how I read it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to the premise prostitution being violence. If I had to put my hand on my heart (and hence the name Superego), I think it is. The problem with prostitution is that we can only see it from our narrow frame of reference.

Personally, if women were the equals of men in all walks of life. The attitude to sex and definitely the attitude men have towards women would be different to how society has it now.

I aver that if women were men equals even prostitution would be different and it would not be mainly assigned to the female sex and it would perhaps even stop the question is prostitution violence and change it to a different question to one which may be based on class and/or probably race.

Can you explain WHY it is violence if it is completely consensual?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kill

Can you explain WHY it is violence if it is completely consensual?

cos these nobeds dont think anyone would want to be a wg cos they want to. They think they are all doing it cos they are coerced, druggies or something

its a stupid argument but there is no no data to argue against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phew...blows out a very long breath of air

Its a difficult one to explain.

What one has to take on board and understand is the sociological aspect of society. Prostitution by and large is the domain of women, it is not an accident that womens lowly status is also tied to the oldest profession that perhaps has the greatest stigma .

Two consensual parties let's say two thousand years from now consensually agree to have a sexual liasion, and let's say both parties do benefit and are happy (micro level). This does in no way impact on the sociological level and changing the status of women per se (macro level).

In simple terms any behaviour that continues to reinforce or endorse behaviour that help to keep women confined, maintain their lower status is usually considered as acts of 'violence'.

One could also speak of our acts of 'violence' against the disabled and/or animals also although it is less popular to do so. It is in this context the word takes meaning.

Edited by Superego

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phew...blows out a very long breath of air

Its a difficult one to explain.

What one has to take on board and understand is the sociological aspect of society. Prostitution by and large is the domain of women, it is not an accident that womens lowly status is also tied to the oldest profession that perhaps has the greatest stigma .

Two consensual parties let's say two thousand years from now consensually agree to have a sexual liasion, and let's say both parties do benefit and are happy (micro level). This does in no way impact on the sociological level and changing the status of women per se (macro level).

In simple terms any behaviour that continues to reinforce or endorse behaviour that help to keep women confined, maintain their lower status is usually considered as acts of 'violence'.

One could also speak of our acts of 'violence' against the disabled and/or animals also although it is less popular to do so. It is in this context the word takes meaning.

Well by all definitions of "violence" which is the use or threat of physical force you are completely wrong. If no physical threat is made and there is a consentual contract and futhermore if both parties want to engage in the act then there is no violence occuring.

You are making your arguement by re-defining the word violence. By your definition I could also say that the police force is violence against men because the there is potential for men to be harmed during the work as a police officer.

If women are making money from escorting, some very substantial amounts (which is why they choose to do it) , using the money for education in many cases, then that is increasing their socioeconomic status not decreasing it or keeping it below the level of men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well by all definitions of "violence" which is the use or threat of physical force you are completely wrong. If no physical threat is made and there is a consentual contract and futhermore if both parties want to engage in the act then there is no violence occuring.

You are making your arguement by re-defining the word violence. By your definition I could also say that the police force is violence against men because the there is potential for men to be harmed during the work as a police officer.

If women are making money from escorting, some very substantial amounts (which is why they choose to do it) , using the money for education in many cases, then that is increasing their socioeconomic status not decreasing it or keeping it below the level of men.

But what if society has created the institution (social structure) to maintain women subservient role? If this premise is true, then it would be 'violence' irrespective of consensual parties, and this is what many argue

I am afraid I did not re-define the definition of violence but sought merely to offer an explanation why some consider prostitution violence.

Finally with regard to your comment; 'You are making your arguement by re-defining the word violence. By your definition I could also say that the police force is violence against men because the there is potential for men to be harmed during the work as a police officer'.

Not quite unless you take up the supposition that the police force is an oppressive institution whose aim is to oppress and subjugate young men. If this is true. Then it would be possible to argue about the 'violence' used by the police force....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am afraid I did not re-define the definition of violence but sought merely to offer an explanation why some consider prostitution violence.

That doesn't pass the giggle test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what if society has created the institution (social structure) to maintain women subservient role?

What makes you assume that women are necessarily subservient in the WG-client relationship? Assuming the lady isn't being pimped/coerced/trafficked, if I attempt to arrange a booking with a WG and she doesn't like the sound of me then she can easily refuse to see me and I'm the one who's then reduced to trying to find someone else to take me on. I can't insist that the original lady must see me!

Bearing in mind the number of comments there are on these boards about women having the power to withhold sexual favours in a relationship, surely being in a position to grant those same favours (and get paid for doing it) gives a woman power too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes you assume that women are necessarily subservient in the WG-client relationship? Assuming the lady isn't being pimped/coerced/trafficked, if I attempt to arrange a booking with a WG and she doesn't like the sound of me then she can easily refuse to see me and I'm the one who's then reduced to trying to find someone else to take me on. I can't insist that the original lady must see me!

Bearing in mind the number of comments there are on these boards about women having the power to withhold sexual favours in a relationship, surely being in a position to grant those same favours (and get paid for doing it) gives a woman power too?

Well the arguement is so weak and ignores any emprical evidence to the contrary so its not worth responding to.

Edited by willsmith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes you assume that women are necessarily subservient in the WG-client relationship? Assuming the lady isn't being pimped/coerced/trafficked, if I attempt to arrange a booking with a WG and she doesn't like the sound of me then she can easily refuse to see me and I'm the one who's then reduced to trying to find someone else to take me on. I can't insist that the original lady must see me!

Bearing in mind the number of comments there are on these boards about women having the power to withhold sexual favours in a relationship, surely being in a position to grant those same favours (and get paid for doing it) gives a woman power too?

I was referring to womens' subservient roles in society. Then I went on to make a link between womens subservient role in society generally as an explanation why they and not males who would predominate in the oldest profession with the greatest stigma.

Hope this clarifies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was referring to womens' subservient roles in society. Then I went on to make a link between womens subservient role in society generally as an explanation why they and not males who would predominate in the oldest profession with the greatest stigma.

Hope this clarifies...

I'd have thought that the reason that there are more female than male escorts was because women generally don't have to pay for sex (if they want a casual sexual partner then they'll find one more easily than a man would) and male sex drives, over time, appear to generally be higher than those of women (because they're willing to pay for casual sexual encounters). Put another way: there's more demand for female, rather than male, escorts - therefore there are more female escorts.

I'm leaving non-heterosexual escorts and clients out of this, of course ;)

Edited by Grendel22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stereo typical image of prostitution! I personally don't see how it could be classed as violence, however in the "normal" world all prostitutes are stereo typed, all working for a pimp or drugs or under threat .... Blah blah blah! As long as both people are consenting to any form of sex i don't see why there should be a problem! :rolleyes::unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stereo typical image of prostitution! I personally don't see how it could be classed as violence, however in the "normal" world all prostitutes are stereo typed, all working for a pimp or drugs or under threat .... Blah blah blah! As long as both people are consenting to any form of sex i don't see why there should be a problem! :rolleyes::unsure:

well no. but certain people think redining a word somehow gives their argument more credibility. They would argue that women are not capable of making their life choices to become a prostitute, therfore they are being raped and rape is violence.

They dont accept some women are quite happy being a prostitute and we know form here that many really enjoy it. So their argument is false.

Methinks those who think like this are a sandwich short of a picnic, but thats my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0