Instigator / Pro
1
1500
rating
1
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#1019

The Nordic model should be applied regarding prostitution law

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
1
0

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

Cogito
Judges
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
43 debates / 689 votes
Voted
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
3,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Judges
Contender / Con
0
1687
rating
555
debates
68.11%
won
Description

The Nordic model simultaneously protects prostituted (trafficked or coerced) victims by:
1) Making it legal to sell sex and this way the vicitms fear no reprisal if they want to report the abuse they experienced to police. This helps to find perpetrators/traffickers and also makes victims less vulnerable to extortion/abuse from policemen as well.
2) Punishes the buyers and this way decreases the willingness to buy prostitutes and as such decreasing the national demand for prostitutes. Ultimately the absolute number of victims trafficked and forced into the prostitution business (as a portion of all prostitutes) is also decreased.

-->
@David
@bsh1
@blamonkey
@semperfortis

Dear debaters, are you interested in a friendly debate about the most appropriate prostitution policy laws, talking about legalization, Nordic model and such?

-->
@Ramshutu

Thank you very much! Wonderful, I will ask them.

-->
@Cogito

There’s a few individuals that do more serious and structured debate; it maybe worthwhile PMing them for a direct challenge. There’s Blamonkey, Bsh1, Virtuoso, and Sempafortis who may potentially be interested.

-->
@RationalMadman
@Ramshutu

It seems you two have a long lasting grudge, its not my job to pick a side or bring peace, I just want to test my opinion in an objective debate.
I have seen the previous Nordic model debate and decided to add my researched views to that topic, trying to elucidate the issue in a relatively simple and easy-to understand way and test whether there are supported counterarguments for me to consider changing my viewpoint.
I found that the debate was not well structured at the start, the two sides need to speak the same language built on the same debate principles to get a constructive debate. First of all is the arguing power to understand.
RM: can I ask that do you accept that there is a power difference between the argument types below?
1. opinion only
2. opinion with logically cohesive interpreation
3. opinion, interpretation and anecdotal evidence
4. opinion, interpretation and anecdotal evidence validated by authorities
5. opinion, interpretation and scientifically reviewed evidence
6. opinion, interpretation and statistically robust and scientific evidence

-->
@Cogito

See what I mean?

-->
@Ramshutu

You won't succeed in deluding me into the idea that you're right and I'm the delusional narcissist. over time, as the site grows and you become just one voter amongst many, your power to delude me and prey on me will dissipate. You will pick on someone easier as you're a sadistic predator by nature and I will be left in peace.

-->
@Ramshutu

No, it isn't. Also, your entire RFD was making your own arguments against mine. The rebuttals you raised, my opponent never did.

-->
@Cogito

RM is mostly just paranoid: https://www.debateart.com/debates/697

Basically, RM has a tendency of going down side tracks, opinionated tangents and semantics rather than throwing himself head first into the arguments in good faith. I tend to not award debates for toxic behaviour, or arguing in bad faith.

In the old Nordic model debate he essentially ignored his opponents core point about legalized prostitution increasing human trafficking - claiming it wasn’t true based on no evidence- despite his opponent saying it was true, providing a source that shows it was true. Data trumps opinion, thus he lost. This is the same sort of error he makes in many debate

As a result of these types of issues, I award votes against him sometimes; and rather than trying to improve, he launches into accusatory tirades, personal attacks, etc (its not just me though - he does it with most people who are critical)

-->
@RationalMadman

I'm afraid not, but that's an issue, I will hide the rating mode setting for the debates with the judges

-->
@DebateArt.com
@David
@bsh1

Is this rated or not? It's a judge debate.

-->
@K_Michael

If the prostitute is not coerced due to debt, physical force, drugs, threats, poverty (e.g. he/she is a golddigger or a high end willing prostitute), then of course this law would hurt her finances. This is one side of the scale, on the other side the law protects victims of abuse. Now, we have to prioritize which we value more in the society:
A) supporting the interest of willing prostitutes, whose wellfare is not depending on the money they receive, or
B) we support victims of rape and abuse, who are coerced into this business.

Its a choice.

-->
@Cogito

And if the prostitutes aren't forced or coerced? How is that justice?

-->
@Alec

Think about it as an illegal activity, in which only one side can be persecuted. Alternatively you could think of an illegal dog fight, in which the tamers and the audience is punished, but the dogs are not. It punishes the powerful actors (johns, pimps) and leaves the vulnerable actors (prostitutes) a safe route to exit or report to the police.

-->
@Cogito

How can it be illegal to buy sex but legal to sell it? I heard that Denmark is giving autistic people federally subsidized sex encounters with prostitutes. This is how the autistic people get STDs.