The legal policy to prostitution was always a complex issue, in many countries laws were changing from criminalization, to partly-, or fully decriminalization, tolerance, spatial segregation or even regulation during the centuries and were often reversed after seeing different problems arising from newly adopted policies.
Punishing the client and pimp, while not punishing the prostitute is however a relatively new approach, that provides benefits for fighting criminals and protecting victims of abuse/coerced prostitutes.
As every law, prostitution law has advantages and disadvantages and conflicting interests cannot necessarily be resolved in an equal manner, that is we have to prioritize which values needs the most support when adopting a prostitution policy. Should it support the willing prostitutes, whose wellfare is not depending on the money they receive, the non-criminal third parties, like providers of travelling and location for the business, should it support local residents who complain about the side-effects of prostitution, public health policies against the spread of STIs, the johns (who buy sex), or the abused victims coerced to become prostitutes?
The position of this argument is that the first priority should be the support of abused/coerced prostitutes, and lowering their absolute numbers when deciding over a prostitution law. All other support for other interests are secondary of importance.
Following this logic, how can we best serve the interests of coerced victims and lower their numbers effectively? 1) Prevent their entry and 2) support their exit from prostitution.
1) Punishing the demand, can decrease the total number of prostitutes required in the sector and thus decrease the absolute number of those prostitutes who are coerced as well. This hurts the interest of high-end prostitutes, pimps and johns but serves the interest of coerced victims. If we follow the priority, we value this action as beneficial. Direct policy: punish clients.
2) Providing alternatives for prostitutes to exit this business also help coerced victims to find a way out. This hurt the interests of pimps and johns.
Direct policy: cease persecution of prostitutes, to not fear reprisal when reporting their history to authorities, rehabilitation centres, employment options, helping organizations, translations, education etc.
Dear debaters, are you interested in a friendly debate about the most appropriate prostitution policy laws, talking about legalization, Nordic model and such?
Thank you very much! Wonderful, I will ask them.
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.
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
See what I mean?
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.
No, it isn't. Also, your entire RFD was making your own arguments against mine. The rebuttals you raised, my opponent never did.
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)
I'm afraid not, but that's an issue, I will hide the rating mode setting for the debates with the judges
Is this rated or not? It's a judge debate.
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.
And if the prostitutes aren't forced or coerced? How is that justice?
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.
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.