I honestly thought for a moment that you wrote "moose" instead of "loose" :D The meaning changed in funny way

First of all, there is the argument that prostitutes are always victims who are being oppressed, that's why they shouldn't be punished. (Not that I personally believe that, albeit that may many times be the case too, at least in many parts of the world.). Especially the feminists like this approach because then they can punish the filthy men.

However I think the more important reason is that to my recollection some EU body or whatever has earlier made the decision that prostitution is a legal profession, hence you can't arrest prostitutes for selling sex (unless they are breaking some other law at the same time). So going after their customers instead is kind of a workaround to that.

Sure, selling sex is legal then... but buying it is not. How convenient, making it impossible to practice a profession without actually making it illegal.

Just take all that shit, the terrorism, the prostitutes, the outdoor cafes, all that and send it to Vegas. Las Vegas can and often does fix all of those problems.

Because in the end, what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. Why? Because it never wants to leave.

There, I just did Nevada tourism for absolutely no reason.

Here it is mostly the feminists who want "buying sex services" to be illegal (currently it is illegal only if the prostitute can be considered to be target of human trafficking, but the local police is complaining that is very vague so they'd prefer either it is generally allowed, or always illegal).

I think most feminists here consider themselves more to the left than right. Then again, the feminists themselves seem a bit divided by this question, as many of them at least here feel it should be up to the individual (woman) to decide whether she wants to sell sex or not, ie. taking that possibility out is taking control from women over their own lives. After all, why is prostitution illegal in islamic countries? Because they care for women's rights? :)

Feminist movement seems a bit divided on its stance to sex overall, ie. there are the more liberal feminists (who also say prostitution is ok as long as it is fully woman's own decision), and then the new moralists who'd want to abolish prostitution, porn movies... heck one notable feminist here (who recently moved to Sweden, figures) has even said that having sex with men is a "gender betrayal", ie. women should have sex only with women. :D

Note that "advocating" prostitution being legal is not the same thing as advocating e.g. brothels, or pimping. I guess I am also in this group:selling and buying of sex services should be legal, but at the same time:

- no brothels
- being a pimp should still be considered illegal, ie. prostitution should remain as "private enterprise" where no third party is actively taking a cut from you (this rules out the brothels too)
- prostitution in itself shouldn't necessarily be considered something that should be endorsed by the state, and services should be offered for prostitutes to also leave their profession, if they so wish.

So, a bit similar approach as to e.g. alcohol: it is not illegal, but not really endorsed either, and restrictions are applied over it. Plus there are services for alcoholics.

Yet they still accept getting other people punished which is not nice regardless of status.Selling sex should be legal between adults if they agree this way,just punishing the buyer is only filling the dirty pockets of politicians and the problem won't go away.

Maybe so, but if you are a feminist suffering from misandry, a legislation which kicks only men (who are mainly the customers) to the balls is just perfect.

Also as I said, it might even be against some EU regulations to make selling of sex services illegal in itself, as it is considered as a valid profession. So, making _buying_ of sex services illegal instead is a workaround. Quite devious.

I kinda agree with your principle though: if some act (like buying of sex services) is considered illegal, then trying to lure people to commit such criminal acts should be illegal as well.

Really? Are there any statistics over that? At least here, I'd think "internet prostitution" (ie. advertising your services online) is the most common form of prostitution.

Then again here we have legislation against street prostitution, ie. selling of sex services openly in public places (like on the streets, restaurants etc.). That is forbidden but it is not based on thinking of the poor prostitutes, but rather public order keeping the streets clean from unwanted activities. That is, people don't like it if some prostitutes are sometimes even aggressively harassing people going by, trying to sell them sex services. Many other actions are forbidden on the streets on same grounds, like peeing on the streets (even if you do it on the lawn or a street gully; peeing in itself is not forbidden), or having sex in the open in public, or maybe even playing music loud.

So the message is mostly: you can sell your sex services... but please do it privately.

Compared to what? Don't forget that prostitution is generally illegal also in backwater islamic states.

It is a tricky question anyway because you have to consider if you see prostitution as a cause for something, or as a consequence of something (your question seems to concentrate on the "cause" part, ie. allowing prostitution causes something (positive or negative) to the society). If you observe only one country, it is probably plausible to say that when the economy is up, there are less (local) prostitutes (and those who are might make quite a lot of money simply because there are more customers with good income), and when the economy is down, there may be more people trying to get extra income from it, including people who wouldn't otherwise want to have anything to do with prostitution, but the prices for prostitution would also go down as there are less people willing to spend money on it, and more people offering the services.

Then again, if the economy is down and some people seek extra income through prostitution, is that a positive or a negative thing? What if the other option is not having any income at all, or doing some criminal acts? Does making prostitution illegal in such a situation really help anyone?

Having said that, maybe Thailand is one example where prostitution is tolerated... at least more than in most other countries, and prostitutes themselves face less "slutshaming" than in other countries, even if there people don't necessarily want to publicly announce selling sex services (to their relatives etc.).

After all, in many western countries one common question by anti-prostitution people is "Would YOU marry a prostitute?" (as if it is something unthinkable no western man would ever do, as prostitutes are just filthy and whatnot), and I feel in Thailand it might not be such a big deal for many (local) men. In fact, since it is customary to send some of your income to e.g. your parents, it may sometimes be deemed even positive (that someone is doing it), if it helps their family back home.

Great idea. Get the prostitute wear a pony suit and tell her to roleplay being your GF; GFE, a.k.a GirlFriend Experience. Charged a bit extra, but is high quality service, too!

Her man ain't even takin care of his kids!

A lot of the hardship that prostitutes have to put up with is caused by society having zero sympathy for them, because despite the surge of sex positivity in the last few decades, it seems to be limited to the idea that "devoted couples can do anything they want together", and sex workers are not included in that bubble of tolerance. People are still very keen to place family values on a pedestal, as we can see from the attitudes that you mentioned: Logically though, why wouldn't you marry a prostitute? To make the closest analogy, if your partner was a well-paid, professional massage therapist, wouldn't you consider yourself lucky? They'd be bringing home plenty of money, and you'd naturally get to enjoy the benefit of their skills for free! I see nothing but upsides.

One Finnish researcher (Anna Kontula, a leftist/feminist MP) studied earlier prostitution in Finland, and wrote a book about it (Punainen Eksodus, translated "Red Exodus"), which was quite welcome because before it it was mostly just police who commented on prostitution, and since the police sees only the darker, criminal side of it, the common misconception was that prostitutes in Finland are mostly e.g. Russian girls working for the Russian mafia.

In her interviews, according to the (Finnish) prostitutes themselves, they saw as one of the biggest problem the social stigma, ie. how the rest of the society sees them. Not the fear of violence from customers, or fear of STDs, or what it causes to their own mental well-being, or anything else that is commonly claimed to be the dangers of prostitution by the anti-people.

Even the people who claim to care about the well-being of prostitutes (e.g. certain feminists) are considered as a problem, as they like to condescendingly present prostitutes in general as some kind of weak-minded losers who are lost and don't know what they are doing. Ie. if some prostitute suggests it is her own choice and she knows what she is doing, she can't be trusted any more than a drug addict about his drug habit. After all, since she is a prostitute, she must be somehow mentally ill.

I do miss George.

Neither of the three options in this case. Actually, this law started to surface 2-3 year ago and was initiated by some feminists activists based on their own perceptions (a mix of morals and virtue). The question has been extremely divisive in the feminist circle (and the general public opinion was in favor of prostitutes) but not a lot of politicians dared to go against it in fear of media backlash. So during 2 years, the project went back and forth and got its first early positive vote because the voting was at friday night with less than 30 attending politicians. This week, it got its final vote with 62 yes, 13 no and 11 neutrals while normally the total of voting politicians is around 550. Financially, it will actually be bad for France as the foreign prostitutes who get "caught" will get a one-year "stay permit" and 400€ per month (with a total budget of 4,8 millions of euros). Almost everyone has pointed out that the budget is undervalued and there is no ressources to actually control that they stop prostitution and such (and it could also potentially attract foreigners to get into occasional prostitution just to get a stay permit).

Outside of the initial subject, it just shows how a small fraction of activists (be it from left/right/whatever) can get their way in a malfunctioning democracy when there is not a minimum of voters required.

Are you kidding me? O_P No, actually, are they kidding me? Foreign prostitute for illegal act gets 400€?! I am surprised only because local citizens in Lithuania, who are working legal full time jobs, get a minimum salary of 350€ per month (on paper, with taxes not yet applied). Bollocks... Bollocks everywhere!

Really, now? Here, illegal immigrants are being given food and they toss it away, so they can buy from canteens junk food; food which locals spared from dead sources (economically) and while we have hundreds of poor Greeks starving... Illegal immigrants are being provided shelter to stay in, they break and vandalize the structures and stay in mud and swamps, becoming a living health bomb, to protest for closed borders, so they can be sent to Germany and get the free salaries in the form of compensation for being war refuges, even though the bulk of the rabble are totally unrelated with Syria (they came without papers from god knows where); while homeless greeks count thousands and reek on the streets without even a paper box to hop inside! Illegal immigrants get to stay in structures with air-condition and they shatter them, while greeks die at winter because they don't have money to pay for heat and they make self-made fireplace that chokes them on monoxide, for not freezing to death! Illegal immigrants here started trafficking underage girls in prostitution circles already and they don't even value them, for them they are TOOLS; recently in a riot, a scumfugee threatened to throw his baby towards a policeman who was sent to convince their herd to embark on ship for Turkey (as per the european agreement)! They camp everywhere they like, they roam freely, they play beat em up and shiv them up in knife-fights and the policemen HIT and throw TEARGAS to the GREEKS who protest against the refugee occupation!

Of course this is no Bollocks, it is a plan! It is scandalous, a real INVASION! Brace yourselves, we haven't seen anything yet! This is only the beginning! Pay up for foreign trash, they are more valuable than the locals... :@ Locals can go die, starve, freeze to death, eat police brutality, while those apeish thugs roam free, police escorts them and the army cooks and cleans for them, instead of sending them where they should be, like ALL our logical neighbors do! THIS. IS. THE. PLAN.

Enjoy your culture, Europe and multiculturalism. Work hard, so trashfugees can be paid higher salaries than yours, for breaking things and mass producing babies.