On 07/01/2010 21:17, Don Pearce wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 20:38:56 -0000, "David Looser"
wrote:

"Don wrote

Remember how I started into this? It was in response to a comment I
found offensive, namely that of comparison to prostitution in a
denigrating manner. I simply defended what I consider to be a service.


Well I find your trivialisation of the well-documented harm that
prostitution does offensive, deeply offensive.

All sorts of flak followed saying it wasn't because sometimes

Not "sometimes" - usually.

people
are forced into it - blah blah blah.

As I said, trivialisation.

All quite illogical, and that is
what the subsequent stuff has been about.

Not even remotely illogical. Unless you want to argue that any disagreement
with you is necessarily illogical?

You said that, rape apart, no one gets hurt. That is simply untrue,
prostitutes are at a very high risk of being beaten up, even murdered. Or do
you not count that as "getting hurt"?

I used to have a high degree of respect for you Don, as one of the most
knowledgeable poster on u.r.a. But no longer.

David.

d


David, I haven't trivialised anything. All I have said is that you
can't condemn prostitution because some people do it to support a drug
habit or whatever. Some people are accountants to support a drug habit
- does that make accountancy bad or wrong? What I am trying to do (and
evidently failing) is to separate the occupation per se from the
unfortunate situation that some people find themselves in.

As for the getting hurt stuff, no, nobody gets hurt by sex - I stand
by what I said. If someone gets murdered it is because someone
murdered them - not because someone had sex with them.


OK, I think I understand a little better now. There was a good series
(2nd IIRC) of 'The Wire' that dealt with people trafficking if you can't
find/make the time read up on the subject, and it'll make you aware of
some of the 'harms' that can arise from the marketisation of sex.

Once you've figured out what the issues are I can gladly supply some
peer reviewed evidence. There has been a debate about balance in the sex
industry (hate that term), and arguments relating to women empowerment
and a need for greater regulation (health and safety if you like). Even
these acknowledge the extreme harm that happens to prostitutes and others.

On the other hand, evidence please for your 'no harm' notion. You must
have got the idea from somewhere - where?

Rob