" I refer to the human right of all women to equality and not to be an commodity to be bought and sold for another's pleasure."

Sex-work is not treating women as a commodity per se; the woman is selling a service - a temporary service.

Also, appealing to equality is disingenuous, as is referring to sex as "a human right", as the author did previously.

While there is violence association with sex-work, and servitude, sex-work is hardly violence per se.

Sure reduce these negative aspects of sex-work, but don't paint the whole industry with them.

Clarifier: I have never used a sex-worker.

The consent of the parties answers all questions of morality, and this completely disposes of all the author's arguments.

Notice how the author cannot maintain her argument without immediately falling back to non-fact and illogic?

"is it right to be able to buy a woman for a man's use?"

Prostitution is the sale of sexual services, not the sale of a person. Prostitution no more involves the buying or selling of a person, than any other sale of personal services, such as a dentist or hairdresser does. It is dishonest hyperbole to suggest that someone exchanging money for sex obtains any kind of property right over the person exchanging sex for money.

As the author's entire argument depends on this complete nonsense, her entire argument fails.

"Having sex is not a human right."

Freedom of association is a human right. Other people's private and consensual sexual relations are none of your business.

"The perceived needs of one sub-set, in this case a terminally ill woman paying for her husband to have sex, should not trump the rights of another sub-set..."

Stop thinking of human beings as herds of chattels to be herded around by the State.

"the human right of all women to equality and not to be an commodity to be bought and sold for another's pleasure."

So no woman should be entitled to any employment at any time anywhere for the same reason - all services ultimately go to satisfy some human want, and according to the author, this must be banned because it's abusive. Complete nonsense

I don't like prostitution. I don't like drinking alcohol either. However, I am against banning either prostitution or drinking alcohol. I am against forcing my morality on other people. I don't regard it as a legitimate or desirable function of government. When those who don't approve of some activity decide that government should ban that activity the results are generally disastrous. Banning abortion sends pregnant women who don't want to bear a child into the mercies of backyard butchers. The banning of alcohol during Prohibition in the US facilitated massive crime empires and government corruption. Criminalising those who use the services of prostitutes or those who set up disorderly houses will have the same sort of results as banning drinking alcohol or abortion.

Make more opportunities for employment and education for women. Take action against sexual abuse of children. See that those who engage in prostitution have a safe environment. The foregoing will either make it less necessary for people to engage in prostitution or make it less onerous for those who do. However, the kneejerk response of, "I don't like it. Let's ban it." rarely, if ever, works.

Geoffrey Fisher, Archbishop of Canterbury said, "In a civilized society all crimes are likely to be sins, but most sins are not and ought not to be treated as crimes. Man's ultimate responsibility is to God alone."

Oh come on po-face. Sex might not be a "right" as you claim, but quite a few people seem to like it for its own sake, and not just for procreation.

Prostitution will not stop rape: rape is not sex, it is a brutal violation. But for normal people who don't have sex available to them through marriage or casual relationships there is prostitution. The fact that it is the oldest trade in the book proves its efficacy and value.

When I was younger and single, I would have been too embarrassed to seek the services of a prostitute. I was a bit of a prude too, and still am. Now, when sex is a distant memory, and I would prefer an icecream, I still believe that there is too much of the nanny state telling its citizens what to do and what not to do.

Prostitution shoul be legal and clean. Taxes should be paid. Nothing else matters. It is not compulsory for people who disapprove.

Ms Francis paints her pictures of prostitution grim. Women are victims she writes, "Prostitution is a form of violence particularly against women and girls. Prostitution is both a cause and consequence of gender inequality. As a society we should reject the notion that women are a commodity to be bought and sold."

Meanwhile, coincidentally, in another journal today, the Daily Telegraph, a different picture is painted.

Why being a high-class escort has made me a better mother
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/why-being-a-high-class-escort-has-made-me-a-better-mother/story-fnpug1jf-1227518418865

In her article, Ms Samantha X (no, I don't think that's her real name) writes the following:

"At the peak of my new-found career, I was charging $1000 an hour. I was barely making that a fortnight in my "real" job working long days and taking work home with me.

So, for the first time in my life, I did something extremely unconventional. At the grand old age of 40, I jacked in the real job, and swapped my computer and commuting for high heels and Agent Provocateur."

Hmm, somehow I can't see this woman as a victim really. A predator perhaps, but not a victim.

Anyway, maybe we should all mind our own businesses and let other people mind theirs.

Interpretation of moral, violent and rights has changed greatly since prostitution ever began. There is no doubt women are being coerced, drugged and provided for sex against their will for someone else's greed. These are a violation of rights and immoral. Police would be aware of it but who will identify themselves with this industry to volunteer the proof? Great need to address what is happening, so those who are contributing in one way or another, become transparent in how legal prostitution trade really is.

I thought the regressives in their brainwashing of young girls had made sex so easily available that their would not be a market for prostitution.

"But I believe the more pertinent question should be, is it right to be able to buy a woman for a man's use?"

Why stop at one women?

Reckon his old lady should throw in two for the price of one and a clean hog.

Oh Wendy, there you go, sticking your nose into somebody else's business.

What right do you have to tell someone they are not free to perform the oldest profession in the land? I know sex workers who make a very tidy living, and, they do it by choice and are very choosy as to who they perform for and, they are nit a drain on our overloaded welfare system.

Are you suggesting they give up their chosen work and go on the dole.

What happens to their kids, their partners, their bills? Are you going to chip In?

People need to keep out of other people's business.

Yeah we should all back what rehctub (rectal tub?) is saying.

Think of brothels as finishing schools for drop dead gorgeous blond wives, with very old husbands, on the Gold Coast.

A goils gotta make a livin.

When we look at the illicit drug trade, we consider the addicted the victim. It is the seller of drugs the pusher, that we see as the criminal taking advantage of the victim.

I can see no reason to look at prostitution any differently. The poor addicted victim, the male is being taken advantage of by the pusher, the prostitute. Is it really any more criminal to take advantage of one addicted victim than any other. At least with prostitution, there is usually little long term harm to the victim, so should perhaps not be considered criminal.

I think Wendy has an inflated idea of her own value, & projects that inflated value onto other women. She does not want to see that many women are not capable of earning the living they desire with simple honest work. She refuses to believe that some of these women chose the easy way out in prostitution.

For centauries women obtained the support of one man by marriage. Some may consider sex in marriage is payment for that support. Is there any correlation between the reduced number of fully supported stay at home wives, & the reduction in women bothering to marry.

Is it any less moral for some women to gain the support of many different men in payment for one off sex, than for others in many marriages of convenience or arrangement.

One recently divorced acquaintance was heard to suggest that, "it's a lot easier catching a bit of sex, chasing it around the street, than around a double bed". He was not referring to prostitutes either, but he could have been, & why not, at least they [probably] supply what has been paid for.

I have been accused of being predictable Hasbeen but you take the cake.

//is it right to be able to buy a woman for a man's use?//

No. It is wrong to be able to buy and sell people which is why we abolished slavery a very long time ago.

You can buy a woman's time. If you only want them to clean your house or mind your children, it might not be too expensive. If you want them to have sex with you I'm told it can be very expensive. Which seems unfair on the poor: why should only wealthy people have the means to hire ladies of negotiable virtue when they already have it so good?

I think prostitutes should be made available at local libraries so that the less well off can enjoy their services as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp0dkvGKOPo

So sexist Hasbeen

Where does that us with male protistitue aspirations?
With the gifts to service ladies in our imaginations?

Fess up Hazza

Surely the question nowadays is not should prostitution be legal or illegal (those days seem to be well behind us now, for good or ill), but can we have prostitution without all the negatives that often follow it?
Can we have a system that is free of criminality, abuse, violence, drug abuse, exploitation etc?
Or are those things inextricably linked to the underlying service?
Can prostitution become just like most exchanges of services or is there something unique about it?
Can prostitutes peddle their services like plumbers, electricians, lawyers, or any other service provider?
I think we have a way to go before we get to that level - but I can definitely see it coming.

Yes cumming indeed John.

Re "Can prostitutes peddle their services like plumbers, electricians, lawyers, or any other service provider?"

On future Uber "Your Ride, On Demand" https://www.uber.com/ it may be as concievable as conception.

I'll supply the disclosure part up front. I've never used the services of a paid sex worker in any form and don't have first hand experience of the industry.

I do though hold some opinions about the approach advocated by Wendy Francis and others. Points have mostly already been made but across multiple points and sometimes repeating is valuable.

- it's not a purchase of a person, it's a fee for service for a restricted time. It's a service that crosses a lot of social mores for many but involving an activity that for many humans is one of the most pleasurable things they do in their lives. No doubt with some customers a very unpleasant task but a lot of people have very unpleasant/stomach churning tasks in their jobs.
- "by criminalising sex buyers" As someone pointed out in the drug trade we don't (officially) punish the addict and absolve the dealer. If society thinks it has a role to play in consensual arrangements between adults then by most standards its the one making the money from the transaction that should be the most accountable. Mostly I think it's not societies business and if we want to deal with the assumed damaged individuals involved I don't think there is a case to suggest that it's just the prostitutes who are damaged.

If anything I suspect that the type of dialogue about prostitution encouraged by Wendy and those with similar views is a contributing factor in the harm potentially facing prostitutes.

R0bert

I stopped halfway through reading this article, because I can't agree with the author.

Before I talk about prostitution I want to talk about abortion.

Some issues are complicated.
I cant support a ban on abortion, even though some part of me knows its morally right (stopping the killing of unborn innocent children... or fetus if it sounds less threatening), because I know that if its banned then women will go to the extremes of literally shoving a coathanger up there and dying on the table themselves.

I'm a realist.
I can't support abortion morally, (its not a contraceptive) but I know that banning it will push abortions underground and put women at risk themselves.

And so, I accept its legal, but in a social sense I frown upon it.
Why must we celebrate and embrace everything that's legal?

I support freedom and liberty for all.

I understand that some women feel that women should not be treated as sexual objects, but at the same time these women with their high and mighty ideals should not be able to dictate what other women who willingly choose to sell themselves for money can and can't do.

They have no right.

They do have the right to shut the hell up and mind their business, and they can exercise that right at any time.

I won't support any woman being forced into prostitution.
I would support that woman's freedom and liberty.

But freedom and liberty means she has the right to sell herself... if she wants to.
- And even if I don't like it.

Tony, good news for you mate, there are such things as budget hookers as well.

Armchair, you can't support everyone's freedom and not support their right to have an abortion.

As for selling a oman, you have that all wrong as women of the night don't sell themselves, they sell their services and, if they're good at it what's the problem, or more so, what right does anyone elese have to say they can't do what they do best.

As I say, people have to learn to mind their own business.

There is clearly a demand for sex which is created by nature. That will not go away. Even our Christians have failed at wishing it away, as we note in the behaviour of some of their clergy and members. Deny human biology at your peril. That demand will keep resurfacing in one way or another, no matter which laws you try to implement. Right now we have some feminists making all sorts of claims about sex, but I suspect that men enjoying themselves is something they can't stand.

The article is full of mistakes. If I hire a cleaning lady and she cleans the toilets and floors for low pay, I am hiring her services, commoditising her for my use no more than paying twenty times as much per hour for an Escort. In fact I value the Escort's time far more, as is shown in what she is paid.

If I go to the pub and convince some female to come home for the night and I score a freebie, that is seemingly ok. Even if I pushed every available emotional button and told every fib imaginable, to get her to agree.

If a girl marries a rich guy for the money, is she not selling herself?

Prostitution is at least honest and there is no reason why both parties should not be willing participants.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that so many people are unable to accept the truth exposed by articles such as these, but it still depresses me.

"no other choice"?

Pfft!

Plenty of people suffer traumatic childhoods and don't become prostitutes.

Any woman "victimised" by prostitution is victimising herself.
If she didn't "hurt" herself that way, she would do it in another, as she has a negative self-concept.

Inequality?

The only reasons there isn't more male prostitution are:
1. most men are straight.
2. almost any woman who wants sex would never have to pay.

The one group of women who've historically had the most *independance* in a "man's world" were prostitutes.

What other job can earn $1000 an hour with no tertiary qualifications required?
VICTIM!?

//I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that so many people are unable to accept the truth exposed by articles such as these//

What 'truth' is that, Louisa?

Louisa I suppose your apparent unwillingness to accept the truth in many of the posts pointing out the problems with what's in the article should not be a concern.

As someone who does not use the services of sex workers my larger concern is with the sad idea that female inferiority exists and should be further entrenched in law.

The only logical basis that I can see in the way the supggestion is put for supporting the idea that male customers of female prostitutes are somehow more accountable for their choices in a consensual transaction is a belief that women are somehow less able to make decisions for themselves than their male peers. Not a position that I support.

R0bert