Billy I did touch on conditions but admittedly was not thinking of the risks of assault. It's not a job I'd choose nor a service I choose to use but my preferences should not stop others.

As to choice - maybe an issue in the third world but I doubt that there are many being "forced" into prostitution in this country. Well not much more so than most other people who could find something better to do with their time if they could get the same money doing something they prefered to do.

The job has risks but then I used to be a sparky, took the occasional electric shock on that job. I guy I used to work with recently had his second major accident at work, another was seriously burned years ago, another was killed on his way home from work.

David, I tend to agree with the idea that prostitution may be a consequence of some sick ideas in society about sex and relationships. Where we try and force people into particular moulds (hetro and monogamous being the standard). People who's sexual preferences are outside societial norms tend to be forced to act in secret. As you may have noticed gays still have to deal with bigots who consider homosexual behaviour unnatural, sick etc. The situation facing those who don't embrace monogamy does not seem all that different. Maybe there would be little need for prostitutes if Polyamory was more widely accepted as a legitimate choice.

R0bert

What a lot of silliness about prostitution. I really enjoyed Debbie’s posts. Would think a conversation with you could be very educational.

Re all the issues that beset sex-workers; those need to be addressed. Not prostitution itself. Sex in exchange for money is a moral issue. Some think it OK, some think it is sinful. Making prostitution or obtaining the services of a prostitute criminal is not going to solve or make any issues go away. It would only make them worse by driving aspects of the industry underground.

The more openness there is, the more accountability there will be. Only this way can issues be dealt with, and criminal activity, like human traficking policed.

A drug habit supported through sex work sounds a much better option than break and entering or mugging little old ladies of their pension money.

As to the opinion that this kind of sex is degrading to women. What a sanctimonious load of rot.

How many men who are married think it is quite OK to demand sex from their wives? Some even think it OK to subject a woman to ‘rougher than usual handling’ to coerce her. Rape in marriage is still a contentious issue. It apparently cannot happen according to some. After all, doesn’t the husband have rights after bringing home the bacon? Sounds like sex for money to me.

How many men think it OK to ask a woman for sex after a night out after spending some money on her? There would hardly be a wife, daughter or sister out there who has not experienced that. Sex for a pitiful meal out? That’s not going to pay the rent.

How many men think it OK to coerce a woman to sex after ‘she’s led him on’? That’s a freeby! These are the kind of guys who boast that they NEVER have to pay for sex.

There are times when sex can be experienced as degrading by a woman, but in prostitution it would happen less often then out there in the suburbs without ‘payment’.

Aqvarivus, I don't agree when you maintain that it is permissible to read/write an article selectively, omitting whatever does not suit.

As a journalist I find that dishonest. And as an academic I believe texts should be read objectively.

I do agree however, that those who are selective shouldn't try to push this view onto others. To do so blaming those others would indeed be bizarre behaviour. And yes I agree one is responsible for ones own interpretations and must own up to them.

As to your stated purpose in not apologising to me for the way I think? Good heavens, man, what a strange notion!

Bit confused as to why you advise me to "adopt" an holistic view? As you then seem to have switched from talking about texts to "events" I confess I remain confused.

Regarding "picking away"? The nature of debate is to challenge another's stance and to provide evidence and reason/s for an alternative viewpoint.

However I understood perfectly the para beginning "What I'm saying is.." If that is what you were indeed saying the detours into gender crap, specifics informing generalities and gratuitous advice served to obfuscate a view I, and I'm sure many others agree with 100%.

End of "divisivness".

Romany, you pounced with out reading and twisted what words you chose for your justification. Please don't at this date say you did it all in the name of debate. You have offered no debate but backhanded insult and belittlement from post one. Not once in this thread have you posted opinion. And please stop with the sanctimonious "I'm sure I can speak for everyone". Though I guess you would need to gather support for your personal attack and lack of substantive topical informative discussion in order to maintain your self-righteousness. I gave no off topic detours into gender crap, or specifics informing generalities other than using generalities to speak to other posters generalities and the authors generalities and gender attack. The gratuitous advice was for you specifically. I see you didn't take it and chose to obfuscate. You have chosen to argue me. Not a very healthy attitude to bring to communal debate. Not once have you spoken to the article, the gross assumptions put forward by Sullivan or her laying the responsibility for prostitution at the foot of men. Or is Mary Sullivan one of your many nom de plumes? Has feminism so clouded your objectivity that the slightest whiff of masculinity sets you off on a mad course of sly personal attacks?
I hope I have given you sufficient attention and that I can now return my focus to the article under discussion and those who have something to say on subject. Thank you.

Interpol while investigating more than 1000 murders of east European prostitutes throughout the Mid-East were able to trace the ring leader back to a Bulgarian woman who presented herself as an employer for international domestic care. Another such ring was broken in Norway also run by Bulgarians. The suspects, seven men and three women who were Norwegian, Turkish and Bulgarian citizens, were charged with organised pimping.

the following links give a good look at such trade.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L13181613.htm
http://international.ibox.bg/news/id_1278415435

Boy am I glad Debby doesnt do it for free commented and purged the ignorance from the thread.

What it exposes here is the desire for certain groups (lets say feminists or christian groups), to impose their ideologies on other adults and citizens.

WHY?

Why does it always come down to some bunch of morons desiring to restrict the freedom of others and lobbying the government to create laws to do it? That is NOT DEMOCRACY.

Richard Dawkins is right about religion.

Socialisation may explain female dominated sextrade.

Woman socialised to see sex as valuable commodity. Dont give it away. Once, most men had to pay with a marriage contract and indetured servitude to wage slavery. The wage slavery part hasnt changed too much tho.

Women generally dont have to 'pay' for sex. Men are expected to earn it, one way or another. Men have all the power, its a mans world, etc. Men have a strong natural drive to procreate, which can be 'exploited.' Women use their sexual power to redress wider power imbalances (perceived and real) between the sexes.

Sex defines power between the sexes.

Unambiguously 'selling' sex for cheap money devalues it, considerably.

Men dont complain about being 'used' for sex. To give/take something without fair trade is to be 'used.' Its often an emotional exchange they seek, which men withhold, because we too know the value of supply/demand.

Devaluation of sexual power, reduction to mere monetary trade of a couple days wages, is the primary reason that women disagree with prostitution. Rather than humane sisterly considerations. Rhetoric of exploitation and humanity is cover.

Society contrives many pretences for sugar coating the exchange. There's lots of baggage around sex.

The ultimate sex trade is ATTACHMENT. A sort of ownership or claim to another human being and aspects of their existence... because two people copulate. When a baby comes along the parents make a claim on it and on each other. People are strange.

There are physical considerations for mens minority representation. A male has to get it up. And keep it up. Which is prolly impossible to sustain all day, physically. Or mentally, in the midst of the types who tend to use prostitutes. One is passive the other active.

'High class' hookers, who skin phychologically/emotionally vulnerable rich foreigners to the tune of $20k for a week's sex work, hardly strikes me of exploiting females. Its the other way around.