|
 |
 |
|
We Asked; You Said
We asked: ******************************************** In the economics of crime, the rational for criminalization of an activity
is the negative externalities that it imposes on others. The confused discussion
in the article is produced by the difference in externalities associated with an
"escort" or "massage" service that has a discrete prostitution component and
flagrant street walking. The former likely produces few externalities because it
is virtually unnoticed while the latter is offensive to many. The difficulty for
policy is to craft legislation that criminalizes selectivity the high
externality activity. There is another consideration in the criminalization
debate because the civil law is generally disabled when an activity is
criminalized. Thus, a legal prostitute can sue for civil damages regarding
contracts, working conditions, etc. Criminalization removes these rights from
the prostitute and plunges the activity into a "lawless" underworld. Therefore,
I recommend that criminalization only proceed when the externality associated
from the activity is clearly demonstrated and, hopefully quantified. There are
ways to quantify the externality based on implicitly markets but that is a
technical matter. Prostitution is violence against women. Please see ten years of research
summarized at www.prostitutionresearch.com. Also, look at the "What's New"
section of the Prostitution Research & Education website, and see several
articles describing details of what happens when prostitution is decriminalized,
regulated, legalized, etc. Explicit in the characterization of prostitution as sex-trade is yet
another imperialist justification of the commodification of women, who more
often than not are the disposable people of society. The implication of this
can be better understood from the market economy vis a vis women at the margins
of society. It is only fair to expect that few women, if any at all, would
resort to making fast bucks from fast sex. It is possible that some may use
their body to move up in the socio-economic and professional ladders. These are
exceptions rather than rules. It is possible that some may have more than one
man for sexual satisfaction. That may come under adultery and not under
sex-trade. Seen in the above light, prostitution is an avoidable social malaise.
Legalizing it is legalizing another facet of man's inhumanity.
...There are legitimate questions to be raised about prostitution--like how
many women would voluntarily sell sex for money if their other opportunities
were equal to those of men. But I don't see what such questions have to do with
talk about the "values of a healthy society" or the like. The real problem, I think, is how a prostitute can get security doing his or
her job, opportunity for social and medical assistance, and the possibility of
saving for retirement. I believe that prostitution serves as a perfect indicator of the value of
labor independent of any component from capitalism. A worldwide index, like the
Big Mac index of the "Economist," should serve as a valuable input for labor
cost around the world. The attempts to criminalize prostitution by certain
governments is just a reflection of the fear society has towards innovation and
change. Technological innovation has produced new forms of potential social
interactions and voters are frightened. Criminalizing prostitution is a cheap
way to satisfy voters without actually affecting the trade. The trade will just
go underground, until new illnesses and epidemics will force governments to make
the trade licit again in order to control sanitation issues. The degree to which people find it necessary to turn to prostitution is one
measure of the degree to which communitarian ideals have failed to take root. In
this light, a reasonable answer to the problem is two-fold. First and foremost,
the social ills that lead people to sell their bodies have to be vigorously
addressed. If employment compatible with human dignity is available, if the poor
have access to education, if communities provide single mothers with support, if
drug dealers are actively prosecuted and users rehabilitated, then and only then
will prostitution begin to be rooted out in earnest. After all, punitive threats
do little to discourage those faced with such pressing problems. Secondly,
measures taken against prostitution should use soft-power, i.e., the use of
social persuasion. To give just one example, in some Canadian cities community
members fed up with prostitution in their streets have begun to post on the
internet the license plate numbers of johns who frequent their streets, a
practice that has some impact when discussed in the local media. Obviously, prostitution is morally problematic. Especially disquieting is the
frequent imbalance between the power and resources of the clients vis a vis the
providers, which casts serious doubt on advocates' claims that exchanges are
truly voluntary. The tendency for prostitution to be associated with other
social, psychological, and health problems should also make any society
reluctant to allow its unregulated practice. Nevertheless, these are not
concerns unique to prostitution. Many people, especially women, are effectively
forced by reason of their relative powerlessness to work demeaning and
unfulfilling jobs. If economic exploitation is the
concern--and it should be--prostitution is just one of many occupations that
deserves to be questioned. Moreover, plenty of activities are associated with as
many or more social, personal, and health problems as prostitution, yet these
are tolerated. Whether tobacco, alcohol, or even the private ownership of motor
vehicles, a strong case can be made for prohibiting a lot of activities besides
prostitution. Protection of children should be the first objective of community. The
trafficking in children for sex trade should not be supported under any
circumstances. If adults choose sex trade as their source of employment and do
so as a business, they should be regulated as is any other business. Consumers
should have protection; the business persons should have protection. If it's a
business, it should be treated that way. Regulation is appropriate. On the other hand, we rarely talk about the morality of selling (or buying)
things that we can have for free. People who agree that adults should be able to
have the kinds of consensual sex that they want, ought not oppose prostitution
simply because the sex is exchanged for money instead of for some other reward
or benefit. People who believe that sex ought to be restricted to married
couples, for example, would seem to have a more logical basis for objecting to
prostitution. What role should the government or community play in all of this? Provide a
legal system that allows both parties a voice to resolve written disputes or
contracts. The industry should be no different from any other business people
enter into. The service may be risky, but that choice should be left up to all
parties involved. Sexual enslavement is a side effect of demand and high profit induced by a
blanket ban of all sexuality outside marriage. No slavery may be condoned or
permitted, of course, but if people were allowed freely to negotiate commercial
sexual services (outside the dual constructs noted above) then market forces
would drive profitability down to the point that coerced black market slavery
would evaporate. As context, I would not favor any legal restraint on sexual activity between
consenting partners--those uncoerced by economic need--other than mutual and
informed respect for physical and emotional health. Individuals should be permitted to do as they please in the privacy of their
own homes or places of business. Human equality implies the moral proposition
that there be no restriction on peaceful and honest human action.
Decriminalizing prostitution would avoid nuisance to the community by putting it
indoors instead of seeking business in the street. Oh, God, the Puritans are at it again. One scholar has classified societies
into "sex positive" and "sex negative" societies and has shown that a majority
of the world's societies--at least pre-industrial societies--have been sex
positive. Western civilization, with its dominant religion of Christianity, has
been decidedly in the other category. In the 1960s and 1970s sexual attitudes
became more liberalized, which I think was, for the most part, a huge
improvement on the past. But recently we are seeing a "new Puritanism." The Communitarian Network invites you to: ********************************** Endorse the Communitarian Platform! Join other communitarians who have read and endorsed our platform. Visit our web site: http://www.gwu.edu/~ccps/rcplatform.html. ************************************ We apologize if you received this message in error. To be removed from this list send the message "signoff comnet" to listserv@hermes.circ.gwu.edu or reply to this message with the word "remove" in the subject line. The Communitarian Update is compiled by Emily Pryor. Please consider forwarding the Update to others who may be interested. |
|
The Communitarian Network |