Schraf and Satcomm hand in hand against victimless crimes

quote:

---

A consensual activity, crime or other, does not suddenly change to nonconsensual simply because the person was a victim of another crime in the past.

---

Though I usually agree with Shraf, that isn't the case this time. Your comment above conveys my thoughts when I read Shraf's message. She has her causality backwards.Great post, by the way. Saved me a lot of effort.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Psychology disagrees with you. There are plenty of cases where one or more of the "consenting" parties have had some sort of childhood trauma.

---

So some people, even many people, who are prostitutes/frequent prostitutes have a history of abuse, you haven't said anything about consent. Does past abuse mean that a person is unable to consent? It would seem to follow from your statement. If the only criteria is "some sort of childhood trauma" then precious few people ought to be able the consent to anything.The issue, at any rate, is whether prostition is a victimless crime. The argument given was that many prostitutes were abused as children. Sorry, but the casuality is backward. You can argue that abuse produces prostitution, but not that the prostitution produced the childhood abuse-- which, quite obviously, happened PRIOR to the prostitution. And it is this later case that must apply for this particular argument that prostitution is not a victimless crime to stand.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

No. And this is a good point, John. However, I do think that past abuse will strongly influence the choices made by an adult.

---

No argument. Any event will influence future choices, and traumatic events should exert more influence. But I question linking this with a person's ability to consent.

quote:

---

Prostitution is not a victimless crime, because it hurts both parties involved.

---

So does football ( American ). Everyone I know who played football in high-school or college has some permanent injury from it. Yet know one talks about 'victims' of football. It is a somewhat glib response, but if you look around, a great many things people do for fun also cause injury. Most sports fit this category. Most jobs also tend to produce a particular set of physical/emotional problems. Secretaries get tendon diseases. Soldiers in combat tend to develop stress related illnesses, not to mention risk the occasional collision with a lead ball. Factory workers risk exposure to dangerous chemicals. Yet this same injury/consent argument is not applied to any of these things. The only difference is that prostition involves sex and sex has a stigma to it. To me, the 'prostitution injures both parties' argument is just a gloss covering the underlying prejudices against sex.

quote:

---

In places where prostitution is legal or widely present, discretion goes right out the window.

---

I believe this has been addressed by Holmes. What areas are you talking about? What countries? What time periods?

quote:

---

It's degrading to the woman

---

Why? This is a cultural prejudice, not an absolute.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com