A recent article in The Economist magazine discussed the outcomes of the different approaches that Sweden and Germany have taken towards prostitution since the early 2000s. Sweden—under massive pressure from feminist lobbying groups—took the path of banning prostitution completely, and actually prosecuting men (not women) who pay for sex. Germany, implementing proposals from Social Democrats (SPD) and Greens, legalized prostitution to such an extent that, in theory, working girls can get health insurance, welfare, and pensions. Both approaches have failed to live up to expectations, since both were implemented with an inadequate awareness of historical reality and human nature. This article discusses the details.
Sweden
In 1999, patronizing a prostitute was criminalized. The law was put into effect to appease the legislative efforts of feminist and leftist groups. The assumption behind the ban on prostitution was idea that a centralized government can, and should, stamp out the “evils” of prostitution and so-called “human trafficking.” Have the results lived up to expectations? The Economist smoothly demurs on this question (it “seems to have declined”), but offers no anecdotal or statistical evidence to support its bald assertion.
Germany
The idea behind legalizing prostitution was to remove the stigma from the world’s oldest profession by providing “sex workers” with clean and safe venues from which to ply their trade. It seemed to follow, proponents maintained, that doing this would drive abusive pimps and sex traffickers out of the market. There is also in Germany a traditional distrust of governmental attempts to regulate morality, as well as long-standing openness to sexual expression.
Sources state that Germany now has over 400,000 active prostitutes conducting over 1 million transactions per day; yet only 44 of them (including 4 men) have registered for welfare benefits.
Individual German states and municipalities are responsible for the zoning of brothels. Berlin has no zoning restrictions; and “in some places, streetwalkers line up along motorways with open-air booths nearby for quickies.” The title of The Economist article cited above (“A Giant Teutonic Brothel”) and its content leave the reader with the impression that liberalization of sex laws in Germany has gone too far, to the extent that Germany has now become a haven for sex tourists.
While Germany’s and Sweden’s different approaches say much about the culture of each country, I believe Germany’s is far more realistic. While some excesses in Germany will need to be curbed, its policies are in fact far more normal and healthy than Sweden’s. Despite the avalanche of feminist cant surrounding this issue, history has demonstrated that prostitution is an enduring and unavoidable human activity, and has always been so.
In the classical world, prostitution was a highly sophisticated and regulated activity, practiced throughout the Mediterranean world under various social and religious guises. The practice continued in different forms with the advent of Christianity; the medieval Church’s views were in fact surprisingly enlightened. St. Augustine, in his treatise De Ordine, stated that “If you do away with prostitutes, the world will be convulsed with lust.” St. Thomas Aquinas supported this view several hundred years later. Medieval man took his sex frankly and matter-of-factly: growing up in a world where both men and women matured earlier than today, he had neither time nor patience for abstract, unrealistic views of sex and gender.
Medieval towns such as Toulouse, Avignon, Montpellier, and Nuremburg permitted prostitution on the same theory: that providing a relief for lust and monogamy would outweigh the sinful presence of harlotry, and thereby prove a net benefit to society. It is a mature and practical view, and one that modern feminists and leftists choose to ignore. Alas, history and human nature are feminism’s greatest enemies.
London in the 1100s had a district of “bordells” or “stews” located near London Bridge; it was regulated by the Bishop of Winchester and later authorized by Parliament, which passed edicts in 1161 forbidding employment of prostitutes with known diseases.
Attempts to ban the practice outright met with no success. Louis IX expelled all prostitutes from France in 1254, but was forced to repeal his law two years later, once it became clear that the wives, daughters, and sisters of many Frenchmen were being bothered by aggressive admirers. In 1256, a new edict set up a special “red-light” district in Paris under the supervision of a roi des ribauds, and things improved measurably.
Louis’s son Philip unwisely renewed the expulsion law, which was ignored as unenforceable. In Rome, throughout the medieval period and into early modern times, there were brothels near the Vatican, which were permitted to operate as long as certain conditions were met. (A sisterhood was established to care for such women in approved hospitals, and donations from reformed prostitutes were given away as charity).
Wise men have long recognized the need for providing an outlet for the sexual impulse, which, if allowed to accumulate without relief, could have deleterious effects on society.
Human Trafficking: Feminist Propaganda?
Seen in this light, Sweden’s attempt to ban prostitution will result in more harm than good. The feminist backers of the law were careful to place all the criminal stigma of prostitution on the male patron; in feminist doctrine, the prostitute shares no responsibility for her choices or actions.
This attitude has been even more starkly observed with the spread of “human trafficking” propaganda. No one denies that such a thing exists, but it is clear that the issue is being grossly exaggerated to advance the feminist agenda. Every time an Asian massage parlor is shut down, it seems, we have to endure lectures about the evils of human trafficking.
The reality is very different. A recent article in The Guardian (Oct. 19, 2009) stated:
The UK’s biggest ever investigation of sex trafficking failed to find a single person who had forced anybody into prostitution in spite of hundreds of raids on sex workers in a six-month campaign by government departments, specialist agencies and every police force in the country.
The failure has been disclosed by a Guardian investigation which also suggests that the scale of and nature of sex trafficking into the UK has been exaggerated by politicians and media.
Current and former ministers have claimed that thousands of women have been imported into the UK and forced to work as sex slaves, but most of these statements were either based on distortions of quoted sources or fabrications without any source at all.
Evidence is mounting that human trafficking is a manufactured crisis, pushed by feminists and leftists to advance their social engineering goals. Radical feminist Alice Schwarzer, an opponent of Germany’s prostitution laws, claims that prostitution and “slavery” are “inextricably entangled.” Two social researchers quoted in The Economist article cited above deny this; they note that slavery and prostitution are two distinct and separate things, each with its own economic impetus.
Few dare to state openly what is becoming increasingly obvious: the phrases “sex slavery” and “human trafficking” are being used to mean whatever feminists want them to mean. The goal, as always, is to portray women as perpetual victims. The dark secret they wish to suppress is that the vast majority of women are not coerced into prostitution; and once there, they choose to stay there for financial gain.
One website has documented an impressive catalogue of studies showing how the issue is being manufactured. U.S. Justice Department Inspector Glenn Fine, for example, audited Former Attorney General Gonzales’s reports on human trafficking, and found them filled with exaggerations and misstatements.
Human lust has been with us from the time humans first walked the earth. As societies developed and became more organized, it was inevitable that some sort of commercialization of the sex act would arise. Attempts to ban the practice have never worked, and never will. Such attempts in the past were often based on religious rationales, and failed due to an inadequate understanding of human nature.
Modern attempts to ban the practice in Sweden and Germany have focused, instead, on using feminist victimization theories. The new religion (feminism) has simply replaced the old. Feminists will perform intellectual somersaults to try to explain the presence of hundreds of thousands of prostitutes in Germany, practicing their trade in public view. “They must be slaves who were trafficked there!” is their default response. But by going down this road, radical feminists find themselves on the horns of an especially delicate dilemma that frustrates their theology of victimization. How?
Because you can’t be an empowered, independent woman—collecting a pension, medical insurance, and welfare from a career in prostitution–and be a victim at the same time.
Read More: How Contraceptives Distort Gender Relations
Excellent article, but one point of contention. You keep stating that prostitution is frowned upon by the ‘leftists.’ I was under the impression that the right-wingers were the ones preaching sexual conservatism and traditional ‘family values.’ In fact, a very liberal place like Amsterdam has legalized prostitution.
Conservatism isn’t necessarily right-wing. Socialism and conservatism are almost always two side of the same coin. Both are pro-big-government and seek to regulate and control society by increasing government power and regulation. Classical liberalism and individualism are right wing in that both ideologies seek the smallest possible government and the greatest amount of individual freedom. Traditionally left has meant big government and right small government but years of leftist propaganda has distorted people’s understanding of this basic concept of politics.
Makes sense. But I don’t understand how both socialism and conservatism are pro-big government. Obviously, socialism is, but conservatism?
There are different factions. In the Tea Party, for example, there is a more socially conservative, often religious, right wing. But there’s also a libertarian, secular right wing. While the latter is more consequent in its opposition to big government, the former is more specifically opposing the liberals in big government.
Well you need only look back at history to see that conservative governments increase the size of the state when they are in power. Also, conservatism is essentially traditionalism and socialism is the breakdown of traditionalism in order to see in a socialist or communist state. Traditionally most political and social power was in the hands of religion where socialists want to take that power and hand it to the government. Liberalism is neither and seeks to hand power back to the individual, this is true liberalism. The mainstream liberalism promoted by the socialist left is not liberal in any sense and is simply an attempt to breakdown traditional structures (marriage and family being two main components of these structures) by disguising it as a “liberal progressive” agenda. What we understand as right & left in the West has nothing to do with opposing sides trying to reach different ends. Rather it is two opposing sides trying to reach the same end via different means. It is a battle of two different ideologies but where both ideologies seek to control and manipulate society.
Personally, I think the whole focus on ‘big government’ is a bit odd, surely it should be a case of looking at what, if anything, you think ought to be handled by the government, and then once some sort of agreement there has been reached, figure out how they’re going to be funded adequately.
In the case of the United States, there’s no need to look at what should be handled by the government. Their specific powers are outlined clear as day in the Constitution and it was written as such to prevent expansion into other areas of responsibility without a long drawn-out and measured process.
Think of it this way. Both parties want to spend.
One spends on buying votes.
One spends on defense, guns and oil.
Not that you have the basics, fill in all the blanks with whatever bullshit rhetoric you want to get elected.
And the different sets of friends and well wishers who reap the benefits of legislation.
Exactly.
What you say makes sense. But how is conservatism pro-big government? I thought their whole ideology was based on the least amount of government possible.
Just different big guv. The government will be the morality police citizen. You are not free in your own homes to, as an example, ask your girlfriend (or wife) to perform oral sex on you. Sex only between a husband and wife, preferably missionary.
Oh and you think that 4 kids is enough, stop having sex. Birth control is abortion, and not in God’s plan. The only purpose of sex is procreation you sinners.
That’s the morality police coming to break down your door citizen.
There are different aspects of conservatism, however. For instance a lot of ‘conservatives’ are really just fiscally conservative (advocate least government and low taxation, low welfare), while still being fairly libertarian in their moral views (live and let live, as long as you don’t harm other people’s freedom). One does not necessarily imply the other. Seeing things as just left or right is much too simplistic, since there are many more areas of social and political life to consider. One can be ‘conservative’ in some while being ‘liberal’ in others.
The “morality police” argument is both grossly exaggerated and a stark mischaracterization of the typical conservative viewpoint. I’ve interacted with a great many ‘Republicans’ in the US and ‘conservatives’ in other countries and have yet to find one that is in favor of laws regulating the sexual behavior of adults in the privacy of their own homes. What they find distasteful is what they view as the parading of sexual vice and “sin” in front of their children. Media obsession with sexuality, homosexual PDA in public places, etc. Hardly the same thing.
Real world example: both the Bush and Harper governments of USA and Canada respectively, both ran the largest governments and most expensive governments in history, both claim to be conservative.
lol weird part is conservatives are supposed to be against goverment spending. guess thats not the case when there lining there own pockets. theory vs practise.
But being more objective and less ideological (it should be “moralists” and “non sex-positive feminists”) won’t alienate as many people. And that would give Quintus a sad.
If Quintus had been more objective, the article wouldn’t have been memorable. Haha
It’s more complicated than that, I think.
Both sides of the ideological spectrum have sought to ban prostitution, under different banners.
Right wingers like to stress the sanctity of women, the supposedly corrosive effect of prostitution on public morals, and traditional religious phobias about sexuality.
Left wingers, on the other hand, like to use pseudo-scientific theories about gender and femininity to claim that prostitution “harms women” or exploits them in some way.
What is interesting is that both camps are proceeding under inadequate premises.
My point is that prostitution has always been here, and will always be here. At best, it can be regulated and zoned. At worst, ideologues seek to ban it.
Understood
what you call right wing in the US, is just a thinly veiled attempted to get the religious vote from the rural population that represents a huge portion of the states….. US right wing is more along the lines of hitler’s national socailism / crony capitalism, than anything representing free market liberalism…. while what is called liberal in the US is more like a drive towards UK or French style socialist Govt. where you can’t blow your nose in public without a license…..
both head in pretty much the same direction.. it’s like arguing about landing at JFK or La Guardia…. they are both in NYC….
Neither wing has our interests at heart though. We’re the enemy, the man who won’t knuckle under and just do as their masters tell them. We’re just supposed to be tax-farm cattle and consumers, and if you breakout of the false dichotomy, you’re a threat to the system as a whole.
The Communist News Network once again spouts its Cultural Marxism:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/27/opinion/wells-prostitution-victims/
Cases like these are more sexist than our reports, for they truly see prostitutes as individuals who cannot care for themselves.
It’s the worlds oldest profession, and they make it sound like an oppressive evil. Bah, the irony.
exactly and then it can be properly taxed. its horrible watching a woman standing on a corning in winter up north. plus if its zoned people would know where to go for it and not try to buy people who are not for sale. would decrease ghettos to..
My point would be, why should prostitution be taken away?
No, both sides hail the feminist narrative. On the one hand, it is the vile/evil bad man penetrating the poor, poor feminine victim who was “obviously” brainwashed by an even worse man. The other is the pathetic white knight mangina we all rightly loath and detest; who fails to see the evidence of his “innocent virgin” right before his eyes.
I have done almost 500 boardings of vessels from the horn of Africa, to the mouth of the river by Basra in the North of the Persian Gulf. NOT ONE SHIP CARRYING ENSLAVED WOMEN. Quintus discovered the article I knew of and would have linked to. These dumb broads got everyone from Scotland Yard, to teh local priests to go looking for these poor soon to be born again holy virgins. Only to be faced with the fact that they all wanted to be there in the first place. Out of all those boardings, not one single case of human trafficking discovered. And I looked my ass off. I looked for significant reading changes in air pressure (for slave breathing tubes), noticeable speed differences, etc., etc.
Nada, nothing, no slave children, women or otherwise.
As the holiest of holy women, I believe her name was Lil’Kim, said “why spend my money, when I can spend yours?”
Oh yes, we all know how “pure” the Notorious BIG was don’t we?
When I went to the Middle East, South Asia, and Eastern Europe; I asked several women how much to get them out of here. They all just wanted the money, they already had their passports, and could leave when they wanted to. The “evil” pimps were most likely their “open minded” boy friends whose rent you are paying.
Never again have I looked at feminist, and government largesse the same. They screach like banshees about everything under the sun, and in the end; they merely demand more funding. None of which we will ever discover “the innocent victims” it went to “help.”
Screw all those damn liars.
Amen brother.
Excellent article. Let me also drop the link to my favorite writer on this topic. One of the most coherent and devastating voices against the feminist oppression (oooops, “protection”) or whores in the world:
http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/
Yes. I read it often. It has excellent arguments against prohibitionists. Her article No Other Option about disabled clients is very moving and shows the cruelty of what she calls neofeminists to men with disabilities. http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2010/10/17/no-other-option/
First class analysis, Quintus!
“yet only 44 of them (including 4 men) have registered for welfare benefits.”
Even if Germany has very liberal prostitution laws, the stigma of being a prostitute still remains. That is one reason for this very low number. The other reason is, that most register under another profession such as physical therapist,…because tax evasion is easier this way. No one would believe that any prostitute has an income below 2000 Euro, even a bad one.
“Radical feminist Alice Schwarzer, an opponent of Germany’s prostitution
laws, claims that prostitution and “slavery” are “inextricably
entangled.”
As much as i want to deny her claim, she is sadly not completely wrong. Most of the prostitutes who work in brothels, houses,…are doing it voluntarily. But many of those who work near motorways or on the streets are mostly from south-eastern Europe, don’t speak german and are forced, many times by their own compatriots, to prostitute themselves for minimal prices.
All in all i would say that legalized prostitution is the better alternative.
It is the better alternative but here in Germany, on a declining path.
Due to more and more Eastern-European Women moving here for a better live and offering themselfs illegaly and for very(!) low prices they push legal institutions out of business.
As counter-measure legal brothels try to compete with these cheaper offerings with offers like “all you can F*ck – Happy Ours” and so on.
The article is correct.
But as far as I heard from an recent article here in Germany, the earnings and life quality of prostitudes is the worst in the last 30years.
“No one would believe that any prostitute has an income below 2000 Euro, even a bad one.”
Yet. that is wrong. As written above, here in Berlin, due to the illegal competition the earnings of a prostitute declined substantially.
The earnings were way higher back in the days when prostitution was illegal, because you had not to pay the ~45-30% of taxes, and Germanys borders to the east were still intact.
If the liberal approach is on the decline, which I can’t tell, it won’t be because of “cheap competition”. After all, there will hardly be lobby groups on the streets shouting “German men for German hookers” or something bizarre like that.
nono it was more an additional information to the main article.
foreign competition makes it more difficult in every sector as supply increases.
I’m convinced, that the way my homecountry handles prostitution is quite a good approach.
“Because you can’t be an empowered, independent woman—collecting a pension, medical insurance, and welfare from a career in prostitution–and be a victim at the same time.”
I love this article. I 100% agree with the author. Slavery and prostitution are two ENTIRELY different things. While there is human trafficking in the world it is by and large a small problem not an epidemic. Most women choose to be prostitutes for the easy money and lack of real work that it entails. If you could make 50-3000$ (high end call girls) a client for laying on your back and having bad to great sex in stead of getting up and sitting in a cubicle or saying do you want fries with that, wouldn’t you lol. Don’t get me wrong, being a prostitute is not a glamours life (unless your’e a high end call girl), but its not something you’re being forced to do in most cases.
I think prostitution serves a important role in society. It is there to relieve sexual frustration for men and some women. making their lives easier and more enjoyable. Some guys use their prostitutes as their psychologist. Lets be real, some days you just want to go home or somewhere after a hard days work, have a beer, relax and get your dick sucked. now barring sexually transmitted diseases that some prostitutes carry (all the more reason to legalize it in america for healthcare and taxes), prostitution is an excellent alternative to masturbating or living in sexual frustration. It also avoids the completely unnecessary dating game when a man just wants to get his rocks off. It helps men to avoid having to lie to chicks just to get laid or waste money on dates, talking, getting to one one another and any other time wasters when he just wants to fuck. This way is very efficient. It is money well spent in that regard.
There is a saying “you don’t pay a whore to stay, you pay her to leave”
WITH THAT BEING SAID…..it does absolutely nothing for game and can have negative side effects…i.e. laziness towards game, lack of confidence when talking to women you are not paying for, viewing most if not all women as whores (snicker) but seriously, if you ABUSE using prostitutes it can have negative psychological ramifications toward women in general. If you want to use them (which is fine) do so in significant moderation. there is no need to if you are concentrating on self improvement but…sometimes you just want to get your rocks off quickly and go about your day. There is something to be said for the convenience.
Agree with everything you said.
“Human trafficking” is a manufactured crisis that is being used to advance the pro-woman agenda. Undoubtedly, it does happen in some cases. But it is nowhere near as common as it is made out to be. And the studies demonstrate this, as the article explains.
Think about it. Is it possible to keep someone under lockdown 24 hours per day, in today’s world, unless you’re a state actor?
I never really believed the “trafficking” hype. Most of these “trafficked” women are there because they want to be there. They want to pretend that they were “coerced” into it, so that they can get citizenship and welfare benefits from the state, which feminist lobbies are screaming to give them. It’s also a convenient way of avoiding responsibility for their choices, which, as everyone knows, is the stock-in-trade of feminist ideology.
Obviously fake, because why use weird BSDM terms when false imprisonment and rape are serious charges that already cover the situation? The problem is indeed that since the parties are willing, the “victimization” needs to be invented by the law
I’m reminded of Charlie Brooker’s snide comment about a Hannah Montana bit in which she’s worrying about her guy having a hairy back — Charlie Brooker commented that usually girls of that age only worry about such things if they’ve been trafficked, with the implication that only the script writers could imagine such things …
“Is it possible to keep someone under lockdown 24 hours per day, in today’s world, unless you’re a state actor?”
Some people who believe in the “Monarch slave” concept think it’s not only possible, but also commonplace. Every time I see Miley Cyrax “twerking” like a one-chick version of “We Are the Robots”, I have to wonder how much is conspiracy theory and how much is conspiracy analysis.
I don’t know if the concept has basis in fact, but I know that this sort of “strange brew” is becoming increasingly plausible …
A busy mans savior. When going hard for a large goal such as financial independence it’s difficult to
find the time to procure a rotation. So much easier to click click,
drop some bucks, wham bam and out than to waste so much time / money
when it could be better spent on more pressing endeavors.
Sir, I can understand and completely agree with you.
The Pinochet regime in Chile tried to ban prostitution by edict in the early 1980s – the decree was never enforced in any meaningful way, and the junta made themselves a laughing stock of the nation.
The German attempt at “normalizing” prostitution has had its crass failures, as in work agency sending young/handsome women who would have nothing to do with prostitution to apply for jobs at whorehouses – in Germany you lose your unemployment benefits if you don’t apply for a job which the agency gives you.
Here in Austria the whole thing is managed in a more nuanced way: pimping is nominally forbidden and establishments may not be within 300m or so from schools and other public venues. This has lead to pimps changing their business model from the classic bordello to “renting” the room to the girls for a fixed fare. The stated purpose of these laws, namely disassociating organized crime from prostitution, failed, as now the more business-savvy Russian Mafiya has taken over big parts of the business.
The whole prostitution business may not be of everyone’s taste but it fulfills a social function. Forbidding it and the hare-brained regulation schemes and “social discourse” around the business of the last decades probably say more about the bigotry of our dear leaders than about the business per se.
The case with the work agency referring a young woman to a brothel was widely exaggerated. It happenend once, the agency said it was a mistake, and after all the excitement went down it became clear that the job was behind the bar, thus making all the blahblah just that.
Precisely.
The narrative in the U.S. is of course, ass-backwards. On the one hand, we have women testifying before congress that they need the government to subsidize their birth control so they can have as much sex as they want. As Rush observed, paying women to have sex, which by all accounts is prostitution. At the same time, women are constantly shouting for government to stay out of their bodies, usually in regards to abortion. Of course staying out of their bodies doesn’t apply when the government via taxpayers is placing food, medicine, and knowledge in their bodies, but how dare anyone point that out.
Yet, keeping government out of a woman’s body does not apply to women who engage in prostitution, which in the criminally-defined sense is but a degree away from what women do in their every day lives a la feminist hero, Wendy Davis. And certainly feminists have no problem with women slutting it up in whatever amounts necessary, so how exactly could they find a women earning money for doing the exact same thing problematic?
They don’t find the selling side problematic, they find the buying side problematic. If a women slept her way up a company, most feminists would surely be first attacking the men, not the women, and for the same reason.
400.000 prostitutes in a country of 80 million people shows how much men crave and possibly need sex.
And with every working man paying and average of 40% tax on their earnings, and most of what is paid back to society going to servicing women’s needs shows how one sided the equation has become.
Men need some things, women need some. the state provides for women, by men’s stolen time, but makes it criminal in many countries for men to obtain what they need even if they are willing to pay with what is left over.
“You sexist pig, do you suggest women who are on welfare go into prostitution?”
… if you are in the quest for equality, and you steal from men almost half their working life, almost half of their heart beats that they spent at work, a time they could choose to spend with their families, or just relaxing,…. and if women on welfare insist on making babies with men on welfare who use the state’s child support to be new sneakers every month (two degrees of seperation to me); then…
Prostitution should be safe, legal, and rare.
Femcunt logic works well when it’s applied correctly.
How did the “leftists” switch their reports with the conservative AG Gonzalezs reports, which were written by Baby Jesus, is what I want to know…
Just goes to show you:
It doesn’t matter if it’s left or right wing. The church and the state want to control sex. I haven’t had the wherewithal to try and find a hooker, I don’t like the idea of being busted by some moralistic effeminate cop and his feminist partner.
Remember one thing when you go to the voting bot: the feminists and the church want to punish you for having sex with sluts. The church want to punish sluts just as much.
Don’t give them ANY power.
The article above gives examples of the church NOT wanting to control prostitutes. You are repeating a myth.
They want their beta slaves no matter what. If betas can get sex in a safe controlled environment, and from a hottie no less, they will never man up and marry a wall slammer for a life time of bad sex, bad conversation and transfer payments.
“wall slammer”
Very eloquent. I like it.
There are reasons male mid-level managers talk in glowing tones about their “vacation on the beach” in Havana, despite coming back without suntans or even the slightest bit of sunburn …
The Internet routes around censorship?
The world traveller routes around politicians.
Might be time for me to submit an article on my experiences in amsterdam, in fact if I ever get married, it will be to one of those girls. After all they have given me so much.
I tried. I thought marrying a pro would be awesome.
Didnt work.
Unfortunately, whores just are not marriage material.
Sorry to hear that bro, I would think they would appreciate it too, at least until they get a green card or something.
Oh well, you are welcome to come with me to the dam this year. In fact this article just reminded me to book my ticket and save some vacation days.
Well..wasnt quite like that. It never really when past the discussion point with us. She kept talking about some stupid thing called “love”.
Totally was the deal-breaker.
Point by point, how did it fail?
Unfortunately, most western women are just as much whores as the professionals.
Spot on – exactly right!
I find that escorts/prostitutes are consistently more honest with you than feminist girls and have a better ROI(Return on Investment)
Try Costa Rica brother, you’ll never go back to the US for working girls again…
Also see Dominican Republic.
The only 100% effective way of choosing an escort who isn’t working with the cops on a sting is to choose one who lists on here profile that she won’t see black men. Of course this won’t help you if you are black yourself.
The correct way to do that is to proposition for still and video nude photography. Engaging a woman to make a porno movie with you is completely legal. The fact that you are paying her to have sex with you is negated by the fact that you are making a film. I am not sure if you absolutely have to monitize the resulting film to be covered.
Several sources have cooberated that ifapproached on the street or in a freelance venue, say you are interested in nude photograhy. No undercover cop will be willing to do that while any real prstitute will be glad for a payday without having any wear and tear on the equipment.
Swedish feminist politician Beatrice Ask (short haired and ugly) did not even lose her job for proposing that men SUSPECTED (not caught, not prosecuted, but suspected) of ‘using’ prostitutes have large coloured envelopes sent to their home to name and shame them and alert their family/partner. She didn’t even have to resign from her job after making a half assed apology. She should realise it is women like her who make men want to sleep with prostitutes.
Boys need to be taught the laws surrounding sexual conduct at school (since all the liability is on them in virtually every instance). The 2003 Sexual offences Act (UK law) makes a man who does have sex with a trafficked/coerced sex worker guilty of rape whether he knew she was being forced to work or not. I can believe that this human trafficking shit is greatly exaggerated. I would imagine in today’s economy most hot girls would rather earn £100-£200 an hour sucking cock than minimum wage working a coffee shop or a clothes shop.
Isn’t making prostitution illegal oppressing the women who do want to exploit their sexuality?
I’m a feminist and support the legalisation of prostitution. So does pretty much every feminist I know. Your argument is invalid.
No sugar, your one anecdote about yourself and the vast network of cunts you know really proves nothing more than that you are an idiot. Go away.
Well put. But I think simpy calling her “liar” would suffice.
You mean legal for women, and illegal for male customers. Or maybe some hyper-regulated scheme that would make operating legally impossible. You can’t be anti-business, anti-male, and anti-individual and approve of prostitution, though I have no doubt that your logically inconsistent thoughts do in fact exist
No, I support it being legal for both men and women, whether they are the prostitute or the customer. You don’t understand what feminism is, not that I expected you to.
oh, we understand it too well – because we are men, we judge it by actions, not words.
Feminism is a plot by rich nation Jewish women to destroy men in our society. Period.
Fuck off, bitch.
If you really do support it then i commend you. Very few people would get behind a cause that could potentially render them obsolete.
You don’t even know what it is-
In plain English its Illuminati Zionist bankster social control read henrymakow.com for an education- he’s a Jew and says its a Jew control game- wake up you’ve been had by Jewish finance!
Great analysis – I tend to see Brazil’s approach as one that works – prostitutes are viewed as independent contractors and people capable of making their own decisions. All of these other approaches basically see women as being unable to make decisions for themselves, and the state has to step in to protect them – this is why it is seen as Leftist. Also, they all use sex as a way of controlling men – if you can pay for it, why would any man subject himself to being with one woman? Answer – they wouldn’t.
Maybe we need a true – non-trackable digital currency. Then you aren’t “paying” for it in a way that can be tracked…
A “gift” culture can accomplish much the same thing with even less trackability.
It’s no coincidence that feminism began to take off as prostitution was made illegal and cracked down upon. Men became sex beggars and women developed an attitude of entitlement.
Feminism and chivalrous patronage (the two are pretty much the same) are based upon the notion that women are oppressed by sex and that only lesbians are truly free. They regard men as disgusting and view normal heterosexual relationships, which are partly prostitution (since men as providers are still paying for sex indirectly), as oppressive for women. They think that women should get men to provide for them, but for free without any expectation on his part. And there are men who buy into it and say they’re proud to be “old fashioned” and take women out on dinner dates with no expectation (so why not just give ANYONE a free dinner?)
From Germany: Both feminists as the ever-present Alice Schwarzer and the leftist parties (from an American point of view, I doubt there is a non-leftist party in any German government) try to push for Sweden-like regulation due to the alleged increase in human trafficing. Which, given the political climate, is likely to happen, because [quote] There is also in Germany a traditional distrust of governmental attempts to regulate morality [/quote] is simply not true. Since the 1990s the government does little but regulate morality.
The number of only 44 of 400.000 prostitutes signing up for welfare may be easily explained that they prefer to stay self-employed instead of having a work contract, as to the employers. German work laws make it preferrable to shoot yourself in the foot instead of having employees. But German gun laws keep you from having a weapon. And the number of 400.000 prostitutes is likely to be exaggerated, says Bavarian police.
There is, as far as I understand (sorry, I am not active in that area), a measurable influx of prostitutes to Germany driving prices down, thus making business harder. Though, according to a self-proclaimed prostitutes blog (http://streetgirl.twoday.net/ – German) the prices estimated by the authorities (averaging 25-50 Euros per Job) are widely understated.
God, I hate Schwarzer so much.
Daniel:
When I spoke of “the traditional German distrust of gov’t attempts to regulate morality”, I was speaking specifically of attempts to enforce puritanical anti-sex laws regarding pornography and prostitution since 1945. I don’t think anyone can deny that German culture since the 1950s has shown a high degree of sexual openness in comparison with, say, Italy or other Mediterranean countries.
You can see pornography on regular TV channels, for example. I’m not saying this is bad, I’m just making an observation as a visitor.
As a German I can confirm that “puritanical American sexual mores” is seen as cliche here (as opposed to what Germans consider normal). I don’t think that prostitution laws in Germany are so liberal because they think that’s the way to reduce it. They are merely so liberal because most German really don’t see much wrong with it. In that sense, I disagree with the article in that the policy has “failed” – because I doubt the supposed goal was actually a goal to begin with.
I also don’t think it will change much because feminism has already climaxed a while ago here, and is now on the decline. Few women call themselves feminists these days – it’s a bit crazy, as if you live in the past. It’s not to say there is no feminist influence, but it’s waning rather than strengthening.
Feminists are just changing skins. They are still going strong and many women are feminists even if they don’t say they are.
In the US the climax might sill be in the future, but in Germany it’s in the past. I know what kind of prison my childhood was, and the things I can get away with saying know – the winds have changed considerably.
I visited Germany once for about 10 days around 14 years ago. I was near Stuttgart. Wonderful country…although you’d better be a good driver or people will be merciless…!
I’m not so sure that feminism is on the wane in Europe. It may not be as visible now. But that could be because it has won such victories in the popular culture that it doesn’t need to trumpet its doctrines any more. In other words, it’s low key because it’s defeated all challengers.
All over the world, it is increasing, not decreasing, in my view.
I can’t say it for Europe in general, the European countries don’t walk completely in lockstep due to the language barriers.
Cannot contest that… it still feels strange that TV started censoring nipples in primetime TV. Compared to most countries, yes, Germany is a very open country; it’s just getting less open.
The feminist war against prostitution is about the most blatant example of straight culture war that exists. Only a female with power would make criminals of women who sell themselves, a man with power would never do this. For a woman with power, every woman who sells their own body represents a potential threat to her own power. This is because, whether it is actually true or not, women instinctively presume that their own power flows to them from the men around them. If those men who gift power to her can be distracted by a woman who sells her body, the power that she sacrificed for would be threatened.
Any one of us can call for legalizing prostitution, we can create a special color ribbon and wear it, put a week on the calendar to celebrate the sex industry…but legalization won’t happen until true masculinity is re-asserted in the political structures of the developed world. The feminization of politics is incompatible with the industry of prostitution.
100% agree.
Feminists cunts in power bans prostitution simply because they don’t want their mangina husbands having options…
No sex option = committed to feminist pussay and rules to follow to access said pussay…
I was going to make the same comment basically . If prostitution is legal women’s power in society is greatly diminished , hell, even game will be diminished because men would only need to chase money women be damed I will just pay for pussy and get back to work( or video games, fishing, whatever) . Gaming women would become a fetish, or a sexual conquest for fun not necessity. Think of how much shit would get done if men did not have to chase sex, there would be this vague since of happiness washing over American men while civilization advanced at an unprecedented rate.
The only hope on the part of the right-wingers may be the shotgun wedding. You seduce a virgin she is your wife. And you cannot separate from her as long as you live.
And the corresponding incentives to marriage. Regular sex, Headship of family. Feminine wife. etc etc. And the repeal of all the misandric laws concerning marriage.
So men never ban prostitution? Prostitution is a stark contrast to the family unit that so many societies relied on that it why it is often banned or seen as a vice.
Prostitutes have no loyalty to the men the sleep with and have little interest in caring for children and even when they have children the child is left fatherless. So prostitution is something that may exist but it’s is obvious that it can only do so as a small portion of society.
In many cases it is the leftists who go for Germany’s approach, not Sweden’s. Left wing policies are not strictly tied to feminist bull shit.
Really is the Party line, whatever leftists you’re talking about will be “re-educated”
Prostitution was legal in most of the U.S. up until the turn of the 20th century. It was only after politicians started to fear white women being worked in Asian brothels that it was criminalized. Not coincidentally, the century-long failed prohibition against drugs began when the same people started to fear that blacks on drugs would indiscriminately rape white women.
All of the modern vice laws have their roots in this racism and the pedestalization of white women. Now, there’s nothing necessarily wrong with trying to protect your women provided it’s done in the proper way (it’s the only way your civilization can survive in the long run), but I find it interesting that the leftists are at least the cousins, if not the direct descendants of these people, even though most of them proudly wear the slogan of “anti-racism” on their sleeve.
Go look for consistency of logic in Cultural Marxism, though.
Gun control also sprang out of a desire to keep blacks from arming themselves after inexpensive, mass produced guns became widely available.
Yep, that is also true, though I left it out solely because it’s not necessarily a “vice.”
Indeed. In fact, back in the day, especially when I was growing up in constitutional carry Vermont, we called being armed “citizenship.”
In Vermont you have to be armed, you’re the U.S.’s first line of defence against those damn toque-wearing, maple syrup-eating Canadians. Why, them bastards are liable to stream over the border at any minute and start “pardon me and thank youing” their way across the eastern seaboard. Next thing you know, you’re standing there in a plaid shirt with a moose sandwich wondering “WTF is this all aboot?”.
Oh sure, laugh it up, but you should see them driving down 89 at 90 mph (I guess they think the rte number is the speed limit) in the slow lane while reading the paper. Some day they’ll need to be taught some manners.
I do not recognise your strange usage of “gun control”, because for me, it means hitting the target you’ve aimed at …
gun ownership control
There’s one in every crowd. Usually it’s me.
Which is why I usually use the term Arms Restriction to call attention to the fact that it isn’t just about guns.
Ya ever notice that the right hand seeks to ban guns, while the left hand bans every other form of weapon and claims its constitutional because you can have a gun?
Wat’s wit dat?
I DEFY THAT GUN TO OWN ME
I KNOW MY RIGHTS *ahem*
I’ll stop with the American television caricatures now. 🙂
I’ve spent time in Switzerland as well.
Guns dont kill people
Marriage does.
So you’re going to pretend the suffragettes had no part in ant-prostitution laws?
Cultural Marxism is big on revisionist history as well.
My understanding is that drug prohibition laws were designed to get rid of low wage Mexican workers. I think the rape thing was just a means to demonize the drug and its users.
Here is one source and I have heard the same elsewhere:
“During the Great Depression, massive unemployment increased public resentment
and fear of Mexican immigrants, escalating public and governmental concern
about the problem of marijuana. This instigated a flurry of research which
linked the use of marijuana with violence, crime and other socially deviant
behaviors, primarily committed by “racially inferior” or underclass
communities. By 1931, 29 states had outlawed marijuana.”
-Frontline “Busted: America’s War on Marijuana”
In fact, black jazz clubs of the 20s sold marijuana and hash legally as a replacement for booze which was outlawed by the Volstead Act.
http://www.quickmeme.com/img/97/97669a0434bbe5680e2654fd09cc3bf7a5fec0c55e2fffa08642cd729195c05f.jpg
Lol!
It seems to me that Sweden is ripe for conquest.
Decades of feminism has emasculated Swedish men into the role of women who pee while sitting down, while boys are tricked into feminine roles in schools like being forced to play with a toy kitchen.
http://www.visitsweden.com/sweden/Featured/Sweden-Beyond/Society/
http://digitaljournal.com/article/352108
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2008453/School-bans-bid-stop-children-falling-gender-stereotypes.html
Once the invaders have hit the beaches the Swedish men will complete their emasculation by cutting off their dicks and donning dresses to avoid being killed, while all those feminist women can be herded into harems of obedient cocksuckers.
The Muslims are way ahead of you.
It’s really, really sad.
Sweden produced some of the greatest warriors in history- Vikings and Gustavus Adolphus.
Now look what they’ve become.
Sweden and England are the two biggest laboratories of Cultural Marxism, and serve as a stark warning to everyone else just how crazy these people can get.
This is true.
On an individual level, the Scandinavian men I’ve met seem to be sensible, level-headed, decent fellows (if a bit stiff and robotic socially).
Yet their heads are stuffed with post-modern liberal, feminist bullshit that destroys their ability to think clearly. When I’ve probed deeper, most of them will concede that their societies are feminist dictatorships, but they seem powerless to do anything about it.
I will say that Norwegians are the exception to this rule. Norwegian army dudes I worked with in Bosnia were first rate snake-eaters…real stand up guys.
Home of the True North real Norwegian Black Metal.
Yummy.
Sweden and England are the two biggest laboratories of Cultural Marxism, and serve as a stark warning to everyone else just how crazy these people can get.
That was pretty much the point I was trying to make.
Dont forget they brought us Death Metal. Best music in the world to work out to.
Alexander Gustaffson disagrees.
There is a lot of truth to this harsh indictment.
One of the laws of history is that affluence promotes weakness, which then invites conquest.
WTF, Swedish men peeing sitting down…
Remove that urinal and I’ll piss on the FLOOR!
Sweden is a strange bird. Remember how they stayed “Neutral” during WW2? Now look where they are today. Many things can be inferred from this…
They were making a mint selling ball bearings to both the RAF and the Luftwaffe, no reason to pick a side if you can get rich from both.
They remained neutral cause they had full conscription which scared off Germany from fully invading. That’s probably why women have taken so much control of the country, due to full conscription the military institution was denied any political or cultural power, due to being infiltrated by women. Hopefully now that in 2010 they switching to an all volunteer force, the military will have more cultural and political power, which will decrease the level of female countrol.
They will be liberated by Holgar Dansk, who will make the Swedes into Danes, depriving the Swedes of their legendary “fika”, making them instead understand the serenity of “hygge” …
The Swedes will never know what hit them.
I went to a place last Saturday night, run by Korean guys. Shown a bunch of beautiful Korean girls, choose one I liked. Now she was amazing and took a lot of initiative in the bedroom, she was so fun. After we were done I had time to spare we talked a little, her English wasn’t too great, but from what I understood she doesn’t go out at all, doesn’t know much about the city she’s been in for a month, asked her how long she’s going to be here for? she said 3 more months, I followed up with whats after 3 months? she didn’t know, I didn’t want to pry too much into her situation but I just got a bad vibe.
Still wondering if it was slavery or maybe she just signed upto a really shitty deal. If I had to make a guess, I’d say they’re probably here on tourist visa’s and working illegally, probably promised a lot of money. As for their treatment, really don’t know.
And speaking of shitty deals, I was doing some after-sex talk with a girl when I was in Bangkok, I asked how much she got after each client(paid upfront to the dudes running the place(shady gangster types)) and she told me 500 Baht, that was 20% of what I paid the dudes! I got ripped off should have negotiated a little bit and tipped her a lot more.
Congraturation Sir, it is a very interesting and well written article.
I lived in Germany for a while and the way they (and the Dutch) handled prostitution always impressed me. Pimps are rare and health checks+ condoms limited STD diffusion between sex workers.
On the other hand we have countries like Italy, were I come from. There prostitution is illegal BUT you regularly see women on the streets with pimps s sentinels nearby. Plus sex trafficking is way worse than North europe, fueled by immigration from Africa. And EE
Beautiful article.
Recently I went to the FBI’s anti-prostitution page and was not surprised to discover that the anti-prostitution rhetoric on the site was entirely “sex trafficking” propoganda. In earlier decades the FBI (or government officials, or those who want prostitution to remain prohibited in general) wouldn’t have felt the need to use a fake scare about women being forced to be prostituties as an excuse to entirely prohibit prostitution. The practice was condemned in and of itself. Yet today the anti-prostitution folk are reluctant to make a moral case against prostitution itself that isn’t an outrageous lie about women being exploited.
The reason the prohibitionists do this is because they are aware that the Sexual Revolution has allowed people more sexual permisiveness and that anyone who disapprovingly concerns himself with the sexual habits of other people is looked at askance as a prude who should mind his own business. How, after all, can a moral case be made against consensual prostitution when homosexually, and all manner of other sexual practices, are permitted so long as they’re consensual? The prohibitionists have given up making the “prostitution is morally wrong” argument and all they have is wanton lies, now even being displayed on the FBI’s website.
And there’s the deeper question of why these people (who are significantly an alliance between feminists and the conservative religious right) want to prohibit prostitution in the first place. I suspect it’s just a response to the collective contempt women have for other women who give it up too easy (and who therefore lower the price of sex in their social milieue.) Obviously a prostitute is the ultimate example of a woman who gives it up too easy. Women vote more than men, and they make a demand on the government that men’s sexuality be restricted to the benefit of the average woman.
I really do think that the deeper, subliminal reason that women in the US want it banned is because they want to severely restrict pussy access. They want to keep men beholden to their nasty fat asses.
Once men begin to have options to relieve the boredom of monogamy, they begin to lose a lot of their psychological power. They want manginas to increase, not decrease.
And this is one of the examples of restricting pussy access:
Alan Turing was convicted by the same act of parliament that raised the age of consent from 13 to 16.
The feminists who lobbied for that bill had actually sought an age of
consent of 21. We recently pardoned Alan Turing for having sex with a
19 year old (when he was 42), and now regard his persecution as a
shameful episode in our moral history.
The FBI was set up as a moral police force; its first job was cataloguing brothels in preparation for the Mann Act. J Edgar Hoover was drawn into his line of work by a fascination with Anthony Comstock’s crusade. Effectively, the FBI came into existence with the first White Slave Panic. Its current role in this one is entirely historically consistent.
Time to take a vacation in Sweden and show all those manginas how to treat their blonde haired whores…
If only Swedish guys could read this article by the millions and WAKE THE FUCK UP!
The average Swedish guy is well capabla of reading this as they usually speak 3-4 languages fluently. They have had the gender bullshit for quite some time and most men and women are returning to traditional gender roles. And while some Swedish men may have difficulties finding a swedish girl because they are indoctrinated effeminate, they share the good looks of the girls in the country so they rarely have problems finding chicks elsewhere.
Och de kan läsa dem Monty Python älg skämt 🙂
Sweden has a huge rate of men bringing wives from Thailand. The Swedish women are starting to try making laws to prohibit the practice.
BTW a Swedish man paying as prostitute in a location outside of Sweden, even where the practice is totally legal such as in Costa Rica, is still legally liable back in Sweden.
As long as the woman has not been forced into prostitution, it is no one’s business but her own. People who rail about abortion staying legal and transvaginal ultrasounds being banned (both of which I agree with their stance), are going to attempt to exert power over another woman and force her out of a profession she chose of her own free will. ”
No,. sweetie, he’s an evil man and you shouldn’t let him be in control of your body. That’s my job.”
Rad fems are completely invested in the criminalisation of men who patronise prostitutes. Yes, this reflect feminist / gender class theory whereby women are a subordinated classed oppressed by a dominant oppressor class, namely men within patriarchy. It is surprising how effectively this idea can operate within culture and politics without revealing its underlying assumptions within marxist feminist gender class theory, but it seems when such ideas are advanced they are advanced in a secular fashion that disguises the underlying theory.
Making prostitution equivalent to trafficking (or modern slavery to use Theresa May’s phrase) reflects both opportunism and rhetoric on the part of feminism on the one hand but also a genuine belief that women cannot freely alienate sexual labour (to use marxist terminology again). That’s to say rad fems will outright deny that any woman (or man?) who as an adult chooses to sell her wares is doing so freely, actually making a choice to do so, and as such they question the possibility that women can actually consent. This is despite the fact that prostitutes groups consistently describe themselves as adults who have made precisely those choices.
One problem here is that just as there is a tendency for rad fems to exaggerate trafficking there is tendency amongst those defending prostitution, including punters, to play it down. Even if one supports the principle of adults being able to sell their own labour sexual or otherwise, this doesn’t mean that there may not be very genuine problems here, and I suspect the reality is actually quite mixed, some independent escorts, some drug addled, some more free than others (particularly where girls come from other countries to tap a lucrative market) and some countries where prostitution is driven by poverty etc. So intelligent solutions rather than generalisations are likely to make things better for everyone rather than blanket policies that seek to either criminalise men or simply allow social evils to continue un-addressed.
But while all of the above is important I am not quite sure it gets to the heart of the matter. Criminalising male sexuality is a boon for rad fems, it isn’t necessarily an end, or at least the most important end they have. Or rather if feminism is concerned to police sexuality, and particularly male sexuality it has a larger aim in mind. That aim I think is fundamentally an economic one. The value of male and female sexuality fluctuates according to market conditions; like everything else it is susceptible to supply and demand factors, and as such for feminists prostitution is about the exploitation of women because a) they are selling sex too cheaply and b) by selling sex too cheaply they are depressing a commodity the supply of which they wish to control. Look at divorce. Sometimes when we see very rich men divorce wives who’ve only been around for a year or two but profit by huge divorce settlements people do the maths and say things like wow, that amounted to X thousand pounds for every day of marriage – it would have been cheaper to have hired an escort etc. This is crude, and million pound divorce settlements are rare but even though such divorcees – typically trophy wives – are often compared to prostitutes, feminists never seem to have a problem with those women monetarising what are effectively sexual services as the sums involved are very high.
While I do believe some of the concern may be genuine what is actually happening relates to the economics of sex, and particularly the desire by feminists to effectively take the place of the male pimps as the people who control access to women.
I agree with feminists that women are not and should not be treated as commodities. Sex needs to be consensual or not happen at all. Which is why what we need is for the pimps to leave town. By that I mean the gangs of men who may well control girls who are not perfectly free as well as the feminists who want to take their place. Let adult men and adult women negotiate sex as adults should be allowed to do
Great post. Your last sentence nails it.
Here in Canada, our Supreme Court just struck down laws against prostitution and brothels, because it “infringed on the rights of women” to work as prostitutes if they so chose.
I believe the reason was, the “nuisance” [their word] caused by prostitutes wandering the streets is lesser than the right of the woman to ply her trade if she so chooses.
Will just result in total prohibition
Edward, aren’t the laws that prevent “negotiating business” in public places still in effect? I gather that’s the case in British Columbia still …
Yes, they’re still in effect. We’re in a one-year period where the government can either draft new prostitution laws, or else the current laws will be struck down with no laws to replace them. Until then, the current laws stand.
I find it interesting–or revealing–in that even when Western governments permit prostitution, they always do it under the guise of “what’s best for women”.
They never reason, as Augustine or Aquinas did, that permitting prostitution would benefit society as a whole by providing an outlet for men who either enjoy it for its own sake, or have no other options.
Whether they ban it or permit it, the underlying rationale is always, always, always: what’s best for women?
Men’s wants and needs are irrelevant. As are the needs of society at large.
How do you feel about women frequenting prostitutes, as is more and more common?
Apparently, a lot of women vacation/move to for example Gambia in order to exploit poverty stricken boys and men there.
It was really about the safety of prostitutes. The court said,
“While some prostitutes may fit the description of persons who freely
choose (or at one time chose) to engage in the risky economic activity
of prostitution, many prostitutes have no meaningful choice but to do
so. Moreover, it makes no difference that the conduct of pimps and johns
is the immediate source of the harms suffered by prostitutes. The
violence of a john does not diminish the role of the state in making a
prostitute more vulnerable to that violence.”
The “nuisance” law’s aims were found to put the safety of prostitutes at risk and therefore were disproportionate to its purpose
Imagine how the REAL boy/girl SLAVES in Africa 3rd world countries feel to be placed in the same category as these Western pampered spoiled twats who get paid more in 1 day for spreading their overpriced privileged stank, than the real slaves get paid all year.
Imagine you’re a boy in Africa being forced to mine for diamonds at gunpoint, 16 hours every day with no breaks, and when you’re not working you’re probably being raped by adults, meanwhile these privileged feminist cunts in the West are comparing your plight to some dumb adult hooker who feeeeeels exploited.
Slaves get paid? Huh?
They get “paid” by being allowed to live and work until dead. They get paid in food and sustenance. A well-fed slave is a happy slave.
“A well-fed slave is a happy slave.”
A well-fed happy slave is a slave. Forcing people to work for blood diamonds is unacceptable as is sex work done by women, children or even men against their will. The latter probably have it a lot better than the child down the mine but its still a rotten existence and in either case there is nothing to defend: slavery is a crime. The point of the article is that adults who choose the profession of sex work are being wrongly described as slaves by activists who want to blur the lines between consensual and non-consensual prostitution because it suits their purpose. By denying trafficking is slavery – if that is what you are saying – you run the risk of playing into their hands. Organised sex gangs exist, and they do exploit sex workers. If a sex worker will be beaten because she refuses to have sex then that is a problem because she cannot give consent. The evidence presented in this article e.g. the guardian article date 19.10.09 suggests that forced prostitution is very rare and that the people arguing that it is what prostitution essentially is are lying. But forced prostitution where it is found is wrong and is a crime. Everyone whose opinion is to be counted needs to agree upon that.
Agree. Forced trafficking can’t be denied because it’s not as common as freely chosen prostitution. I’ve seen it myself in Brazil and S.E. Asia, especially Cambodia — lots of foreigners are there for the kids. Adults who chose this profession should pay taxes, the same as any other job.
I think another reason why prostitution stays illegal through most of the US is because of not only feminism, but the web cam whore industry and the porn industry in general wanting to keep their monopoly.
Some things about Sweden I definitely don’t get …
Prostitution is illegal, but you can watch porn of a busty farm chick getting log slammed by a pony, and that’s legal? (Someone I worked with thought showing me that would make my morning.)
Well, it’s not that kind of chicken that feminism wants to see privileged.
“The purpose is to portray women as perpetual victims”
Yes that is a big part if it, but another equally important factor (and one that I think has even been pointed out in these pages) is the power it gives them over men. Women have traditionally been the gate keepers to sex and THAT is an aspect of feminity that feminists do not want to give up. They have their beta sex starved husbands wrapped around their little fingers. Some other woman providing to him what they will not is a challenge to that power.
Yes… Behind all the moral posturing and crying out against alleged exploitation and waging war against a virtually non-existent enemy (ie: “human trafficking”), the economics of sex is ultimately the real crux of this matter. Everything else is just noise.
Females are notoriously susceptible to projecting their own biases on the desires of men. In the case of prostitution (or was it rape? It’s probably both), it is indeed all about power… That is, the power to maintain their monopoly on the price of sex.
ALL men should be in favor of prostitution, as well as alternatives such as virtual reality sex and sexbots, because these options reduce the price of sex on a large scale, which is a net plus for all men, regardless of an individual man’s desire to use these alternatives. Failure to understand this is a failure to understand basic economics.
Likewise, women who care about the preservation of their cartel should be against these alternatives… But to the credit of those who aren’t, at least you aren’t hypocrites.
On a related note, I find it cynically amusing, not to mention telling of the current state of gender relations, that an increasingly prevalent line of thought among men is that sex with prostitutes of the $100-200 per hour variety is actually the cheapest sex you’ll ever find. I mean, various handymen and white collar professionals charge these kinds of hourly rates for their services… and I’ve never heard anyone proclaim how “cheap” it was to get a plumber to fix their clogged drain. And yet, when it comes to inter gender relations, here we are… All things considered, $100-200 per hour is now considered cheap compared to the alternative. A sad state of affairs if there ever was one.
No monopoly in the entire world is begging to be broken more than the female monopoly on sex. Your stock is massively overbought and is begging for a serious correction.
Soon…
Love the stock analogy.
Shes a whole new light on the term “Pump and Dump”
The carrot and stick. Sex. It’s the only card these crusty feminist have. Remember most of them acquired worthless degrees and are in serious debt.
I am a staunch feminist supporter of the legalization and regulation of prostitution, as it’s safer for the community as a whole. I think the problem with your article is your broad generalizations of who is on what side of the argument. Any woman supporting the legalization of prostitution is a feminist and there many who do.
I do sense that there is a conflict in the feminist community between those feminists who are passionate about keeping prostitution prohibited and those feminists who don’t quite share that passion and don’t lose any sleep over the prospect of legal p4p. But as Keats said, “the best lack all conviction, While the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
as far as I can tell the radical feminist community is staunchly in favour of criminalisation of punters only, and is only in favour of decriminalising sex workers as they are seen as victims. They are an influential and very organised network, and they have wide support in the wider feminist community, that is why people like the French minister for women can propose such selective criminalisation (I believe a law on the ‘Nordic model’ is likely to pass) and in UK the same thing was lobbied for (although it wasn’t successful). If you read the guardian most of the feminist writers seem sympathetic to the Nordic model. Just because they’re nuts doesn’t mean the rad fem’s don’t have tentacles everywhere
The public policy web journal “Cato Unbound” did a symposium on prostitution a month ago:
http://www.cato-unbound.org/issues/december-2013/perverse-incentives-sex-work-law
A George Washington University professor named Ronald Weitzer (who participates in the above) is academically interested in the issue and has quite a few compelling papers on his website arguing for ending prohibition. He even got a piece dismantling the “human trafficking” scare in featured at the Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ronald-weitzer/human-trafficking-myths_b_935366.html
Good article. Knocks the fuck out of another feminist ploy that will join the other scare tactics such as rape drugs and domestic violence.
I wrote about his scourge a few years ago during the last SuperBowl sex trafficking hysteria :
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2012/02/15/its-time-to-shut-down-womens-day-spas
Everyone is a whore. It’s just that most of us never get the price we want.
Every other day there is something in the media in Seattle about “human trafficking.” It is always presented as if these are women that were enslaved in some other country, then smuggled into the US, then held in a sex prison by a horrible organized crime mafia of awful men.
To support this, they find the one case that actually sort of fits that description. Then, imply that this one case is the norm for all prostitutes in the area. I always assume that they are recycling the same sad case over and over again. Seattle loves to recycle after all. If you were to believe the media, however, there are like a million under aged girls smuggled in from some mysterious unknown country being held in downtown Seattle for the lunchtime use of businessmen.
It doesn’t take much to find what is really happening. Women who want to make some money with their vagina are endlessly creative about finding ways to do so. The Internet obviously helps them along. Check out http://www.WhatsYourPrice.com. It’s supposed to be a site where guys agree to pay chicks for a first date. I suppose some of that happens. But most of the transactions that are conducted are by young women looking for older men to be their regular sex customers. In other words, it’s a quick way to find Sugar Daddies for “mutually beneficial relationships.” A young women can quickly line up 10 regular customers for her vagina and live pretty well.
They do it for the money. Welfare can never match the amount of money an attractive young woman make by using her vagina.
“Sweden—under massive pressure from feminist lobbying groups—took the path of banning prostitution completely, and actually prosecuting men (not women) who pay for sex.”
If this is the definition of “prostitution” every woman will be involved in prostitution on numerous occasions in her life.
I believe Sweden has laws to reflect even that: Eivind Berge wrote that there are laws that if you threaten to end a relationship to get sex it’s rape also. Completely mad, isn’t it?
This is fascinating; I wonder how the situation in Sweden will pan out and if the data can be reliably linked to the prostitution ban.
Pft, that’s not the only side feminism fights on, though. If you look around and get involved with feminism culture you’ll find that many feminists are in favour of prostitution being completely legal as long as regulations are put in place to help keep the women safe as well as ensuring all those particpating are willing participants.
NAFALT
Yes I get got the feeling that the sex trafficking problem was exaggerated. I once read a feminist propaganda book called “The Johns” where they argued that holding the Johns accountable will cut off the demand, thus women will get off the streets. Millions of men have been arrested. but women are still streetwalkers. These laws were grafted to criminalize male sexuality.
I believe in a woman’s choice. Choice for abortion, prostitution, whatever.
This article makes me realize that feminists portray prostitution as “human trafficking”.
I understand there IS child human trafficking and I think that it is disgusting and the scum that are responsible for it should be hanged…
But to portray VOLUNTARY prostitution (a chohice) on the same level is ridiculous..
Prostitution must be legalized including the pension, healthcare, and other benefits that come with it.
Only then will there no longer be abusive pimps, underground chains, etc.
The “evils” that exist have to be understood, embraced and regulated. To fight against evil often creates a greater evil.
A rich relative of mine practically lives in whorehouses. He just can’t be assed taking women to dinner and buying them things, plus it is easier to fuck younger women that way(he is 55). Often he disappears to S.E Asia for a month at a time and says he is going for ‘business’ and amazingly people believe him. 95% of the business he does over there consists of gaming and fucking young women. I went with him once and could barely fucking believe it. I don’t know how he keeps up with them at his age but he has more stamina than me and he is 20 years older! He is fucking beast.
When cheap pussy is around men are less likely to marry or get involved with women unless they want a family. If i was rich i would pay a surrogate to have a kid and just fuck whores and club sluts for as long as i could.
You could have daughters, you know. Do you think being surrogates or whores are good career choices for them, or is that just for other peoples’ daughters?
I find this argument strange. We seem to be back to the 1950s, and stern fathers ruling their daughters.
It is also an underhanded argument for the simple reason that we all have a taboo regarding family members’ sexuality; it is essential to preventing incest. This means we always feel uncomfortable with thinking about it. That’s not a useful basis from which to make objective moral and ethical judgements.
I used this argument since I have learned that some people cannot feel any compassion for or understanding of other peoples situation unless it’s directly correlated with theirs.
I agree with you regarding objectivity and backwards morality.
Not ideal career choices perhaps but surrogates can make great money!!
There is no such thing as equality either, so yeah, I am comfortable with certain ‘double standards’ in the world. I’m sure you are too.
That’s why I have little sympathy for most women that are broke and in debt. A woman always has a man to extract resources from, especially when she’s young — literally ass for cash. They never save and invest, they just consume like locusts.
Prostitutes, porn actresses, models, all are daughters. Most Johns are fathers. Daughters have sex (OMG!). Fathers have sex (the bastards!). Help, this World is sick!
Hey, your grandparents had sex too. Get over it!
A potential wife/mother has to offer a man something more than a young tight body and pussy. What are the feminists bringing to the table? Nothing but a old half-eaten roast beef sandwich.
“to the extent that Germany has now become a haven for sex tourists.”
Why is this a bad thing?
That’s the Economist. Magazine like The Economist and Time are little better than the gutter press.
I hate this illegalization against prostitutes.
I have these 5’4 and below friend, short as fuck AKA betas, cannot get laid…they can’t even get prostitutes to relieve their tension and then they take their anger out on me .
I once tried to convince my Fuck buddies to bang one of them and it ended pretty badly..lost the friend and her.
They need to legalize prostitutes.
WHEN BETA MEN ARE HAPPY SEXUALLY, SOCIETY WILL PROSPER AND BE HAPPY.
I mean who invents all the cool shit, builds awesome stuff and keeps the plumbing systems in check, keep the power and electricity in check…beta males.
ME I’m not beta, I just have sex, but I do not help or contribute to society except at my dead end job.
As far as I see it, Beta males should be getting prostitution benefits.
The article is misrepresenting the Swedish law – it used to be illegal to sell, the law was then changed making it legal to sell sex but illegal to buy. So now the prostitutes will be able to come forward if they are the victims of crime without being scared of legal retribution against them for what they do, persons who rape them can be prosecuted etcetera. In Sweden, basically all political parties are against prostitution.
I believe everyone should have the right to do what they want with their bodies, but not with anyone elses body. If someone wants or needs to sell their body then it is up to them, I do not judge. I do however think that anyone who think it is good or normal to pay others to serve them in sexual ways are some pretty damaged and disgusting people.
I feel the same way about house cleaning.
Do you have any grasp of how inconsistent and irrational your position is? It amounts to saying something like, “white people should be able to have sex with black people, I do not judge, but blacks having sex with whites is disgusting”.
You see the problem?
It’s about having the right to do what you want with your own body, but not with someone elses.
Nobody claims a “right” to anyone else’s body, except to interact with it when that person wishes them to. You’re using a fallacious argument. A client doesn’t have any “right” to a prostitute’s body; he simply interacts with it when she gives him permission, the same as any other sex.
It’s about men being criminals by definition while women can only be victims.
Whenever human trafficking is brought up, I make sure to mention in the comments: “Men, ALWAYS make sure your prostitute is of legal age!”
It’s funny to see how many hostile responses that gets from people who were claiming it was “all about the children” just minutes earlier…..
Once again, excellent article Quintus. Prostitution should not only be legal but a moral right. A woman’s basic instinct is to garner some sort of compensation for sex, albeit dinner, drinks and a movie, gifts, marriage or just a straight monetary exchange. Women have always possessed this evolutionary trait for their survival. We men had our strength, hunting ability and raw courage to bargain with, but what did women have? Sex. The thing I appreciate about the institution of prostitution is the honesty about it. Dishonest whores, the ones you go on dates with are stringing you along, sizing up your earnings or earning potential while telling sweet lies. Prostitutes are women in a raw form, no bullshit, just business. Prostitution should be a moral imperative for societies to safeguard against the excesses of female duplicity and protect males (especially young men) from the ill-advised decisions of their own penises. Men could focus a lot more on our careers if sex was just a credit card swipe away, while putting gold diggers out of business or pushing them into their natural line of work, prostitution. Prostitution is not a carrion of civilization, it’s a benefit of civilization, one that filters the bad seeded women from the good, and deters men from making decisions with the penis.
The feminist war against ____________ is fueled by lies and distortions.
Sex worker’s rights, and the fight to legalized prostitution, is a worthwhile goal. Whether you would ever hire a prostitute or not, it’s legality would be a boon to men. And it’s the right thing to do, morally speaking.
To quote the pro-abortionists, “It’s a woman’s body to do with as she pleases.”
I can’t talk about it too much, but you’d surprised on the amount of intelligence reports I’ve read on human trafficking. That said, Germany’s way of tackling it is quite astute.
This man is right. Why do the femi-nazis feel the need to keep him from pursuing his dreams of man-mayo guzzling in Taiwan as a self-employed alpha-male prostitute?
Surely they are just jealous that, by and large, alpha-male pole polishers are not routinely kidnapped, tortured, beaten, and raped by their captors before being forced into prostitution, unlike their female counterparts.
If only the female media cabal would allow Quintus the right to let a bunch of swarthy Greek car salesmen run a train on him in an Albuquerque motel, this conflict would not exist.
Your typical case of ugly, inflated primates jelly of younger females?
Do you actually believe the bullshit you spew?
Yes they do.
Note that legalization in Germany has its downsides. Prostitutes now get badly hit by taxes and they’re not always able to discount overheads from taxable income. They have to rent rooms at 150-170 euros a day. That’s 3 times the price of upmarket apartment rents. They have to rent those rooms because they’re not allowed to prostitute in their own home even if they have one. So either they live in their “rooms” (small, cramped) or they pay two rents (150 euros/day for the room + an apartment in town). That’s why some legal prostitutes end up not earning much. Indeed some contemplate going underground again. The hitch is the prohibition to prostitute in their own home. If they were allowed to, they could spare 150 euros. At a starting rate of 50 euros for a quickie, the room rent represents 3 clients. This shows that legalization can backfire if prostitution is not granted the same status as any other business. By forcing the prostitutes to pay overblown rents and on top of income tax, the State has become the real pimp. Some prostitutes now contemplate going underground again.
This is very interesting anecdotal information, and something not mentioned in the articles I’ve read. Thanks for sharing this.
Let me elaborate somewhat. Suppose prostitute A needs to take a week off work for a holiday, because she’s sick or simply because of menstruation. Prostitute A will have to go on paying rent on her 150-euro/day room during that week and she will do everything to go on working during that week although she’d rather not to. She will do so because 1) Prostitution being a cash business, the taxman will not accept prostitute A is taking a week off. The taxman will consider prostitute A only wants to evade income tax for a week. Prostitute A will be taxed for that week so she might as well go on working. 2) Although the rent is a day rent, the lease is monthly so prostitute A has to go on paying 150 euros a day to her landlord. So she might as well go on working. 3) Even if the lease provides for a suspension of rent, the landlord will insist the room of prostitute A be used by prostitute B during prostitute A’s absence. But prostitute A has belongings in the room (a TV set, lingerie, sex implements like dildos etc.). Prostitute A doesn’t want
prostitute B to use her things so she prefers to go on paying the rent. Couldn’t prostitute A’s belongings be stowed away in a big suitcase while she’s away? Sometimes, but then prostitute B may refuse to vacate when prostitute A returns. So prostitute A might find herself having to looks for accommodation and accommodation approved for prostitution is often in short supply. So prostitute A will prefer to go on paying the rent and work at all cost.
All this shit makes it impossible for prostitutes to take it easy or work part-time. Prostitutes end up putting in 15-hour days to pay taxes, sickness insurance, rents and still throw a profit. Needless
to say this provides a breeding ground for prohibitionist propaganda, to the tune of “girls are forced to …”, “girls have no choice but to …”. My point is that legalization with strictures (without full liberalization) is a mixed blessing.
It’s worth adding I think that the current “trafficking” panic is an identical re-run of the “white slavery” panic of a century ago; identical narrative, for identical reasons, identically deliberately confusing “slaves” with any prostitution of any kind- on the identical basis that any woman in sex work must be in some sense, directly or indirectly coerced since “nobody would do it of their own free will”.
Jane Addams’s “A New Conscience and an Ancient Evil” (can be found online) could have been written by any of the trafficking-pedlars today.
The result of the White Slave Panic, by the way, was the setting up of the trafficking agencies at, first, the League Of Nations and then the United Nations as footholds for Feminists to coordinate suppression of prostitution internationally from, which they’ve been doing ever since.
They seem to have decided about a decade ago, to rerun White Slavery, presumably since it is long ago to be forgotten and people wouldn’t easily realise they were being sold a new version of something that was completely fake, in the past.
There is a difference between trafficking and prostitution,, I have never heard of feminists or anyone mislabelling regular prostituition as trafficking until now. Trafficking is about often young people (boys as well as girls, but most often girls) being tricked or kidnapped, sold, often raped, beaten and forced into prostitution. Regular prostitution is more of an individuals choice to enter into the sex trade.
However, one mustn’t forget that in the regular sex trade about 90% of the prostitutes (male and female) have been the victims of sexual abuse growing up, and most often have run away from or simply moved away from home at an early age, and a lot of the time also have drug addiction problems as a way to cope with their pain, shame and trauma. A majority of sex workers enters into the trade at age 13, to survive and often to finance their drug use. This would mean that when you take advantage of a prostitute, you are most likely taking advantage of someone who has been the victim of incest and/or pedophilia. Is that something that any normal, decent person wants to be a part of?
As I said below, all this is basically invented agitprop by antisex feminists- and entirely identical to the claims and rhetoric of the White Slavery Panic of a century ago, which was run by the same group (1st wave feminists/suffragettes).
I recommend you google the Jane Addams book I referenced below, read it, and see the remarkably similarity.
The claim that prostitutes routinely (or even significantly) enter the trade at 13 is particularly mythical.
“White Slavery” came about becuase the great successful crusade of the 19th century had been the abolition of “black” slavery. The early part of the activist womens movement which became Feminism- focussed on moral reform by suppression of sex, drinking, gambling, etc- had started off in the abolitionist movement, so it was natural and advantageous to create a slogan along the lines of “we have defeated black slavery, now we must defeat WHITE slavery”. The slavery they really meant was an idea of man/woman’s “slavery” to the corrupting passions, but to sell it to a wide audience they had to generate a narrative of literal slavery, and thus develeoped a mythology of naive girls kidnapped and literally enslaved as prostitutes.
None actually existed because- as even Addams accidentally admits- there is always an ample supply of voluntary prostitutes. But some staged “rescues” by crusaders of girls working, particularly, in Chinese brothels and opium dens- playing on racist assumptions of the time of Chinese as slitty eyed, untrustworthy and inscrutable foreigners (there was a lot of racism against Chinese at the time as they were seen as an immigrant cultural threat)- could be portrayed in the yellow press as evidence. It’s easy for police/crusaders to pick up some random prostitutes and punters and just declare them “trafficking victims” as has just been announced prior to the Super Bowl, though they are in fact just ordinary prostitution arrests at any other time of year.
Basically, the whole thing is an organised urban myth, used by activists whose sole interest is in suppressing the sex trade, driven originally by the puritanism of Victorian evangelical reformers, which revived in a secular form with the 2nd wave feminist movement.
Well, since I have spoken to former and current prostitutes about their background, as well as trafficking victims in Bosnia (mostly used by UN “peacekeeping” troops) firsthand, I simply cannot agree with you.
That’s the strange thing. Everyone claims to have testimony, nobody ever seems to have any verifiable data. It’s easy to claim to have personal knowledge; it’s also easy to fit somebody else’s testimony to one’s own mental framework.
In what capacity did you talk to these victims, and what action did you take?
They had been either forcibly taken or had come to find jobs in the area, which was overrun with organized crime and corruption, and were taken advantage of. There are heaps of UN-data on the subject.
I have worked for Amnesty for many years.
Dude, its out there. I’ve seen bitches take beatings all over Asia. And you can keep that “why didn’t you do something?” line for the coffee shop; America is the only place where foreigners can run their mouths and get away with it. Pretty much everywhere else you keep your trap shut and mind your business.
We know that there’s heap of UN data/propaganda. This is why this article is useful, to counter the lies of international feminism. I’m sure hundreds of thousands of prostitutes get beheaded by their pimps in Germany. Ask Amnesty.
None of which is any help in telling us whether the claim that there is a slave trade is true, or not.
I was talking about 2 different subjects – prostitution and trafficking. One is (mostly) optional, the other is a form of slavery. They are not the same issue or subject.
I just think one should keep in mind that many prostitutes are damaged and/or poor people, it is not nice to take advantage. It is part of a class system where the rich and well off prey upon and use the poor, and where the poor among themselves fight for the scraps from the rich’ table.
…you mean with people up on blocks being passed off to the highest bidder? Well there’s probably not, not in the sense that you mean. I mean if you’re the final authority on hooking and all.
I claim no authority on hooking. But I have spent a lot of my life studying how special interest groups develop narratives, reconstructing reality to suit their own ends.
If Li Cheri really knows of women who have been kidnapped into prostitution, she has the proof that has eluded everyone else; police forces, major NGOs, active parties of all kinds. It is thus not unreasonable to be highly sceptical of this.
I can dig it, and I totally agree. Especially where financial support in the form of dollars-American is concerned, data gets stacked, details get cherry-picked, and numbers get fudged.
Like I said though, a lot of it has to do with women being dumber than a bag of sand, but the shit does go on. Filipinas are especially prone to this gig, I think the PI is the only country whose biggest export is people. Chicks take gigs as “waitresses” or “hostesses” in Middle East hellholes and if they’re dumb enough to cough up their passport for “safe-keeping”, the job description changes.
Kinda like going to a massage parlor for a handy; there’s probably not much “data” on it, but we all know the deal.
Which allegedly involved several government contractors and federal employees. Did she share the info she gathered with the appropriate authorities.
Boys will be boys and little whores will be whores.
I’m a big fan of legit by-choice hookers and as anti-feminist as anyone you’ll ever meet. But saying human trafficking doesn’t go on is pretty much you talking out your ass.
I’ve seen it first hand in places like Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, UAE, Saudi, Kuwait, the PI, and Europe. Hell, regular people in UK are actually getting pissed about incidents of muslims doping up young White girls and pushing them into the skin game, and even more pissed that these incidents are being pushed under the rug.
Granted, most women are idiots and they bring these situations on themselves by giving up their passports or getting high with people who shouldn’t be allowed indoors. Still, saying its fabricated is weak sauce.
“Wise men have long recognized the need for providing an outlet for the sexual impulse, which, if allowed to accumulate without relief, could have deleterious effects on society.”
This is true in a society where people were expected to have sex only within marriage in our contemporary world this expectation no longer exists. People can engage in casual sex and modern contraception has made female promiscuity more acceptable. Not to say that prostitution should be illegal everywhere but it is understandable that people have an aversion to it as most men here would probably not wish that their own daughters become prostitutes. Oh and lastly not all feminists oppose prostitution it’s a topic that has actually divided the feminist community.
as a woman i have nothing against prostitutes. where i live its illegal and there isnt no pretty hookers. do i feel sorry for them when there standing on the corner in -30 canadian cold? yea any one with any heart would.. what i hate are the buyers. usually they dont know what a hooker looks like. they will follow a 12 year ld home because they think shes a prostitute and yea its happened to me. keep in mind that in canadian winter ur not dressed skanky or slutty so they have no excuse to think im a lady of the night. men have demanded i get in the cars, have asked me and a friend if were available when all we wanted was to go to the store and get so slurpees, prostitutes arent the problem in these scenarios. men are. woman shouldnt be hounded just because of an area of town they live in.
Men are always the problem. huh?
Feminism’s primary philosophy is a goodie grab and hatred of men. Ideally, they don’t want to have sex with men and to become lesbians and even heterosexual feminists like to regard sex with men as a burden and complain about risk of “rape” at the drop of a hat.
Sex is the only card a worthless western woman has.
Feminists can only stop prostitution in Germany and Sweden. Not in UAE, Russia, Ukraine, Thailand, Czech republic, Italy, Latin America, Japan, Australia, etc.
Let them have their victory. In the meantime, these places you can still get your pay for pleasure nookie.
The feminist dangle the promise of pussy like a carrots hanging from sticks in front of some poor asses that will never get a bite.
I’ve found countries that are acceptable to the sex trade, the women are more feminine due to the fact that guys won’t bother with a relationship with a women as much when they can pay as much as a date which doesn’t always lead to sex! It puts the guys in the upper hand in these countries. On the other hand, if guys can’t get sex and their women isn’t putting out, these guys are miserable in these countries and are turn into a women’s slaves just like Sweden! Some guys are 2 fat and ugly to pick up where regular sex has been showed to be great for health and well being! Northern Europe is the most feminist place on the planet from research I’ve done!
The prohibition of prostitution exists because sex it is the only card feminist have to play. They dangle the promise of pussy like a carrot hanging from a stick in front of some poor ass that will never get a bite.
Make no mistake, criminalize prostitution is all about women controlling the supply of pussies. If these women actually care about prostitutes’ well beings, they would get them off the street and into safe/control brothels by legalizing the oldest profession.
They know that a man would rather get a hooker than to be with a fat, ugly, and bitchy chick. They want men to become desperate with no option. The hypocrisy of women is astounding. They would rather have prostitutes walk the streets prone to STD, violent, and the elements than to see their own pussy values decline. But every time they open their mouths, it’s all about ‘safety’ and ‘morality’, what a load of bullcrap.
The prohibition/shaming of prostitution exists because sex it is the only card feminist have to play. They dangle the promise of pussy like a carrot hanging from a stick in front of some poor ass that will never get a bite.
Wow seems im the only hooker here;) Im a feminist when it comes to most things but not this. Im a grown woman and can decide what to do with my pussy. Ive debated with those feminists. Bottom line they believe in love fairy tales and prostitution threatens that delusion for them. They also accuse me of being a male because i won’t agree with them. Last i checked im 100 percent woman. I thought feminism was about equal rights and pro choice, yet when it comes to renting out the pussy, i should not be able to do that. Hmmm. Oh well. And btw i hate men and this website but on this one thing i agree with you.