3 ms·

Are you kidding? Or are you serious? The probabilities of getting the diseases you refer to are much, much lower than the probability of suffering harm due to

Are you kidding? Or are you serious? The probabilities of getting the diseases you refer to are much, much lower than the probability of suffering harm due to alcohol or tobacco use. Now if you're saying we should also ban the use of those items, then I can at least applaud you for being consistent, if rather extremely risk averse. But I'd bet that you wouldn't support banning labor involved in alcohol and tobacco assumption, would you? Nope. This is just irrational moral revulsion masquerading as a concern for public health. Life is full of risks. Some we can ban, but most we either can't or wouldn't want to ban. We need to educate and regulate.

lake99 10y ago
I was going to make a similar argument, except, I would have stayed with diseases. But your point is just as valid. >> What makes sexual labor so horrid? > It is a really effective way to spread some pretty terrible diseases. There are tons of diseases know to the ancients as spread through human action like typhoid, cholera, TB, etc. And yet, I can't recall coming across taboos against the infected. The only taboo I'm aware of is against lepers. STDs are spread by direct exchange of blood too. And yet, many cultures had taboo-free blood bonding[1]. That it can spread "pretty terrible diseases" comes across as a weak boogeyman. Contrast this with other, nearly universally entrenched, taboos against fraternizing with those who are not your ethnicity, race, caste, social standing, etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_brother https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_brother
clavalle 10y ago
The thing about alcohol and tobacco is that it is a personal choice that affects the people making that choice directly. The diseases can be spread from generation to generation. And the problems tend to be worse for kids that are born with these diseases than if they contracted them in adulthood. I personally have no moral qualms with prostitution as long as prostitutes are making the decision freely and not coerced (even indirectly by lack of options to survive economically) into it. My point is that it is somewhat reasonable for people to have a default rule of thumb that says 'this activity is not a good idea and I feel some revulsion for it'. Kind of like swimming in stagnant, slimy water. Legalization has some definite appeal -- I mean, if it is going to happen anyway (and it will) it might as well be above board so we can at least exert some level control and have society offer legal protections to those invovled -- there is some level of danger reduction. But legalization cannot remove the inherent dangers of the activity and the dangers are real and lasting and not as fully understood as some seem to think.

lake99 10y ago

I was going to make a similar argument, except, I would have stayed with diseases. But your point is just as valid. >> What makes sexual labor so horrid? > It is a really effective way to spread some pretty terrible diseases. There are tons of diseases know to the ancients as spread through human action like typhoid, cholera, TB, etc. And yet, I can't recall coming across taboos against the infected. The only taboo I'm aware of is against lepers. STDs are spread by direct exchange of blood too. And yet, many cultures had taboo-free blood bonding[1]. That it can spread "pretty terrible diseases" comes across as a weak boogeyman. Contrast this with other, nearly universally entrenched, taboos against fraternizing with those who are not your ethnicity, race, caste, social standing, etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_brother https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_brother

clavalle 10y ago

The thing about alcohol and tobacco is that it is a personal choice that affects the people making that choice directly. The diseases can be spread from generation to generation. And the problems tend to be worse for kids that are born with these diseases than if they contracted them in adulthood. I personally have no moral qualms with prostitution as long as prostitutes are making the decision freely and not coerced (even indirectly by lack of options to survive economically) into it. My point is that it is somewhat reasonable for people to have a default rule of thumb that says 'this activity is not a good idea and I feel some revulsion for it'. Kind of like swimming in stagnant, slimy water. Legalization has some definite appeal -- I mean, if it is going to happen anyway (and it will) it might as well be above board so we can at least exert some level control and have society offer legal protections to those invovled -- there is some level of danger reduction. But legalization cannot remove the inherent dangers of the activity and the dangers are real and lasting and not as fully understood as some seem to think.