I think it’s ok to separate what one approves of or doesn’t approve of, from a separate axis of looking at what causes objective harm and misery to people. Som

I think it’s ok to separate what one approves of or doesn’t approve of, from a separate axis of looking at what causes objective harm and misery to people. Some of the hardest policy topics involve accepting things one finds distasteful because there is a moral ground for people being allowed to do what they want, and vice versa. Your point on cannabis is certainly an excellent example of how to get policy wrong and create a huge net harm to society, especially in the US where late night TV hosts can joke about getting high, while 8 million others were arrested and harassed for possession over the last decade. In my experience, from what I’ve learned from my friends who work with rough sleepers, all sex work is exploitative of those in desperation to some extent. It’s a spectrum that has at one end people trying to make ends meet, and at the other, slavery and trafficking. I know of attempts to unionize and protect some kinds of sex work, but I don’t know if that represents the majority or a vocal and comparatively unexploited minority. It’s never the most exploited that you see in a debate arguing for complete legalization. It’s easy to see both sides of an argument. It’s difficult and important to focus on where harm is being done, and to do something about that. For something with as rocky a history as prohibition has, I’m in favor of the arguments for it when it comes to sex work, and to my original point — to try to drag this back on topic! — it’s an example of required action to step in where the free market fails to protect the most vulnerable from harm. Edit: and it’s stories like this $1 voyeur hotel that really add positively to thought on the subject. A really good non-tech HN submission, imho.