4 ms·

Although prostitution and bribes isn't that related, I know Sweden did something similar — the supply side of prostitution is legal but buying isn't. From what

Although prostitution and bribes isn't that related, I know Sweden did something similar — the supply side of prostitution is legal but buying isn't. From what I know I think it has worked fairly well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Sweden#Purchasing_sex_.28Brottsbalk_6.11.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Sweden#Purchasi... I know something similar is also used for collusion in the US, where a party that is first to snitch can avoid prosecution. Although there are undoubtedly other ways of curbing corruption, e.g. competition between agencies driving down bribes to zero (in theory at least), this could work.

yummyfajitas 16y ago
Something I've never understood. People advocate to make only the buying side of prostitution illegal. The same people often advocate to make only the selling side of drugs illegal. It's a weird dichotomy I can't wrap my head around. (I realize that some people may favor only one of these policies, but I don't think the intersection of people favoring both is empty.)
- cturner 16y ago
  I was thinking about last night. I see logic in it. (1) Target the people who you have best hope of affecting the behaviour of. (2) Avoiding compounding damage to people who are already messed up. Prostitution attracts girls who are already degraded. It's common for the girls to have been sexually abused as a child, physically abused as a young wife, or to have drug issues. Participation in the trade suggests that the person is not a full-functioning citizen. A motivation for outlawing prostitution is paternalistic: it's a dynamic that causes this a concentrated group of people with existing problems to spiral further. Using the legal system to target people in that situation for their own good is counterproductive. They have low faith in government and institutions already, and jailing them probably isn't going to help that. You just end up pushing them into and out of new institutions, but they keep practicing because the business is there and they don't take control of their lives to rise out of it. Whereas the business that fuels prostitution is vulnerable to the dynamic of the police and legal system. Users are usually people who are full participants in society and are vulnerable to shame and the threat of jail time. They generally have a good understanding of rights/responsibility even if they have periods where they hold themselves to be above it. I sometimes read that prostitution is "misogynistic". It's not. For the most part the users don't think about the circumstances of the girls at all. Some people don't naturally behave with concern for other people's circumstance, and the stick attempts to compensate for that.
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    Regarding 1), why do you believe it is easier to change the behavior of drug dealers than drug users? Drug addicts may not change behavior, but casual users behavior should be easier to change than someone who's livelihood depends on drugs. Regarding 2), why do you believe prostitutes are more messed up than their clients? While prostitutes at the lower end tend to have sordid histories and drug habits, their clients tend to be socially isolated men desperate for human contact. To get an idea of how messed up the clients of prostitutes are, it's estimated that 40% or so of men who pay for a prostitute don't sleep with her (they just talk and maybe kiss). http://www.slate.com/id/2186491/ http://www.slate.com/id/2186491/
    - cturner 16y ago
      I'm not confident that the laws around drugs are sensible, but I was more focussed on thinking about the laws around prostitution. > their clients tend to be socially isolated men > desperate for human contact. I hadn't considered this case. Thanks for link. This development towards 'escorts' is intriguing, and changes the dynamic somewhat. I can imagine that growing, a flow-on from a decline in tightly-knit families and neighbourhoods and more mobile labour.
noss 16y ago
That comparasion came to my mind as well. One problem with the prostitution law was that prostitutes now had to go into hiding, since their customers wanted to be more discrete. This led to an advantage for those working with trafficking, their prostitutes were outside society. Althought, I don't know any numbers on how prostitution changed because of this. I can definitely see how it would from above reasoning though. For bribes, I can not think of something similar happening. The receiver of bribes typically offer a service they can't go underground with. I've had my own thoughts about how to deal with the prostitution issue, where the goal is to look out for the prostitutes: Make prostitution legal; but only with prostitutes that can display proof of a recent health check and meetup with some social worker. That would of course end up becoming a government prostitution-permit-in-disguise, which together with the whole "make prostitution legal", would make a pretty though pill for the political climate in Sweden. It would however give the social agencies and the police a better overview of the "registered" prositutes and their situation, so the police can put their resources into fighting prisoned trafficking victims (which I consider to be much more urgent and important), and the social agencies can identify social problems that led the registered prostitutes into prostitution and what keeps them there. All in all, this might be a very swedish way to think about it, turning it into a tax paid government program. I can't help it, I'm a product of that system. :)

yummyfajitas 16y ago

Something I've never understood. People advocate to make only the buying side of prostitution illegal. The same people often advocate to make only the selling side of drugs illegal. It's a weird dichotomy I can't wrap my head around. (I realize that some people may favor only one of these policies, but I don't think the intersection of people favoring both is empty.)

cturner 16y ago
I was thinking about last night. I see logic in it. (1) Target the people who you have best hope of affecting the behaviour of. (2) Avoiding compounding damage to people who are already messed up. Prostitution attracts girls who are already degraded. It's common for the girls to have been sexually abused as a child, physically abused as a young wife, or to have drug issues. Participation in the trade suggests that the person is not a full-functioning citizen. A motivation for outlawing prostitution is paternalistic: it's a dynamic that causes this a concentrated group of people with existing problems to spiral further. Using the legal system to target people in that situation for their own good is counterproductive. They have low faith in government and institutions already, and jailing them probably isn't going to help that. You just end up pushing them into and out of new institutions, but they keep practicing because the business is there and they don't take control of their lives to rise out of it. Whereas the business that fuels prostitution is vulnerable to the dynamic of the police and legal system. Users are usually people who are full participants in society and are vulnerable to shame and the threat of jail time. They generally have a good understanding of rights/responsibility even if they have periods where they hold themselves to be above it. I sometimes read that prostitution is "misogynistic". It's not. For the most part the users don't think about the circumstances of the girls at all. Some people don't naturally behave with concern for other people's circumstance, and the stick attempts to compensate for that.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  Regarding 1), why do you believe it is easier to change the behavior of drug dealers than drug users? Drug addicts may not change behavior, but casual users behavior should be easier to change than someone who's livelihood depends on drugs. Regarding 2), why do you believe prostitutes are more messed up than their clients? While prostitutes at the lower end tend to have sordid histories and drug habits, their clients tend to be socially isolated men desperate for human contact. To get an idea of how messed up the clients of prostitutes are, it's estimated that 40% or so of men who pay for a prostitute don't sleep with her (they just talk and maybe kiss). http://www.slate.com/id/2186491/ http://www.slate.com/id/2186491/
  - cturner 16y ago
    I'm not confident that the laws around drugs are sensible, but I was more focussed on thinking about the laws around prostitution. > their clients tend to be socially isolated men > desperate for human contact. I hadn't considered this case. Thanks for link. This development towards 'escorts' is intriguing, and changes the dynamic somewhat. I can imagine that growing, a flow-on from a decline in tightly-knit families and neighbourhoods and more mobile labour.

noss 16y ago

That comparasion came to my mind as well. One problem with the prostitution law was that prostitutes now had to go into hiding, since their customers wanted to be more discrete. This led to an advantage for those working with trafficking, their prostitutes were outside society. Althought, I don't know any numbers on how prostitution changed because of this. I can definitely see how it would from above reasoning though. For bribes, I can not think of something similar happening. The receiver of bribes typically offer a service they can't go underground with. I've had my own thoughts about how to deal with the prostitution issue, where the goal is to look out for the prostitutes: Make prostitution legal; but only with prostitutes that can display proof of a recent health check and meetup with some social worker. That would of course end up becoming a government prostitution-permit-in-disguise, which together with the whole "make prostitution legal", would make a pretty though pill for the political climate in Sweden. It would however give the social agencies and the police a better overview of the "registered" prositutes and their situation, so the police can put their resources into fighting prisoned trafficking victims (which I consider to be much more urgent and important), and the social agencies can identify social problems that led the registered prostitutes into prostitution and what keeps them there. All in all, this might be a very swedish way to think about it, turning it into a tax paid government program. I can't help it, I'm a product of that system. :)