3 ms·

This doesn't really work. It's been tried for years now in Norway, and prostitutes, while no longer defined as criminals, still have to avoid the police because

This doesn't really work. It's been tried for years now in Norway, and prostitutes, while no longer defined as criminals, still have to avoid the police because their customers getting arrested means they lose money. And they're prostitutes, so aside from a small minority, they really need the money they make. Very few people become prostitutes if they have other options. They also don't get the same legal rights that workers in fully legitimised businesses do.

saurik 3y ago
I mean it is certainly better though, right? Losing money is way better than going to jail. I'd say that is "working" even if there are even better things to do. Like, it would be strange to think "I guess it didn't work so no need to have bothered".
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
  Depends on whether they have a pimp or not, and how sociopathic the pimp is. At least in Norway, going to jail is a lot better than being physically abused for not making enough money.
- LorenPechtel 3y ago
  Experience shows it doesn't work. So long as it's an illegal marketplace you get all the problems of an illegal marketplace. Whether you go after the sellers or the buyers doesn't change the illicit nature of the situation. If you want to actually improve the situation you make the transaction legal and aboveboard.
  - saurik 3y ago
    That doesn't mean it "doesn't work", that just means it doesn't solve all the problems you want to have solved. Insisting this change "doesn't work" and thereby, what... should not have happened? means that a ton of people I don't want in jail end up in jail. And like, that's what you are thereby arguing for: you are saying this somehow doesn't work to actually fully protect people... so you'd rather the status quo remain and these people be charged with a crime? How about instead of saying "doesn't work" you say "not enough" or "what's next"?
- yieldcrv 3y ago
  Its counterproductive. Germany, Austria, Switzerland have completely legal regimes including brothels, and Victoria in Australia just advanced their legal regime (including brothels) into a decriminalized regime to acknowledge deficiencies in a legal regime. The goal is harm reduction. Its not intended to be a solution for trafficking, the existing labor trafficking solutions are intended to be a solution for trafficking in the sex industry. For (otherwise) developed nations to be just getting around to single sided criminalization is embarrassing.
  - saurik 3y ago
    I don't disagree with you on what should happen, but to argue that this shouldn't have happened as it doesn't work seems problematic as it is essentially dooming some people to jail while we continue to argue about and fail to get what we actually want. (And, meanwhile, not taking steps towards something means leaving the overton window stranded back where too many people think the right thing to do is "extreme".)
    - yieldcrv 3y ago
      Did you mean to respond to me? Nobody is going to jail in the systems i mentioned

saurik 3y ago

I mean it is certainly better though, right? Losing money is way better than going to jail. I'd say that is "working" even if there are even better things to do. Like, it would be strange to think "I guess it didn't work so no need to have bothered".

mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
Depends on whether they have a pimp or not, and how sociopathic the pimp is. At least in Norway, going to jail is a lot better than being physically abused for not making enough money.
LorenPechtel 3y ago
Experience shows it doesn't work. So long as it's an illegal marketplace you get all the problems of an illegal marketplace. Whether you go after the sellers or the buyers doesn't change the illicit nature of the situation. If you want to actually improve the situation you make the transaction legal and aboveboard.
- saurik 3y ago
  That doesn't mean it "doesn't work", that just means it doesn't solve all the problems you want to have solved. Insisting this change "doesn't work" and thereby, what... should not have happened? means that a ton of people I don't want in jail end up in jail. And like, that's what you are thereby arguing for: you are saying this somehow doesn't work to actually fully protect people... so you'd rather the status quo remain and these people be charged with a crime? How about instead of saying "doesn't work" you say "not enough" or "what's next"?
yieldcrv 3y ago
Its counterproductive. Germany, Austria, Switzerland have completely legal regimes including brothels, and Victoria in Australia just advanced their legal regime (including brothels) into a decriminalized regime to acknowledge deficiencies in a legal regime. The goal is harm reduction. Its not intended to be a solution for trafficking, the existing labor trafficking solutions are intended to be a solution for trafficking in the sex industry. For (otherwise) developed nations to be just getting around to single sided criminalization is embarrassing.
- saurik 3y ago
  I don't disagree with you on what should happen, but to argue that this shouldn't have happened as it doesn't work seems problematic as it is essentially dooming some people to jail while we continue to argue about and fail to get what we actually want. (And, meanwhile, not taking steps towards something means leaving the overton window stranded back where too many people think the right thing to do is "extreme".)
  - yieldcrv 3y ago
    Did you mean to respond to me? Nobody is going to jail in the systems i mentioned