Iceland bans all strip clubs. All of them.

[Trolldor]

lol.

And what about what the women want? While you harp on about 'exploitation'...

[mistermack]

lol.

And what about what the women want? While you harp on about 'exploitation'...

Most women in the sex industry just want the next hit of crack.
And if you ban something, you're stopping some people from doing what they want. Surely that's obvious, even to you?
But I suppose if you think that there is no exploitation in the sex industry, you're not really familiar with the obvious.
.

[Trolldor]

Most women in the sex industry just want the next hit of crack.

I lol'd so fucking hard..

[Coito ergo sum]

Morality need not enter into it.

I'm sure you mean that, but to me, what you said sounds awfully close to morality.
Morality often grows out of such practical issues.
If there is no doubt whatsoever about consent, why is it wrong for a thirty year old to have sex with a fourteen year old? Should it be illegal, even if the younger partner insists there was no persuasion or coercion?
There's no black and white in most cases, but if you say it's wrong, that's morality.
I have no problem with a bit of morality being included in the law. Quite often it's intertwined with practicalities. So long as it has the consent of the people, it's perfectly legititmate in my book.
With strip clubs, you can make an argument without morals. They nearly always end up being used as a way in to more organised sex for sale, with all the exploitation that that involves.
I personally would say it's a combination of morals and practicality, and the end result of banning them is a slightly better world to live in.

There are loads of examples of morals coming into the law. It's illegal to fuck a sheep, but not illegal to kill and eat it. It's nothing to do with animal rights, we just think it's wrong to fuck a sheep.
You get arrested for swearing, in England if you are in the street.
A policeman would maybe warn you once or twice, then arrest you for a breach of the peace.
If you urinate in the gutter in the pouring rain, in the street, you are breaking the law.
It just the law enforcing the morals of the majority.
.

"Awefully close" is also "not."

If there is no doubt about consent is a big if. I explained to you about the heightened proof issues involved in a prosecution for rape where a child is involved. The reality is that in every rape case, there is doubt about consent. Even if a 13 year old girl said she consented, there are heightened concerns about her fear, possible intimidation, reticence to take action against adults, and all sorts of known psychological features. A reasoned decision is made that the 30 or 40 year old has the capacity to hold back, and that 13 year olds in general need protection (from adults and from themselves). It's not about a specific case - it's about the fact that in the vast majority of cases there isn't a reliable way to OBJECTIVELY know if there is "no doubt" about consent. It's impracticable to take them on a case-by-case basis because you might as well just pull numbers out of a hat, and determine guilt or innocence at random.

The reason for an age of consent is because it's the only practical way to protect against a known harm. As a result, some wonderful, loving, caring, beautiful, consensual relationships between 30 year olds and 13 year olds will have to wait a few years. That's the way it goes.

Prostitution should be legal too - for adults.

[Coito ergo sum]

lol.

And what about what the women want? While you harp on about 'exploitation'...

Most women in the sex industry just want the next hit of crack.
And if you ban something, you're stopping some people from doing what they want. Surely that's obvious, even to you?
But I suppose if you think that there is no exploitation in the sex industry, you're not really familiar with the obvious.
.

If prostitution was legalized, the exploitation would end. Where it is legal, the pimps are out and women to a far greater degree control their own bodies, pick their own customers, control who they work for, and control when they quit.

This woman puts it quite well:



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDDCapfn ... re=channel[/youtube]

[mistermack]

"Awefully close" is also "not."

Yes, in a black and white world. But I live in a blurry world where morals and practicalities overlap, and sometimes it's very hard to tell them apart. That's what I see when I read your post.

If there is no doubt about consent is a big if. I explained to you about the heightened proof issues involved in a prosecution for rape where a child is involved.

It was a hypothetical case. I would have been interested in your answer. But you chose not to answer. Nice body-swerve, anyway.

People who are moralising usually claim it's all for good practical reasons. That will never change.

Why focus on intercourse? Should under-age girls be allowed to strip for money? If they are properly protected? I suppose that's nothing to do with morals either. You will always find some "known harm" smokescreen to disguise the fact that it might offend your morals.

I'm happy to admit it offends my morals, and would vote to ban it.

[mistermack]

If prostitution was legalized, the exploitation would end. Where it is legal, the pimps are out and women to a far greater degree control their own bodies, pick their own customers, control who they work for, and control when they quit.

That's a rose tinted view of the sex industry. I actually know a guy who's in love with a prostitute. She's from a good family, intelligent. But all she thinks about is where the next dose of crack cocain is coming from. Even her kids come second, and she's sure to lose them shortly. Make it legal by all means, but don't imagine the misery will go away.
Most prostitutes in this country do it to support a drug habit.
That may not be true in the US, where money comes before self-respect.
Or maybe where money EQUALS self respect.

[Coito ergo sum]

"Awefully close" is also "not."

Yes, in a black and white world. But I live in a blurry world where morals and practicalities overlap, and sometimes it's very hard to tell them apart. That's what I see when I read your post.

If there is no doubt about consent is a big if. I explained to you about the heightened proof issues involved in a prosecution for rape where a child is involved.

It was a hypothetical case. I would have been interested in your answer. But you chose not to answer. Nice body-swerve, anyway.

If there is no issue as to consent - and we're assuming that the 14 year old in question is 100% desirous of the relationship and is not mistaken or confused about her feelings, acting hastily, being unduly influenced by the much older man, enraptured by a fantastical image of being swept off her feet and romantically carried away by a knight and shining armor, but really, truly, fully, knowingly and completely of her own volition, freely consents to sex, then I suppose I would think it's o.k.

But, the problem with answering your hypothetical case is that I don't think your hypothetical gives all the necessary variables. Consent is one factor, and probably the most important factor. Without consent, the whole thing falls down and it becomes forcible rape. However, consent isn't the only important thing. How that consent was obtained is important - was she cajoled and seduced in order to get her into bed, and the man's intent is to bang the little girl and then leave her? If so, I do see something wrong with it, because I see it as an older, more experienced male preying on the vulnerability of a young girl. Another variable that your hypothetical is her own inexperience - is she misreading the situation, thinking that this 30 year old man "really loves" her and cares about her, when all he really wants is a sexual relationship, while she wants more than that? If that's the case, then I think that even if the little girl consents, that there is something "wrong" with it because she could wind up hurt by it when she finds out he was after sex while she was after love. Neither of those two things makes it forcible rape, but they are reasons why 13 and 14 year old girls's "consent" isn't the only factor involved - when a woman is grown up and an adult, like any other adult, she is held to be responsible for living with the consequences of misreading a man's intentions, or be on guard for being seduced for sexual purposes. In the case of a little girl, I think there's reason to extend a little circle of protection to protect her from her own bad decision-making.

It's the same rationale behind making a 17 year old driving age. Many 16 year olds and 15 year olds are perfectly awesome drivers, and some can even be better than some adults. Statistically speaking, however, there is reason to categorize them by age (due to physical, emotional and intellectual development generally improving over time). It's too cumbersome to make it a case-by-case determination whether a 13 and 14 year olds can drive on city and state roadways. So, we draw a rational line somewhere, based on what evidence we have.

Hopefully, I think you will see by now that I haven't "dodged" anything.

[
People who are moralising usually claim it's all for good practical reasons. That will never change.

Why focus on intercourse? Should under-age girls be allowed to strip for money? If they are properly protected? I suppose that's nothing to do with morals either. You will always find some "known harm" smokescreen to disguise the fact that it might offend your morals.

I'm happy to admit it offends my morals, and would vote to ban it.

Under what age? Age of majority? One of the various age of consent? Smoking age? Drinking age?

There are all sorts of ages.

I think the child labor laws cover most of this question, and where the age of majority is 18, people under the age of 18 are generally prohibited from working in all sorts of professions. I don't see regulation of the activities of minors as particularly relevant to whether we ought to ban stripping or other activities for adults.

[Coito ergo sum]

If prostitution was legalized, the exploitation would end. Where it is legal, the pimps are out and women to a far greater degree control their own bodies, pick their own customers, control who they work for, and control when they quit.

That's a rose tinted view of the sex industry. I actually know a guy who's in love with a prostitute. She's from a good family, intelligent. But all she thinks about is where the next dose of crack cocain is coming from. Even her kids come second, and she's sure to lose them shortly. Make it legal by all means, but don't imagine the misery will go away.
Most prostitutes in this country do it to support a drug habit.
That may not be true in the US, where money comes before self-respect.
Or maybe where money EQUALS self respect.

Your anecdote notwithstanding, legalization of prostitution demonstrates that a sharp reduction in the rate of AIDS and other STDs results, and a sharp reduction in the amount of drug addiction results as well. Nobody would need to go to your friends crack ridden girlfriend, if they had access to a legal hooker who is regularly disease tested.

In any case, of course there will be some misery. People have issues in any profession, in any job.

Most prostitutes in this country do it to support a drug habit is not supported by evidence, as far as I can see. A lot of them probably do, I'll give you that.

You can take your anti-American rhetoric and shove it. Fuck off (like the emoticon of the same name) with the "US, where money comes before self-respect." You obviously don't know dick about the United States or its culture. But, that doesn't apparently stop some of those from outside of the States from making such declarations.

[mistermack]

You can take your anti-American rhetoric and shove it. Fuck off (like the emoticon of the same name) with the "US, where money comes before self-respect." You obviously don't know dick about the United States or its culture. But, that doesn't apparently stop some of those from outside of the States from making such declarations.

Well, it's a generalisation, but it's a reputation that's been earned over and over.
Al Capone was feted in his own lifetime like a movie star, and most of these sleazy customs like lap-dancing get built up in the US first, before they export it to the rest of the world.
There is a national tendency to admire money, and disregard where it comes from. Even the kids, with the pathetic gangster rap stuff.
Perhaps it's in the american dream. Drop your panties for a few years on the game, and then swan around in a big house with big cars.
But it's unfair to single out the USA. I meant Canada as well.

[Coito ergo sum]

You can take your anti-American rhetoric and shove it. Fuck off (like the emoticon of the same name) with the "US, where money comes before self-respect." You obviously don't know dick about the United States or its culture. But, that doesn't apparently stop some of those from outside of the States from making such declarations.

Well, it's a generalisation, but it's a reputation that's been earned over and over.
Al Capone was feted in his own lifetime like a movie star, and most of these sleazy customs like lap-dancing get built up in the US first, before they export it to the rest of the world.
There is a national tendency to admire money, and disregard where it comes from. Even the kids, with the pathetic gangster rap stuff.
Perhaps it's in the american dream. Drop your panties for a few years on the game, and then swan around in a big house with big cars.
But it's unfair to single out the USA. I meant Canada as well.

It's bullshit that you've swallowed whole.

Al Capone began his Chicago crime career in 1923 as a complete unknown - he was thug in the unknown or only speculated about mafia in 1923 and was invited out to Chicago by a crime boss at the time. He was only 24 years old. Capone had a meteoric rise and became well known over the next few years, and ended up ousting his boss, taking over the Chicago mafia for all of about 5 years. In 1929, the FBI got on his ass and he was indicted and convicted in 1931. He spent the rest of his life in jail. Al Capone was hunted down by the US government and sentenced to hard labor, ultimately put in Alcatraz. He died in prison at the age of 48. So, when was Capone treated like a movie star again? Could it be that you buying in to a Hollywood packaged image of the dapper Chicago gangster? Who thought Capone was awesome when he was alive?

A national tendency to disregard where money comes from? That's so much bullshit, I can smell it through the website here. The US has far greater ethical restrictions on the sources of money, money laundering, bribery and other such activities than most places in the world. Our corporations often have a hard time complying with the rules they have to comply with when operating in foreign countries, where bribery of government officials and payoffs areoften understood if not condoned (example, Mexico). Generally speaking in the US people are raised to have honor and integrity in where their money comes from.

I think you equate an aversion to ill-gotten money with an aversion to money in general. I think it's true that most Americans don't have a particular aversion to money, and think earning money is a fairly respectable thing to do. That's different, of course, than being unconcerned with how one gets it.

What country are you from mistermack? Let's do a little compare and contrast, shall we?

[Robert_S]

You can take your anti-American rhetoric and shove it. Fuck off (like the emoticon of the same name) with the "US, where money comes before self-respect." You obviously don't know dick about the United States or its culture. But, that doesn't apparently stop some of those from outside of the States from making such declarations.

Well, it's a generalisation, but it's a reputation that's been earned over and over.
Al Capone was feted in his own lifetime like a movie star, and most of these sleazy customs like lap-dancing get built up in the US first, before they export it to the rest of the world.
There is a national tendency to admire money, and disregard where it comes from. Even the kids, with the pathetic gangster rap stuff.
Perhaps it's in the american dream. Drop your panties for a few years on the game, and then swan around in a big house with big cars.
But it's unfair to single out the USA. I meant Canada as well.

It's not the money that makes gangsta and gangster so popular, it's the adventurous lifestyle. It makes for a good story. That's why Al Capone's story is better known than wossname Vanderbilt.

Also, assuming that there is a high rate of addiction among those dancers, I don't know how many addicts gravitate towards that occupation verses how many become addicts as a result of it.

[GreyICE]

Well, it's a generalisation, but it's a reputation that's been earned over and over.
Al Capone was feted in his own lifetime like a movie star, and most of these sleazy customs like lap-dancing get built up in the US first, before they export it to the rest of the world.
There is a national tendency to admire money, and disregard where it comes from. Even the kids, with the pathetic gangster rap stuff.
Perhaps it's in the american dream. Drop your panties for a few years on the game, and then swan around in a big house with big cars.
But it's unfair to single out the USA. I meant Canada as well.

Wow.

I mean honestly, you just have no fucking clue about America. This is so painfully silly it hurts. I mean honestly, we're not 300 million stupid stereotypes.

I didn't say it was practical. Just that if it was, I wouldn't have the same objections.
What if someone organised fucking clubs, instead of strip clubs. All the liberty arguments would apply just the same. Consenting adults, private clubs, good money being earned. It all applies just the same. If you ban fucking clubs, you are imposing your own morality on consenting adults, just like banning strip clubs.
.

And this is made of win. Mack, they're called swingers clubs. Perfectly legal here. Is there an epic fail smiley?

[mistermack]

I mean honestly, you just have no fucking clue about America. This is so painfully silly it hurts. I mean honestly, we're not 300 million stupid stereotypes.

In that case, I mean honestly, I feel I must apologise. How many are you?

And this is made of win. Mack, they're called swingers clubs. Perfectly legal here. Is there an epic fail smiley?

Context, context! We're talking about clubs where girls strip for money. Are there clubs where girls fuck for money?

[Trolldor]

Yes. They're called Brothels.
There was a small documentary of one in Texas I saw on SBS a year or so back. All the girls quite enjoyed working there, it was safe, they earnt good money and they mostly enjoyed what they did.