Can we have a polite discussion about child prostitution? You know, history, ethics... No lewd pics, please

>what is male prostitution
Wew. In case you really don't know, it isn't women buying their services.

>In his Second Treatise on Government, the philosopher John Locke asked by what right an individual can claim to own one part of the world, when, according to the Bible, God gave the world to all humanity in common. He answered that persons own themselves and therefore their own labor. When a person works, that labor enters into the object. Thus, the object becomes the property of that person.

>However, Locke held that one may only appropriate property in this fashion if the Lockean proviso held true, that is, "... there is enough, and as good, left in common for others".
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_property

>"No rent" on the sole of his boot
What does he mean by this?

>For rhetorical purposes, Marx identifies Louis Napoleon himself as being like a member of the lumpenproletariat insofar as, being a member of the finance aristocracy, he has no direct interest in productive enterprises.[4] This is a rhetorical flourish, however, which equates the lumpenproletariat, the rentier class, and the apex of class society as equivalent members of the class of those with no role in useful production.[citation needed]
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat

>somebody made that retarded poster
Wew

>As well as many other things, the more you ban something, the more people will search to get it.
I'm getting tired of this meme argumentation. Soviet Union or China have cracked down hard on drugs and it worked (though admittedly i think the eastern bloc started having drug problems towards the end of it, though it was not nearly as widespread as today).
In pseudo-economic terms, the more barriers you put in place to prevent something defined as 'illegal activity', through either violence, the threat of violence, the threat of a criminal record, exorbitant fines or prison sentences, the less willing people are going to partake in that activity. The risk becomes perceived too high by most people. The only ones who might go for it are those transgressive youth (or maybe gay or some other) cultures who want to show defiance of authority of the state.
It's not as simple as though as crackdowns increasing or decreasing demand. I like to think of it as a more fluid thing, with mores being the determining factor. In one society, for example, a government ban and crackdown would go a long way to discourage normies from partaking of an illegal activity. On the other hand, there will always be a certain proportion of people for which the effect will be the opposite. However, almost always this latter group will always be in the minority in a Western country, unless we're talking about a third world country or an ineffective or dysfunctional state. It's more, then, a matter of utilitarian calculation, a cost-benefit analysis ("if we deregulate a certain activity, will more people benefit than will be harmed?")
apologies for my rambling tone i hope anons understand what i mean

you seem like a well spoken lad

may i ask if you are diagnosed with autism?

if not, how do i become smart like you?

There is literally nothing wrong with Nepiophilia

...

>one is forced to have sex in exchange for money which they need to survive.
but basically that can be argued for anything
>one is forced to work
>one if forced to pay taxes
>one is forced to commute 4 hours a day...
>one is forced to do x...
at the end of the day everyone is ultimately coerced by economic forced to survive, and that requires using our bodies. Factory workers and blue collar workers use their hands and muscles, white collar workers tedious mental labor. What's so special about a women using her pussy to make a living? There's nothing mystical about it. Nothing of metaphysical value is lost. There's no "loss of innocence" as christ cucks like to say. Many people like a prostitute for her physical appearance, so maybe you'd argue it encourages sexism. But it's been shown in studies that both men and women who are perceived as unattractive are just as likely to be discriminated on the job market.

The war on drugs helped to create more solid criminal organisations, that also kill and do more dangerous things. People will never learn that education is stronger than prohibition. They should legalise drugs and add taxes (equivalent to the health system they're going to use).

>may i ask if you are diagnosed with autism?
>if not, how do i become smart like you?
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, so I guess that does make me an autist, kek. But assuming you are being sarcastic, what do you find false in my post? I'm perfectly willing to change my views... I just think this enlightenment (I see it as originating from edgy philosophes like Rousseau and Voltaire) idea to challenge conventional wisdom about criminal justice can be taken to far.

S-stop using logic against what is socially acceptable you stupid weirdo! You're not supposed to do that!

Thats just speculation. And there are a lot of worse jobs out there. A lot of people have a lot of shitty jobs, but to remove exploitation you'd have to give everybody enough money to survive, which will mean nobody wants to do shitty jobs.

If you want to reduce exploitation, why is prostitution the highest priority? Perhaps some women prefer it over say, hard manual labour.

Madeleine K. Albright (born 1937)

There is a special place in hell for women who do not help other women.

St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)

Prostitution in the towns is like the cesspool in the palace: take away the cesspool and the palace will become an unclean and evil-smelling place.

W.H. Auden (1907-1973)

You must go to bed with friends or whores, where money makes up the difference in beauty or desire.

St. Augustine (354-430)

Suppress prostitution, and capricious lusts will overthrow society.

Georges Bataille (1897-1962)

Not every woman is a prostitute, but prostitution is the natural apotheosis of the feminine attitude.

Terri-Jean Bedford (born 1959)

If you want your daughter to be…sexually harassed in…an office or to work for the minimum wage while having sex for free I would rather she do what she wanted and not what you wanted.

Brendan Behan (1923-1964)

The big difference between sex for money and sex for free is that sex for money usually costs a lot less.

Martin Behrman (1864-1926)

You can make prostitution illegal, but you can’t make it unpopular.

William Blake (1757-1827)

Every harlot was a virgin once.

Prisons are built with stones of law, brothels with bricks of religion.

>Soviet Union or China
They also killed the humanity of their citizens. Go and have an accident in China. Ask for assistance to any pedestrian, and see what happens...

I don't care about purity or innocence, but I don't think being forced to have sex under pressing conditions is pyschologically healthy.
Your right that other jobs involve coercion. That doesn't excuse it though (it's one reason I don't have a job).
I never said prostitution is a priority. I don't really power-rank things like that, unless it's based purely on subjective feelings which won't mean much to other people.
I mainly just like challenging the common notion I see that prostitution can be an empowering form of work, when it's the complete opposite.

Ron Paul: That’s a bipartisan attitude, Madeleine Albright showed no compassion when they asked her about 500,000 children having died from our constant bombing in the 1990s, which led up to 9/11. She said if that is the price you have to pay, that is the price you have to pay. That to me is an attitude, no moral compass whatsoever.

It's implied in
>Regardless, exploitation is bad and we should strive to reduce it as much as possible, other jobs being similar doesn't make it any different.
What makes it worse than other jobs, except for purely subjective feelings like "feeling oppressed" etc. I think there are a lot more mind-numbing jobs in society than prostitution.

do you see the common denominator?

It's the federal government. I wonder what that means.

Don't see how that implied I placed prostitution above other jobs. I saw a thread about prostitution, so I posted about prostitution. Bringing up builders or police officers would seem off-topic.
Being forced to do some things can be worse than others, being forced to have sex is commonly acknowledged as particularly bad; psychologists mostly agree that being raped isn't good for you. Are there going to be worse jobs than prostitution? I certainly imagine so, but that doesn't mean we can't complain about the coercive nature of prostitution.

>The war on drugs helped to create more solid criminal organisations, that also kill and do more dangerous things.
And? Places like the Netherlands have legal prostitution and even still there's huge organized criminal organization that traffic women from all over the world to work there. In the US massage parlors are rarely cracked down on by authorities and you also have giant trafficking rings that bring asian women here, isolate them, and keep them in debt slavery (though tbf this is not always the case). And anyway, what's so bad about organized crime? At least these organizations have a certain logic to them, whereas petty criminals and drug addicts are going to go to any length to get money for drugs.
Anyway, it comes down to cost benefit analysis again. In Prohibition, for example, there was a moderate drop in alcohol use and the diseases that emanated from its use. So really it comes down to weighing whether we're willing to put up with come organized crime while at the same time you have a lot of people discouraged from using some substance altogether.

> People will never learn that education is stronger than prohibition.
This is anecdotal, and studies have shown that education has decreased drug use, but it seems like our drug education program in school was a failure. People saw the teachers and cops doing the education as tools of authority who were spreading misinformation and using scare tactics. They believed nothing they heard and when it came down to it people were more willing to listen to hearsay from their friends about drugs.

>They should legalise drugs and add taxes (equivalent to the health system they're going to use).
I'm not against this for pot. But for something like hard drugs like meth or heroin its an awful idea. Drug enforcement, as it is, is already so poor in America as to render it nonexistent and de facto legal.(cont.)

>But for something like hard drugs like meth or heroin its an awful idea
If someone wants meth all they have to do is buy certain cough medicine and some supplies from Home Depot.

Meth and heroin are imported in huge amounts in the US or manufactured here. When imports have been cracked down upon, then people simply set up shop with factories in the US. And if not these illegal substances, people have turned ot prescription drug en masse, and the doctors are willing to dole it out like halloween candy. It's not just a simple matter of "adding a tax" as though that were a panacea for all our societal ills. Something is rotten at the core here. I, however, have some bias, as I've seen my sister's and cousin's life destroyed by meth and alcohol abuse respectively. That experience has made me think that for some people it's not of matter of just making drugs more expensive, but taking it off the shelves altogether...

Not so anymore. Authorities have cracked down pretty hard on these substances, at least in my state. That's why you have these cases a few years ago of dealers and addicts doing a string of pharmacy robberies to get stuff for meth

That's large quantities for selling, the ingredients are common household substances.

Random user here. I'm not contributing, but I enjoy reading your arguments, guys.

Well thats the cost of being in a "free" society I guess.

Wouldn't it be a matter, then, of destigmatizing prostitution? Why is sex work psychologically unhealthy? What, the women has to pretend to be aroused when she's not? That's no different from any industry that requires customer service. the emotional labor of having to smile all day in your mcdonald's job for minimum wage takes its toll. At least, a good prostitute gets paid very well (maybe over 100k per year). The same cannot be said for the wagecuck.

ironically, i'm jewish, my dear user

But that is a false equivalence, prostitution is not the same as rape, like work is not the same as forced labor in a psychological sense. If people have the choice to be a prostitute, and even moreso, if prostitutes have the choice to refuse clients (like you could refuse an employer or employee), then this is on a whole other level of psychological impact than rape.

>Places like the Netherlands have legal prostitution and even still there's huge organized criminal organization that traffic women from all over the world to work there.
Got a source for those huge criminal organizations? I'm from here, and while there is illegal prostitution, most of the prostitution is well-regulated with working conditions which you wouldn't get in the upperclass of a lot of countries.

You make a good point. When you use arbitrary methods to eliminate some perceived illegal activity, it does not bode well for the rule of law. See: Hitler's dragnet of prostitutes and gays who, after serving their prison sentences, got picked up by Gestapo outside the jail and taken to a concentration camp.

On the other hand, western countries also cracked down hard on gays and prostitutes and essentially eliminated them from the public sphere. If anyone witnessed these crackdowns it was the poor and marginalized who were not accepted into respectable society in the first place. Same as how most people under apartheid never saw blacks getting beaten by police or tortured in jail. Out of sight, out of mind. The rule of law is degraded in so far as the illusion of it is broken.

>Wouldn't it be a matter, then, of destigmatizing prostitution?
Many places do this by protecting the prostitutes themselves from criminal charges.

>Why is sex work psychologically unhealthy?
Adult sex work is one thing, but show me one single definitive case, from any point in human history, where a child prostitute wasn't 100% the result of sex slavery or obvious unhealthy grooming upbringing.

>> 16-19 — Ephebophilia
how's this a thing?
i'm pretty sure it's impossible for any men not to be attracted to attractive girls at that age... but i'm guessing that is a term coined for men that only feel attracted to girls in that age group

>ironically, i'm jewish
Eh, I'm just memeing anyway. I could see /pol/tards arguing either way that Jews are either for or against prostitution. Doesn't really matter in the end, Jews are always just gonna represent what they don't like and nothing more.

I, for one, agree with you though. Women just hate prostitution because they know they'd lose their faithful wallets if it were de-stigmatized. Lots of things that are stigmatized in society for no reason other than "muh feelings" and prostitution is certainly one of them.

Oh...I thought the argument had veered to one about prostitution in general, not child prostitution. I think at the very least it should be confined to women past puberty. But, yes, allowing younger girls to prostitute is going to allow for exploitation.

I've read it in a few newspapers, but unfortunately I can't find any source at the moment... I think you're right that regulating prostitution works for the most part, but I read that even so there are women who are still trafficked. At the end of the day though the dutch system is probably a net good.

it's not making a judgement call, it's just a categorization, like gerontophilia

Am I wrong if I say that Age of Consent laws exist for the sole purpose of taking out of the market the best girls, and to allow old beef to get economic support by monetising their pussies?

You know, in the old times, 10/10 womens used to be accused of witchery by other villians (envy, hate...). Now they put directly man under control by not allowing them to appreciate the witch.

yes it would seem pretty obvious in many various ways why you are wrong

preventing the spread of disease is unfeasible

that's hilariously false

you are essentially equating prostitution to rape. like, if a woman chooses to sell her puss out for cash, she has by definition consented to whatever sexual contact has been paid for. i suppose you can argue that not paying your prostitute is tantamount to rape, but that's beside the point.

>First of all, why do prostitution exists?
Because there is a demand for sex and women who can supply it. The problem is that there is too much demand for what is a very small supply of women who are in no way economically, socially, or even psychologically pressured into the business. Furthermore, there is even demand for exploitation in the form of girls who are too young to legally consent. Thus, historical prostitution has almost always preyed upon outcast and disenfranchised women (and some men) to some degree. These were usually war captives, slaves, immigrants and refugees, and the poor. Prostitution then was bad only as far as society was willing to protect these groups as well as prevent an increasingly dirty and exploitative business from preying upon one's own citizens. Today, since citizenship is increasingly universal and there are international agreements in place to recognize the rights of foreigners in other nations, this means prostitution is bad because the market forces that have always driven it affect people the modern world has decided to protect from exploitation and abuse.

The sex market can be regulated, but its negative effect on large numbers of men and women becomes an issue of public concern and, like violence, is greatly restricted for the public good.

So you have things backwards - Age of Consent laws and Feminism is a result of increasingly negative attitudes towards what used to be a more open but also abusive industry, and removing both the laws and feminist ideologies will not remove the driving forces behind the negative attitude towards prostitution in the first place.

it means we have a federal government, you pretentious faggot.

I'm playing devil's advocate and definitely don't personally agree with equating prostitution to rape, but i suppose you could make the argument that anyone that willingly prostitutes themselves suffers from an antisocial mental disorder and therefore cannot offer informed consent, making any sexual activity in the context of prostitution rape

>i suppose you could make the argument that anyone that willingly prostitutes themselves suffers from an antisocial mental disorder
elaborate please

prostitution can be considered antisocial behavior, regardless of its popularity, as prostitutes themselves are almost always relegated to the outskirts of society; prostituting oneself usually lead to the negation of ones social status and civil rights, making prostitution antisocial behavior. a pattern of antisocial behavior can be attributed to an antisocial disorder of some sort.

firstly, that's not what antisocial behavior is.
secondly, all of these consequences of prostitution you alledge point towards "anti-social" tendencies among prostitutes are cause by the illegality of the act. by your own logic, if prostitution were legal, and accepted as a legitimate job/career, it would cease being an anti-social behavior.

uhh what is your definition antisocial behavior

>all of these consequences of prostitution you alledge point towards "anti-social" tendencies among prostitutes are cause by the illegality of the act
prostitution was very legal in rome and roman prostitutes still lost pretty much all social status, with some exceptions.

>by your own logic, if prostitution were legal, and accepted as a legitimate job/career, it would cease being an anti-social behavior.
prostitution is legal today in some places, what would you say the general social standings of prostitutes are in those places?

although yes, it may come as a surprise to you but what is considered antisocial activity changes with the times. being gay was considered antisocial by the APA and the DMV all the way up to the 70s.

>uhh what is your definition antisocial behavior
the actual definition. "actions that harm or lack consideration for the well-being of others." someone with antisocial personality disorder would more colloquially be called a "sociopath."
>prostitution was very legal in rome and roman prostitutes still lost pretty much all social status, with some exceptions.
we don't live in ancient rome.
>prostitution is legal today in some places, what would you say the general social standings of prostitutes are in those places?
not bad. certainly better than they were even a century ago.
>although yes, it may come as a surprise to you but what is considered antisocial activity changes with the times. being gay was considered antisocial by the APA and the DMV all the way up to the 70s.
so your line of reasoning is analogous to someone in the 1970's justifying a call to ban homosexuality by pointing out that it could constitute "antisocial behavior".

Yes, that's correct

Absolutely nothing is wrong with it

>prostitution was very legal in rome and roman prostitutes still lost pretty much all social status, with some exceptions.
in other periods, though, men valued prostitutes for their beauty and learned conversation. Courtesans were very popular in Renaissance Rome and Venice, for example, and men of social standing held them in high regard.

>What would you say the general social standings of prostitutes are in those places?
I think this depends on the perspective. Men who frequent prostitutes wouldn't really care about something like social standing. This is especially true in our atomized, commercial society today. In such a society as ours people are free to associate with whomever they want, in whatever organization following any possible ideology. What you or I may look down upon (furries, let's say) as socially unacceptable still attracts a community of thousands organized over the internet from all imaginable social classes (though I suspect most of them are middle class and up). The same goes for any number of subcultures: gay culture, goth culture, motorcycle clubs, religious organizations, fitness clubs, activist groups etc. I regard myself socially above such things, but someone else may just as well hold them in esteem, admiring or sympathizing with them from a distance. The same thing applies to prostitution and those who partake in it. On the internet there's a shitton of forums and communities dedicated to discussing prostitution, rating different girls and such. These "mongers" not only see prostitution as a transaction, but as a way of life. Women are not only rated, but admired, worshipped. A relationship is forged with the girl which, in their minds, is totally acceptable. It's a milieu contained within society, but doesn't interact with it. So sure, "society" looks down on prostitution and the men who like it, but few in "society" really care to look at all.

And let me add that those few that care to look and criticize it are mostly other women. However, if you browse some boards here, there is a split between those who see prostitution as beta failure and others who enjoy it and couldn't give a damn about its significant. So if you think about it, only the feminine portion of our society, I conjecture, is truly against prostitution, while the other half is generally neutral or enthusiastic about it (though this may very with the society). This challenges the idea that there even a critical mass of people that can judge prostitution as socially bad or good. The only thing that really determines it is the state's willingness to use force to suppress the trade.

>in other periods, though, men valued prostitutes for their beauty and learned conversation.
They valued courtesans, who provided romantic companionship, and were less prostitutes or even call girls than they were trophy girlfriends who would stay with one lover for as long as he could afford her company. This did not, however, change the social attitude towards actual prostitutes, of which there were thousands in Renaissance Italy and considered as lowly as always.

The problem with social acceptance of a prostitute has to do with human geography. The closer they lived among 'regular women' the more they were despised by society as a whole, which is why they had to either occupy a special caste all of their own that couldn't mingle with normal society or live out on the fringe either at the outskirts of a city or village or among frontiersmen and soldiers. Even if they were well regarded courtesans, they remained a segregated class that were not allowed to easily mix without the influence of a special patron to shield them.

The problem with prostitution in the modern world, then, is that they can no longer choose to segregate themselves on their own terms. The social and geographical gap that allowed a courtesan or an American Western saloon harlot to flourish no longer exists.

>So if you think about it, only the feminine portion of our society, I conjecture, is truly against prostitution

I doubt this. Historically, it's been fought and demonized by male moralists who above all else are watchful of the sexual behavior of the women of their ethnicity and rank. The biggest fight was never against the supposed jealousy of other women, who themselves were never in any position to command social mores for much of history, but against fathers and husbands of women they feared would either be seduced by or fallen to the life of a prostitute.

interesting, i take back what i say then kek.
>they can no longer choose to segregate themselves on their own terms.
so you're saying that the distance and hatred of society made their profession better? wouldn't it be the opposite? a prostitute can work out of their house or an apartment and advertise themselves online and vet their clients. sounds pretty comfy to me

Proximity to 'citizens' meant proximity to the law, which was rarely kind to the underclass. Working out of a house or apartment meant that prostitute may well be attempting to work next door to non-prostitutes. For honor and virtue conscious societies in Europe, the Middle East, and China, this presents a problem of spiritual 'pollution' the equivalent of someone today being concerned about living next to a drug dealer.

So they would be chased out, with local bylaws regularly passed prohibiting women from working out of a home or apartment without the landowner's/city's permission. This meant the only places that would rent out a room to a whore were brothels and communal apartments all bought out by fellow prostitutes. Thus the sex trade tends to become localized to a district or pushed out to the edges where the law is not as vigilant or which is under the (usually exploitative) thumb of a landlord-pimp who himself was also of dubious social standing or otherwise several ranks above the likes of the prostitutes living and paying rent under him.

Hey go fuck yourself

luna is honestly the best autistic waifu

She actually is.

>children can't work in starbucks
>but they can sell their bodies to old men

You don't see how retarded this would be?

>being this straight

They should be able to work in a Starbucks, as well as they sew shoes in poor countries until Captain Morality find out. Now these kids are dying of starving because they can't have a paid job.

Don't misunderstand me, kids should have an education as well as the chance of developing their intelect, but putting them in that ridiculous situation (you're too young to work, you must depend on somebody older) is making it worse for them. Our parents worked when they were kids, and nobody gave a fuck.

Something similar happens with sex. They're not allowed to have sex because of an adult whim. They've been having sex for the last tens of thousands of years and it worked well. In fact, after reaching puberty they should be able to breed, that's how nature works.

Well, cute young boys are ok, but I still being heterosexual.

Sucks to be you my man.

Just enjoy your sexuality, user. And let others do the same.