When I was her age I am sure I would have felt equally certain. I happen to agree with her but still.

Ok, I'll get that onion back on my belt, continue the surveillance of my lawn and finish the other 5 Lagunitas I have.

Let counties decide if they want to legalize it (although big counties like Clark and Washoe may not legalize it). Then, if they opt for legalization, there are rules and regulations that must be followed concerning licensing, STD testing and other procedures.

it............ all the time their citizens are frequenting the brothels elsewhere. Against the law for prostitution in cities over a certain size in Nevada.... and god help the women who are street prostitutes there. Regular stings happen and it is the women who bear the brunt.

Double standards, absolutely.

And coming straight from a sex worker herself lends credibility to this article too. It's unfortunate that the puritanical religious horseshit continues to strangle society in more ways than just this particular domain.

Here in Canada our idiotic conservative government just adopted the so called "Swedish model", where the Johns are prosecuted while the sex workers are not. As if that's going to make them safer somehow. Take away the demand from all the honest guys and let the price go down for the criminals. Yeah, that'll make it safer for them.

Though I personally lean toward legalization/decriminalization, albeit with aggressive prosecution of pimping and public solicitation.

This is one of those things that's actually NOT complicated, and the only reason it stays illegal is because of puritanical and prudish attitudes towards sex in general. It's religious insanity taken to the extreme just like the drug war.

Legalize it, regulate it, enforce existing penalties on rape. Simple.

We have to have some boundaries for goodness sake. Do we really want a free for all country. Legalize drug, gambling on every street corner and now prostitution legal? Can we at least have a bit of morals for the country? A little for goodness sake.

Not something forced onto you by government. Blue laws are for theocracies.

So should we have morals? Sure, by our own choice.

We are all together and this would not be for the good of society. We have other things to focus on. Prostitution is not one of them. Lets clean up the drug situation first and see if that really improves our lives as a society. One area I know is not good for society is all these casinos going up all over the place. They breed financial problems that are so horrible. "Free for all" societies have huge problems that we just don't need.

Sure, you may also disapprove of them for moral reasons, but the problems that society (ie, government) should address are the non-moral ones. Addiction, violent crime, disease, etc.

There's nothing 'moral' about not doing something because it's illegal, but there are reasons certain activities are made illegal that have nothing to do with morality, or 'not having to have this in your community'.

and men and where it is legal, it is clean and accepted and regulated.

No matter the laws, men and women will buy and sell sex. Criminalizing the buying of sex will not make those who buy and sell sex safer. Keeping it illegal will push the practice further underground - which will only exacerbate the drugs, etc. that you are so against. Legalizing can protect those in the sex trade......... which is a good thing.

and now, many are being trafficked, enslaved.

So much for that "freedom".

So presumptuous.

There's nothing immoral about adult consensual sex. You ought to read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. It'll open your eyes and free you from the shackles of religion.

Yeah, that does get the juices flowing for some. Any minute now our own fun police should be here.

Yeah, I think I might be a distant relative of the great philosopher Mencken.

for the prostitute.

That's how most people think of their professions. Does the fact that their professions bring pleasure to people offend you for some reason?

It's an intimate part of a person's life that they should get to enjoy too, not just because they need money. You're forgetting the prostitute. Bringing pleasure to some john is of no concern to me, what bothers me is the poor prostitute is putting up with unwanted sex just to get the money. She should be able to get the money another way. We should legalize drugs, for example, so that drug addicted women don't have to make their lives even worse by selling the only thing they have, which should be for them only.

upon gender and economic inequality that

But, hey, if it gives men boners and ejaculations, it must be good, right?

Go ahead and tell me all of the men pushing for their own ability to be able to buy sex are really, truly interested in the welfare of the women they want to be able to exploit.

"First and foremost, I'd like to clear up a myth that remains pervasive in any discussion about sex work. Prostitution opponents love to promote images of abused hookers and human traffickers to trump up hostility towards sex work. While it's true ill-intentioned criminals do exist and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, these conditions do not apply to the vast majority of sex workers. We should especially not conflate the sex industry with the abuses of human trafficking because it delegitimizes the workers and creates a moral panic that manifests itself in harmful legislation. The fact of the matter is that most sex workers enter the industry via their own consent and genuinely enjoy their work."

It's right there in the OP, second paragraph.

for all workers.

An alternative view:

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/04/19/is-legalized-prostitution-safer/legalizing-prostitution-leads-to-more-trafficking

Human trafficking should be punished with life in prison. We can probably agree on that much.

Obviously we are not going to agree on the rest.

Where there are johns there will be pimps.

Care to here my views?

Didn't think so.

What would it require, besides total agreement with your views, to get you to respect the views of actual sex workers?

When prostitution no longer is driven by gender and economic inequality, I'll reconsider the institution's merits. When there's a positive correlation between economic opportunity/ education and entry into the sex industry (instead of a sharply negative one), I'll reconsider.

so that the workers have workplace protections, higher wages and basic human rights. I suspect you already know that though.

nature of the institution doesn't change. In the Netherlands and Germany there are a lot more men wanting to buy than women willing to sell, because women have other options. So they import economically desperate women from Africa and eastern Europe.

Demand reduction, not supply increase, is the key. When the only women in the sex trade are those who really want to be in it, then maybe it can be considered something other than a foul perpetuator of inequality.

And while it might be easy to dismiss as only one success, criminalization still has zero successes.

But you already know that.

From what other (non-sex) industries do you also propose legally barring women and arresting anyone who hires or buys from them, until after all gender problems have been solved?

why have sexual harassment laws?

We don't make it illegal for bosses to make employees pick up their dry cleaning. Why would requiring a blowjob be any different?

Consenting adults and all.

And the answer, according to the courts where sex work in LEGAL AND PROTECTED, is:

You've cited the exception, not the rule. It's considered a big deal that an employer who threatened his employees was found liable? Not impressed.

Nor am I impressed by the sophistry-cated question which presumes that there are other trades/industries in which women's bodies are directly commoditized. But if you can come up with another industry that is irredeemable and incapable of advancing the well-being of society, dependent upon and perpetuating gender and economic inequality, I will be happy to discuss appropriate governmental responses.

Finally, in terms of basic economics you can't extrapolate from remote, island nations to the rest of the planet on this. Basic economics--where there is greater demand than supply, then the terms will shift in the suppliers' favor as they have better bargaining power. In NZ, because women have other/ better options, there are fewer willing to sell than buy. Ergo those that do sell are able to win concessions such as being treated like a human being.

However, in Europe supply can be trafficked/imported and ergo increased to meet demand. Indeed, due to the tragically huge numbers of economically desperate women, the terms of exchange will inevitably tilt against those being sold due to the superior bargaining power and resources of both johns and pimps/traffickers. Government regulation is only a superficial remedy, as an underground trade develops to reflect the economic realities.

Short of eliminating global poverty, the only way to make it less awful in most places is to dissuade men from trying to buy women. Part of that is legal deterrence, and part of it is raising boys and educating men to avoid doing so.

and why don't you respect the views of others.

It is not "work." It is not something one should have to sell. The image of them all happily going off to work is ridiculous. No one does it if they are not desperate for the money. I am sure most of them would rather have a better way to earn that money. And how many of them are supporting a drug habit.

And their "views" are quite suspect as they are not of course going to admit their true ones to their "customers." To top it all off, likely they have to spend plenty of time reassuring some customers they like it just fine. That's almost worse than cynically using them; knowing it is wrong but demanding that they "consent" that it's all just fine and dandy.

I have never personally known, spoken to, networked with, or listened to a sex worker that supported criminalization. I'm sure they exist, but they're in the minority. Some people like working for Wal-Mart. Some people like voting for Republicans. Sometimes people do go against their own interests.

I'm not required to respect views that do direct harm to people, and I don't.

It is work. There are an infinite number of jobs that people wouldn't do if they didn't have bills to pay. I notice no one is suggesting that commercial fishing be outlawed. Or waitressing. Or retail sales.

I think it ought to be illegal to procure - arrest the johns rather than the prostitutes. The prostitutes need help with drug addiction or with poverty or whatever other situation of desperation applies. It's just absurd to act like doing something like that is just another job. They ought to be able to have their own sex lives.

Viewing prostitution as fine is just as harmful to people. Maybe not to men who find it convenient. But it does a lot of harm to the women involved in it and to society in general.

The people doing it are workers and deserve to be respected as such.

Anyone with addiction problems deserves help, not dehumanization.

Do you even realize that you're making the argument that prostitution ought to be legalized and regulated when you post something like that to make your "point"?

That girl was underage - hence, it was not consensual. She was a victim of rape and human trafficking. She wasn't a sex worker.

they genuinely enjoy the work. You never tell the customers you hate working for them.

It would be a very rare person, whose sanity might be in question, who would not be doing it out of desperation. Mostly, drug addiction causes people to turn to prostitution.

There's no way it is enjoyable. Men who use prostitutes trying to claim the prostitutes like it are delusional. If you have to pay, then by definition she does not really want sex with you.

Maybe she needs to start looking outside of the well-known, high-class joints in Nevada to get a proper perspective...I can suggest some cities and neighborhoods where she can start if she's interested...

For every "good" anecdote she can spew out, I can respond with two bad ones...

Hence, Belle Knox must not be a young woman who has already had sex for money, but rather some MRA type masquerading as such.

Oh, wait a second, that isn't right, just like the argument for keeping prostitution illegal makes no sense. It is like people who say that drugs are bad because they funnel money to gangs.

Actually, the prohibition of drugs funnels money to black market dealers, just as the prohibition of prostitution funnels money to traffickers and pimps. If both "vices" were legal, then sooner or later 99.9% of the people dealing in them would be legitimate tax paying citizens instead of gangsters.

Ya, it would probably be better if we all had sex in committed relationships, just like it would be better if we were all content to be sober all the time, but that's never going to happen, and the prohibition clearly makes the situation worse.

is about the dumbest argument advanced for legalization.

So congrats on that.

And yes, she is right as rain.

Toss the tricks in jail. Which doesn't not one motherfuckin thing for trafficked children OR adults. Or the fact that it's a gendered profession.

My bottom line is prostitutes deserve to be safe. And since prostiution is built on a religious prohibition, it will never be safe. Prostitution used to be a religious act, with nothing in common with what it is today. Then came other religions jockeying for power. The act of prostiution became shameful, the women and men participating or forced into it shunned.

I know a lot of sex workers. She's young. I'm middle aged. I know what happens with the rest of the story. On FB, I found a group of survivors from my time on the street. We talk. A lot.

You want anecdotal evidence? Happy to oblige

Why should johns be thrown in jail if everyone is consenting?

Didn't you know that it's wrong to have sex unless you're married? You need to brush up on your Bible reading.

It's quite likely that Paul was referring to Athenian cults in which which sex and orgies were a part when he 'condemned' homosexuality. As I said before, it comes FROM religion, not apart from it.

It is not the same thing as sex between people who don't have to pay one of the partners to do it!

Legalization has led to increase in trafficking. But I don't feel prostitutes should be punished at all.

let people sell their kidneys.

Are you seriously comparing waterboarding and organ removal with people consensually having sex?

After all, you're invoking the libertarian playbook on this one.

Which would most people rather do, get waterboarded for 30 seconds or suck the d!cks of 25 lowlives?

If a person wants to get waterboarded consensually there isn't a law against it. Have at it for all I care. I'm not going to make a moral judgement over the consensual actions of another adult that doesn't harm anyone else.

There are some men who consciously adopt a fantasy view that women who are in prostitution do it because they enjoy themselves.

These men usually adopt this self-deception in order to be able to live with themselves while ejaculating into someone who finds them sickening.

The article in the OP was written by woman that has sex for money and enjoys it. Are you saying you know better than her as to if she is being exploited?

"There are some men who consciously adopt a fantasy view that women who are in prostitution do it because they enjoy themselves.

These men usually adopt this self-deception in order to be able to live with themselves while ejaculating into someone who finds them sickening."

Look how comfortable you are inserting your thoughts for those of other people. You have no clue what most johns are thinking.

so one 19-year old speaks for all women caught up in the industry?

But you seem to have no problem substituting your paternalistic judgement for the judgement of thousands of men/women sex workers.

"what insight do you have into the minds of johns?"

None. That's why I don't insert my thoughts for their own.

promote gender equality.

A woman with first hand experience and insight into the industry. A woman that is double majoring at Duke in women's studies and sociology at that.

I'm sure you know better though.

and lots of men have masturbated to the video of that assault.

... "While Weeks maintains that everything that happened at the shoot was consensual..."?

It's almost like you did it intentionally.

This woman has taken part in over 30 movies. She also wrote the article in the OP where she states:

"While it's true that paying my tuition at Duke was my initial motivation for entering the porn industry, I've grown to appreciate the empowerment opportunities that sex work has provided me. In porn, I can speak openly about my experiences without fear of punishment, work in a safe and professional environment and play a vital role in the creative process."

She is smart enough form an informed opinion on if she is being exploited. What you are doing is infantilizing her.

Just because you seem to have hang ups about consensual sex and what people find arousing, doesn't mean everyone else does.

because it's an inconvenient fact. That this young woman makes a living in the sex industry and seems to enjoy it doesn't fit the party line of the prohibitionists.

And you are dismissing her opinion completely all because you don't agree with it.

You lectured me the other day saying that feminists exist that agree with pornography and support prostitution. So shouldn't Knox qualify as a feminist?
But now you are claiming this woman's opinion is invalid because she doesn't adhere to your particular brand of feminism. You don't like her because she stars in porn films and supports decriminalizing prostitution.

This is exactly what I was talking about when I said that feminism is very, very rigid where supporters are not allowed to think outside the box. It's why the movement has such a bad reputation.

Her opinion is that of one young privileged woman who entered the industry by choice.

It is what it is, but it does not trump the many who are not so lucky.

It's not a fantasy. Go click the link.

behalf of those who are.

All those damned libertarians in the Netherlands.