Three individuals have been arrested on charges of operating a “high-end brothel network” in Massachusetts and Virginia with a clientele that included elected officials, military officers and government contractors with security clearances, the Justice Department announced Wednesday.
For years I've contemplated the idea if I came into a bunch of money if starting a porn studio where the customer is an actor/actress in the porn.
We have a building and several "sets" with cameras recording, customer picks their "partner" and "set" and "shoot the porn", after they are done the video is burned on to a dvd(or blue ray or potentially put on a private file server).
The customer isn't paying for sex, they are paying for the video.
Pretty sure it would have a ton of legal push back and I would need a lot of money for the lawyers to fight the cases.
But 1. Safer for everyone imvolved(it's video taped so you won't beat/hurt/kill the other party) 2.technically legal just like shooting porn
This is actually a great idea for couples! The issue of course would be to make sure that the couples are actual couples.
You could have them sign a release indicating that it's a "photo studio", and you can have different prices: one for commercial use ($5,000 per hour) and one for private use ($100 an hour, and you're not allowed to commercially distribute the DVD.)
Not to mention the possible tie ins...imagine if the studio partnered with onlyfans... Or offered special spaces with live streaming(with permission) to people's Webcam sites.
"remember to join the stream this Saturday where we will be on location in the pleasure dome's sunset beach set for a special sex on the beach adventure"
You could burn it to a dvd or whatever, delete the file, and give the customer the only copy. Whether they choose to keep it or destroy it is their own choice.
Because one of the biggest issues with sex work, human trafficking, gets worse with legalization. Studies across Europe have shown that countries that outlaw prostitution see a decrease in human trafficking victims while countries that legalized or decriminalized it see an increase.
Unlike with drugs, you don't just create a way to increase the supply. A very small minority of women actually want to engage in sex work. And the few who do, usually envision the high class escort lifestyle. But working in a brothel charging $100 per client isn't something many want to do.
But legalizing prostitution increases demand. Which makes it more profitable for criminals to utilize human trafficking to fill that demand.
It also doesn't help at all with protecting victims of human trafficking. Victims of human trafficking are already protected. But they don't step forward because of threats against their own well being and that of their families. Something that doesn't change just because their work technically is legal now.
Which leaves a small percentage of people who fall into financial hardship and consider prostitution as a method of overcoming said hardship. For them that might slightly improve their situation. But that still means exploiting vulnerable people and isn't people engaging in sex work because they want to. And it's even questionable if people in these scenarios would follow the legal way.
So while initially it might seem like legalizing it solves a lot of issues, it is more difficult than that.
I reckon that even though sex work is legalised, and still caused issues, the problem is that there is no government regulation. It's one thing to say by the government that they won't prosecute sex workers, but if it's not regulated and abuse still happens then nothing changed for all intents and purposes. Best analogy I could think of is like allowing food factories to manufacture food, of course. But if there is no regulatory watchdog to monitor and test to make sure food factories are not putting random and dangerous stuff into food, then legalising an activity is pointless.
Basically, the sex industry having been legalised by many countries is unofficially a libertarian set up. Yeah, the government exists and allow sexual transactions between agreeing parties, but they're hands off on how the practitioners in the industry would conduct business. There is no government agency for sex workers to complain to if they're abused. I know people would ask, how exactly would the government regulate sex? That, I will leave to policy experts.
Thanks for the data. I think the issue here is not that legal prostitution creates problems, but rather the government bodies being incompetent at protecting the victims, then.
There are other industries in which people "sell their bodies" for profit (the military and construction come to mind), and if those can be quite regulated, why can't prostitution?
We all sell our bodies for profit. To be fair though, wage theft is the most common form of theft. We're all prostitutes and we're almost all being taken advantage of, and we're in a system where we can't really get out.
government bodies being incompetent at protecting the victims, then.
My guess is that it's just more difficult to control prostitution than it is to control construction work. Construction happens in the open, you need to get tons of permits, multiple companies are involved, inspectors check everything regularly. It would be difficult to force some people to work on a construction site without anyone realizing. But how are you going to make sure that each sexual intercourse in some strip bar is 'legal'? Are you going to put inspectors in bathroom stalls? How can you check every cash transaction? It's pretty much impossible. You can monitor the sex work that's advertised and happening 'in the open' but there will always be some grey and black market for it. And the ugly stuff will happen there.
I see this single study trotted out every time the subject comes up and the key factor to take into account is that this is reported trafficking. If legalized sex work means more light is shed on human trafficking that means more can be done about it.
key factor to take into account is that this is reported trafficking. If legalized sex work means more light is shed on human trafficking that means more can be done about it.
Just because more is reported doesn't mean more isn't also happening. In fact, one could reasonably expect reporting to go down as a percentage of incidents due to ordinary citizens not expecting sex workers to be involved in trafficking since sex work is now legal. That the number goes up after the stigma is removed seems to strongly indicate a correlation with a rise in actual trafficking.
Sure, but all you have is assumptions and you're assuming the increased reporting of trafficking means that trafficking is increasing rather than it just getting caught more. It's like when some governments fought over covid reporting. Keeping it hidden doesn't mean less of it is happening and making it more visible doesn't mean more of it is happening.
Second, it does prove that more human trafficking is reported.
You only have the assumption that bringing it into the light of day results in a higher rate of reporting against actual incidents. It's an interesting hypothesis, but without any evidence to support your assumption Occam's Razor dictates that the simplest answer is that the rates do not change drastically and there actually is more human trafficking to be reported.
You didn't present anything but you certainly act like you did. We're agreed in that it proves more human trafficking is reported but again, that doesn't mean more human trafficking is happening. Refer back to my example about covid case reporting. Incorrectly citing Occam's Razor doesn't strengthen your argument.
Because one of the biggest issues with sex work, human trafficking, gets worse with legalization.
Yes, because legalizing sex work is just criminalizing sex work with extra steps. It's very easy to see an (alleged) "rise in sex trafficking" when the legalization shuffle allows politicians to all of a sudden decide what is "allowed" sex work and what is "sex trafficking."
This is why shitty studies like the one you linked is so thoroughly non-credible - it was performed without the input of the people who actually know what they are talking about - ie, sex workers themselves.
legalizing sex work is just criminalizing sex work with extra steps
So what's the solution?? You just made random assertions without any sources and didn't suggest any alternatives. All while skimming over the very real trafficking/coersion problems unique to sex work.
ROFLMAO! No, genius... trafficking is not unique to sex work in any way, shape, or form. If you weren't filled to the brim with anti-sex work hysteria you'd have known that already.
Do tell… is this the first time you’ve actually considered what sex workers themselves have to say about (so-called) “legalization?”
The sex workers with those opinions usually are the already more well off workers who perform escort or cam services, and isn't reflective of the bottom strata of sex worker experiences. It also doesn't address how more common sex work leads to higher trafficking rates.
trafficking is not unique to sex work in any way, shape, or form.
Lol I'd love any source on this whatsoever. I'm not sure how you defend this line of thought, or why you feel this way. You don't think human trafficking shares any of the same risk factors or conditions as sex work?
Which is bollocks anyways because illegalization actually makes things less safe for all sex workers, but especially for trafficking victims who are now legally marginalized into dark number status
Old white men elected themselves under the guise of voting (gerrymandering who?) and are too embarrassed and confused to allow women the rights they have as humans. Isn't democracy silly.
You're correct, it is not federally illegal in the US. Most things aren't. Murder isn't, either. However, traveling across state lines with a prostitute has gotten people in trouble with the federal government before.
Sex work differs from most other type of work in one very significant way - it's an industry in which capitalists cannot really control the means of production unless slavery (ie, a person can become the private property of another) is legalized and institutionalized. In other words, a sex worker - for the most part - is not as easily coerced into selling their labor to capitalists like most workers can be, and capitalists hate when people have a way to opt out of being hosts for their parasitism.
Sex work also has a way of subverting patriarchal norms upon which the status quo rests.
This is not to say that sex work is automatically a revolutionary, anti-capitalist or even "empowering" thing by itself - there are plenty of ways in which our socio-economic systems allows and enables de facto slavery without calling it slavery - but it certainly doesn't fit into the neat class hierarchy that capitalists wants society to be trapped within.
You're reading too much into it. The primary reason is puritan values. To be fair, the taboo on promiscuity is likely due to the lack of contraceptives and risks of getting sexually transmitted diseases. But access to contraceptives and education would lessen the risks these days. Though people are still creatures of habits so sex and sex work are still taboo for many without questioning why it has been in the first place.
You read correctly the first time. It's a lot more difficult to entrap sex workers in patriarchal hierarchies than a housewife (for instance)... this should not be too difficult to understand.
This isn’t a capitalist thing.
All sex work in the world today exists under a capitalist mode of production - as far as I can tell, there is (officially, at least) no such thing as "publicly-funded" sex work... and that is unfortunate.
Due to both criminalization and demonization, sex workers are prevented from performing very necessary work in our society - such as being the only people that are qualified to perform sex education, for instance - so yes... it is quite unfortunate that sex work cannot be performed as a service to the public.
Sex education is more about the changes your body goes through during puberty as well as how reproduction works. None of that is related to sex work. Sex work is about making people feel good.
The vast majority of "self-employed" people are utterly impoverished people doing survival work, Clyde - please tell me you don't buy into the "entrepreneurship" fairy tales Reagan and Thatcher spooned into your parents' brains through the telly back in the 80s. If you believed that, you might just as well believe in magic glass slippers that grants royalty.
You are confusing being self employed with gig economy bullshit. There are a lot of fields of occupation where being self employed makes sense und gives you more freedom. By the way - I'm talking from own experience being self employed fore quite some time now.
There are people living in shacks within a kilometer from where I'm typing this, Clyde... every second person living there has more (so-called) "entrepreneurship" in their big toe than you have in your entire body because they literally have to do it for survival.
I'm not confusing squat... the only thing you've managed to demonstrate here is that you talk from privilege and nothing else.
I like how even you write “entrepreneurship” in quotation marks and ad "so called", but than dismiss my point completely, that we might not be talking about the same thing. And than you get personal for no reason. Is everything OK, buddy? You need to went some anger and frustration? I would recommend some physical activity - much better than arguing with strangers on the internet.
I like how even you write “entrepreneurship” in quotation marks and ad “so called”
That's because I view the neoliberal fetishization of "entrepreneurism" no differently than I view the garbage anti-vaxxers and flat-earthers buy into.
but than dismiss my point completely
Your "point" was treated in the appropriate manner - your "point" merely revolved around the choice the privileged has when it comes to employment. This makes your "point" utterly irrelevant to this discussion.
I disagree with this entire claim. Sex workers are notorious for "having a price" to do nearly anything. I would say they are more susceptible to doing disgusting shit for money. There's a reason why there's an ongoing joke about sex workers getting shit on during their trips to dubai.
Sex workers are notorious for “having a price” to do nearly anything.
And what do you think the rest of us do, eh Clyde? How many sex workers have to piss in bottles to make Jeff Bezos richer?
There's a reason we don't use the term "prostitute" any more - it's got something to do with the fact that understanding how capitalism works very quickly makes it real clear who the real "prostitutes" are...
I think sex workers are pressured to get into progressively more disgusting shit because that's what pays. The market is flooded at this point and the only thing you can do to stick out is either be famous or be willing to degrade yourself.
I'm expressing my opinion on a public forum. I hate how internet comments have become an eternal game of gotchas. I can be aware of a topic without participating in it.
I have an MSc from a top UK university, my dissertation topic was labour abuse and work-related harm for which I received a distinction. I'm no puritan, but genuine "sex work" (outside the internet) is overwhelmingly negative for the actual workers and very few enter the industry from a position of personal or economic empowerment. This is the case to a shocking degree, even where it's decriminalised. I'm not against it, per se, but it confuses me when people are strongly for it. So yeah, stay woke.
I think most people who've actually thought about it would say either "sensitivity to and awareness of the plight of marginalized people" or the same but with "oversensitivity", depending on which side of it you're on.