• finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    34
    ·
    1 day ago

    I don’t think little of whores and I don’t think people against legalization in general do either.

    I think little of pimps who kidnap children and sell them. A business that increases when prostitution becomes legal.

    • kirbowo808@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I think you’re confusing with sex trafficking with sex work/prostitution, which are completely two different things mind you. Ones non consensual and had coercive control, whilst the other is consensual and has full body autonomy.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        Studies and research and numbers, measured many times over a hundred years and more all the time, shows that when legal prostitution is allowed then you also see a rise in the number of victims of kidnapping and being forced into sex work, victims of rape for profit. An increase of slavery and abuse of innocent children.

        Is this new statement clear enough for you to understand my words?

        The idea of legal prostitution is attractive, always will be as a flaw in our brains, but it simply is not worth the unintended consequences. And you should also be wary than many of its advocates are men of power who smell profits to be made.

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t think little of whores…

      Says the person who calls prostitutes by a derogatory name. 🙄

                • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  24 hours ago

                  both are slurs. One’s got far more heavy historical context of slavery and oppression, but both are words used to stigmatise and insult a certain group, and they have been reclaimed by various extents by said groups.

                  And for the record you casually using the word “whore” is probably more insulting than me comparing two words that are used to oppress groups.

            • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 day ago

              They already said it’s derogatory. It’s like if somebody called you on idiot. The denotation would be that your intelligence is lacking. The connotation would be that you’re a lesser person for it and cause issues for those around you. In the same way, whore and prostitute have to some denotation but different connotations with the former having the negative connotation. Is that simple enough for you to understand now?

                • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  No, it doesn’t make it ok because somebody else does it or that the blame should be on the party that did it first. That’s an argument a five year old might think is clever; nobody here thinks it is. You have an opportunity to learn here. Will you take it or will you continue to blame others for your poor behavior?

                  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    It does however highlight how the user and you don’t really care about the use of language and merely use it as an excuse to attack me because I don’t conform to your agenda on prostitution legality.

    • De_Narm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Does it though? There are plenty of countries with legal prostitution and I’ve never seen any statistics about illegal prostitution being on the rise there.

      It’s one of those claims both sides could make and actually believe in. There might even be data for both sides, given enough cherry-picking that is.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        It’s been matter of fact for over a decade LINK, they looked at large scale trends in 150 countries and they controlled for variables such as higher rates of finding criminals by examining the supplier countries as well as the countries that legalize prostitution and found increases across the board.

        Legal prostitution leads to increased human trafficking.

        If a side claims that science is wrong then it’s not the side you want to be on.

        • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I already mentioned the problems with your source is another comment, but now I’m going to address the “science”.

          First up, science doesn’t run on certainty. If you had actually read the paper, you might have noticed this sentence:

          Therefore, the true number of human trafficking victims is unknown (Belser, de Cock & Mehran, 2005).

          Science also does not take place in a vacuum; it is political. The statistics gathered rely on political entities that have agendas. The statistics are imperfect. They even mention this:

          The main limitation of the UNODC data however is that reporting will arguably depend on the quality of institutions, judicial and police effectiveness, in particular, but also on how aware the international community is about trafficking problems in a particular country.

          Until you learn to read things not to prove a point, but to understand them, get science’s name out of your mouth.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            1 day ago

            You “mentioned the problems” by saying the clear increase in human trafficking was something you could live with.

            • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              18
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              No, I did not. I know your reading comprehension isn’t the best, but come on, or my comments are there to go back to and reread. You can even quote me. Go ahead. Tell me where I addressed trafficking and not your misinterpretation of the source.

        • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Ffs, read more than the abstract.

          On average, countries where prostitution is legal experience larger reported human trafficking inflows.

          That “on average” is doing a lot of heavy lifting. I know it’s really hard to read all the way to the end, but that’s where the pictures are. The regression chosen is linear, but the relationship looks to be anything but. Some countries have to substitution effect overshadow the scale effect, some see the opposite. Reducing it to legalized prostitution increases trafficking is facile at best.

          graph from cited source showing trafficking vs prostitution