大象传媒

on what grounds should it be 'legal'. Sounds like a feudal relic from the Norman conquest?

if by being legal it encourages sex slavery then its our duty to ban it?

Outlawing payment for sex is totally the wrong way to go about reducing the problem of sex slavery and abuse generally.

By far the best way is to make prostitution legal, but then to regulate it and actively police it. ie Clamp down very hard on those who don't register as brothels, and pay their taxes like everyone else.

Maybe even individual sex workers could be registered too in some way (like registered therapists of other kinds).

In this way, police and other authorities can target the real criminals which are those who force others to act against their will.

Regulation would also enable better health and safety checks to be carried out, to the benefit of all.

On the flip side, it's disgraceful that politicians are even thinking about passing new laws to stop consenting adults from spending their time and money how they like and when they like, provided there is no harm caused to others in the process.

Surely, if a man or woman chooses to pay someone else for sexual services, and the other person is not under age and is free to say no, then in principle what business is it of other people to get involved and try to stop it?

How on earth can Barrie Singleton
Post 2. say that sex is animal? It is Human. It is the gift that is for marriage, which is God given.

There is either something cerebrally wrong with him or he has a strange idea of God and life

Making it even more illegal is not going to make it go away, people will continue to pay for sex. There's a good reason that it is "the oldest profession". It's time to legalise it and legislate to protect both workers and clients. Prostitution is often a last resort of the poor - let's focus on getting people out of poverty, not make life even harsher for them.

Another stupid law that will be virtually impossible to enforce from this Government who seem to think that the answer to every problem is to legislate.

As prostitution is legal, paying for sex must also be legal. To make payment for sex illegal you must also make prostitution illegal.

Many have tried that before and failed miserably.

Sex trafficking is a problem all on its own having only a passing connection with prostitution and paying for sex. Silly idea.

Oh no - not another futile piece of legislation, thank you.
Has nothing been learned from the already futile "banning" of drugs and guns?
Gangsters love it.
One way or another, everyone else suffers.
Please let us return to the principle that people who do bad things to other people are caught and punished.
Hard work and resources please, not more legislation.

As prostitution is one of the oldest occupations, and is not always something a women is forced into, (many see it as a good way to earn money).
It is a question of what constitutes prostitution.
Most of us have seen married women who use sex with their husbands to get what they want, as in, ('I'll let him have a bit and get him to buy that dress etc).
Is this classed as prostitution?

I personally had a friend who's wife charged him a fiver every time.
What would this be classed as?

after making sex illegal maybe the next thing is to tax the legal one.
isnt alcohol taxed legally
isnt drug taxed legally

would we prefer to have rapists and sex abusers incarserated for life at the expense of taxpayers...or let the oldest profession continue...
as the overspill for maniacs...
Hookers usually choose their clients even in the worst managed brothel
why sometimes even more selective than some "respectable" individuals. Sex by two consenting adults regardless of their circumstances has absolutely nothing to do with politics....so may I suggest that politicians concentrate on making laws that are "neccessary" and not "popular".
May I suggest that consultation with some of our MP s who frequent these places before any decision to ban/tax/or make laws that will take more to enforce than taxpayers will accept.
I think comment 2 was spot on
cerebral money concept may be problem.!!
It seems every decision coming from people who we have elected to govern
us is either stupid/silly or an absolute waste of time.Come on 大象传媒
dont waste taxpayers money !!
R.I.P.

Harriet's plans would encourage sex traffickers :
a) the police would be swamped prosecuting 'legitimate' WGs.
b) this would cause a shortage in supply
increasing the demand for trafficked WGs
c) Traffickers already face 4-7yrs jail making prostitution illegal doesn't make any difference to them.

Harriet recently had a luxury lunch with Newspaper editors to discuss removing adverts for prostitution(These adverts are for the top earners 拢2000+ per week.
She doesn't seem so keen to get her hands dirty helping those on the street suffering drug & alcohol addiction and violence on a daily basis.
She has sent her cronies on an all expenses paid trip to Sweden to find out some facts.......meanwhile she gets back to her business lunches.

Ms Harman's prohibition suggestion sounds like a recipe for driving women into the hands of gangsters, and unsuspecting males into the hands of blackmailers.
Come down heavily on traffickers - but let consenting adults do as they like.

What about those people who are not able to get sex in any other way, mainly because of the bad attitude that society has towards disabled people?

I'm sure it's not just disabled people who also have problems.

Sex between consenting adults is, ceteris paribus, legal; giving people money is legal; criminalising the coincidence of the two, will, I suspect, at most just make the event resemble enjo k艒sai (loosely, 'compensated dating' - it's a euphemism) a little more than presently.

I recall the claim that 40,000 women would be sex-trafficked for the benefit of the fans going to the last World Cup.

At the end of the day, the authorities in Germany found evidence that 5 women had been 'trafficked'.

A new book by social researcher Laura Mar铆a Agustin exposes the myth behind sex trafficking.

Sex-trafficking happens. But the vast majority of women choose to work abroad in the sex trade. They are not trafficked.

Why not go whole hog and stone all adulterers? Come on do, is this Great Britain or Khomeini's Iran? I'm too old to bother now, but for goodness sake think; the world's oldest profession with no customers except ex-jailbirds who fancy going back there? That is what you are heading for.

A recent internet cartoon but relevant.

A prostitute talking to New York cops,I sell condoms with a free demonstration.

How do your lawyers get round that?

Harriet Harman must be living in a feminist dreamland if she thinks that such a law would be effective. No woman should be forced by illegal means into the sex trade, but if a woman were to freely choose to make a living in such a way, there should be no reason for the government to get involved. Even if feminists were to ban all men, we would still have gay, bisexual and straight women willing to pay for sex.

I'm a Glaswegian who is exciled in Edinburgh...

Things in Glasgow are very strict indeed, and I think they only allow the streetwalkers to exist, but not whorehouses or topless bars...

Edinburgh on the other hand has many brothels and heaps of lap dancing clubs scattered throughout the city.

I know one person locally who uses the services of these establishments. He told me of one lady he knows, who flies in fortnightly from Bratislava, turns over a few quid and then heads home.

Licensing the brothels, would make more sense. I think a few Edinburgh mothers trapped in relative poverty with children to bring up work in this industry. And I expect there will be some eastern european girls working in Edinburgh too. How do they all feel about this?

Margo MacDonald the only independent MSP has been fighting a corner for Scottish prostitutes and their rights for several years, it might be worth talking to her tonight...

Their are Edinburgh woman who probably see this as a well paid job and are reasonably happy to enjoy a lucrative tax free wage...

We really must get rid of our English fear of sex. Government run brothels where the girls have regular access to medical treatment, jabs against VD and are protected from pimps and criminals is the simple answer. You will never get rid of prostitution, its been around for a few thousand years, so control and regulate it. ......... and stop being so 'naice' and middle class about it.

As Martin says, this is the wrong way to go about the problem. Prostitute groups have consistantly advocated legalising/regulating prostitution as this is the way to make it safer, for both those who participate and those who have such people operating in their neighbourhoods.

Prostitution will go on without legalising it, but under the proposals, it will still go ahead, but in even more dangerous locations for prostitutes, as driven by fear of arrest, those who still seek prostitutes will look for more secluded places, and thus make those selling sex far more vulnerable.

Legalising does not support or endorse the practice, but acknowledges that it is something that will go on in the current state of society and must be made as safe and secure as possible. If the Government wanted to really act, it would make society as fair and equal as possible, and eliminate the huge inequalities in wealth. Then people wouldn't be driven into prostitution and there would be nothing to legalise or make illegal. Nobody would choose to go into prostitution if they were financially at ease, but under the current Government, with ill-informed laws such as these, this is hardly likely.

The pantomime season is in full swing. The theme of many is either; a rich man trying to find a woman who will not want him for his money - or a poor man hoping to get-rich-quick in order to get a beautiful wife.

Of course there's also the poor girl who gets a surprise when her true love turns out to be very much richer than the man whom her parents wanted her to marry.

I'm sure there's a moral in there somewhere.

(paraphrased) George Bernard Shaw asked his married dinner companion if she would go to bed with a young man for ten thousand pounds - she said "possibly". When he asked if she would go to bed with an old man for ten shillings she said "NO! - do you think I'm a prostitute?". To which the riposte was "Madam - we are merely establishing your price".

Emma said "How can...say that sex is animal? It is Human. It is the gift that is for marriage, which is God given."

Deuteronomy 28:4 "Blessed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy ground, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep"

John Paul II: "If you cannot remain celibate, better then that you must then be married. It is better, My child and My children, to be married than to burn in hell."

Banning payment for sex is nuts. Prostitution has existed for all time and all attempts to ban it will fail. I agree no-one should be forced into the sex industry. Girls become prostitutes for all kinds of reasons. Do not assume they always do it against their will. Some enjoy the job, others do it because nothing else pays that well. It should be legal, based on the German model.

Of course it may be co-incidental that the instigator of this ludicrous idea is a woman. But I doubt it.

Personally, I don't pay for sex. I get mine for free or I don't have any.

But if someone wants to pay for it, then that's fine by me.

Exploitation of women, girls, boys - whoever - is tragic and shouldn't happen. No-one should be coerced into sex. The trade in sex workers is a nasty business and steps should be taken to curb this. At least make sure the pimps are paying their fair share of tax. Perhaps this is what that silly woman was really on about.

A properly run sex trade benefits everyone.

The trouble is that Puritanism is alive and kicking in England. Hence that ridiculous earlier post about it being god given.

If someone wants to pay for sex the only issue that matters is - how much?

Bernard Shaw - allegedly - approached once a beautiful young lady at a party and asked her 'Would you sleep with me if I gave you one million pounds?' She looked at him and said 'Yes, I think I would!' He then asked 'Would you sleep with me if I gave you five pounds?' 'What?', she asked angrily, 'do you think that I'm a prostitute?' 'That we have already established', he retorted calmly, 'now we're only quibbling about the price!'
This is an idiotic idea, which could not possibly work. Where do you draw the line? If you criminalise payment for sex with petty cash, how about an expensive gift? A diamond necklace, a luxury cruise. perhaps a flat.. Come to think of it, even living with a temporarily unemployed partner, who, for a period, cannot contribute to the running costs.. Isn't, after all, according to some sources, marriage a form of prostitution?
Where does it begin, and where would it end?

Prostitution has always existed and always will, get used to it, accept it,and legalise it to protect the victims, both provider and user

post 24: chris jk

That may be a catholic teaching. Hell is not a bible teaching

low wages is modern slavery
there is nothing wrong with two consenting aldults paying for a service , like all services need will be met with demant and the prices will fluctuate when goods are scarce both men and women can be prostitues ,religion is bad as you
p(r)ay and get nothing but guilt in return , humains are strange ....

This is all just smoke and mirrors - it has more in common with an episode of 'The Thick Of It' than proper government.

"Quick, we need a new policy to grab some headlines away from our endless cock-ups! Ummm... Banning prostitution; that'll do it."
"But minister, with respect, it won't work. All it'll do is drive the sex industry further underground, create a massive boost to the organised crime and criminalise a huge swathe of otherwise law-abiding citizens, male and female..."
"Who cares? We're not actually going to do it; we just need to grab the news cycle..."

Truly a dismal commentary on where this government finds itself.

HAVE ATTITUDES TO SEX, DRINKING, DEBT, HONESTY......?

Harriet Hareperson, like her chum Patricia Hewitt was a Civil Liberties/Human Rights 'unwitting' Trotskyite whose job seemed to have been to nobble whatever was left of the 'Stalinist' welfare state (all to be done in the best possible taste of course):

If one creates a free-market which indulges hedonism, one reaps the whirlwind (as Germany did back in the 1930s). Is this what Harriet, Patricia and friends are trying to do, i.e. make things SO bad that the electorate finally cries out for Old 'Stalinist' Labour to restore some order and human dignity (cf. the 'climate change' thread for a more global appeal)?

HAVE ATTITUDES TO SEX, DRINKING, DEBT, HONESTY (AD ANUSEAM)......?

Attitudes are really behaviours. propositinal attitudes are not stuff we can make sense of rationally, (it's a logic al thing - see Quine).

Harriet Hareperson, like her chum Patricia Hewitt was a Civil Liberties/Human Rights 'unwitting' Trotskyite whose job seemed to have been to nobble whatever was left of the 'Stalinist' welfare state (all to be done in the best possible taste of course):

If one creates a free-market which indulges hedonism, one reaps the whirlwind (as Germany did back in the 1930s). Is this what Harriet, Patricia and friends are trying to do, i.e. make things SO bad that the electorate finally cries out for Old 'Stalinist' Labour to restore some order and human dignity (cf. the 'climate change' thread for a more global appeal)?

We need to repeal all of the Human Rights/Equalities legislation before it's too late.

This is the BIGGEST LOAD of CRAP from our TOTALLY USELESS Government to date !

Tens of Thousands of Jaded and Sexless Marriages are being held together, thanks to the SPLENDID WORK done by the Nation's "Working Girls". Men who otherwise might be tempted to ABANDON their wives and families ...... with DISASTEROUS RESULTS ..... as they search for a new and more satisfying partner, are able to honour their responsibilities, thanks to being able to PURCHASE sexual release, when they need it.

Further more, by providing an outlet for the NATURAL SEXUAL DESIRES of any male who is unable to satisfy those desires via a wife or girlfriend, our Working Girls are helping to keep down Sex Crime, as attacks on girls and women would undoubtedly increase if frustrated men were NOT able to purchase sex when they needed it.

Finally, many girls who live in areas where there are few alternative employment prospects, many of whom have children, or aged, or infirm parents to support, or are students struggling to meet the cost of education and living away from home, are able to obtain GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT thanks to our Sex Industry.

Apart from London, where Endless, Excessive Government Investment has created a "Jobs Paradise" where there are more vacancies than the local population can support ...... the rest of the UK's Polulation has to try to survive in an "Employment Wilderness" where even the few jobs that do exist, are very poorly paid.

If our STUPID and INCOMPETENT Government was to truly Outlaw the Sex Industry, they would cause a MASSIVE INCREASE in UNEMPLOYMENT throughout the Regions, thus INCREASING the BURDEN on our Benefits System, they would HARM the Prospects and Health of MANY CHILDREN currently supported by their single "Working Girl" parents ....... and they would also DEPRIVE the TREASURY of a VAST CHUNK of its INCOME !

What our INCOMPETENT and SECRETIVE Government doesn't make Public Knowledge is just how HYPOCRITICAL it is as well! For while it mouths off about our "Illegal" Sex Industry and how it should be shut down completely, The Revenue & Customs people regularly inspect the accounts of our so called "Illegal Massage Parlours" and and extract TAX and VAT from them !

The only situation I can think of that could be EVEN MORE STUPID than this ..... would be if BURGLARS, ROBBERS, DRUG PEDDLERS, The TIADS, The MAFIA, and all our other "Practitioners of Illegal Activities" were also to required to submit accounts and PAY TAX on the proceeds of their activities too !

We currently have a Government that happily BREAKS British, International, and Human Rights LAW every day of the year.

What right have BRITAIN'S BIGGEST CRIMINALS (that's the bunch of Low Life that we call "Government") got to declare that other people, who provide a FAR MORE VALUABLE SERVICE TO SOCIETY THAN THEY DO, be classed as criminals, along with their clients ?

I work as an independent escort. I enjoy my work, meet many very nice, interesting men, including men involved in politics. I see only who I 'choose' to see.

I am educated to university level, and I do not in any way feel exploited.

The problem here is that Labour is looking to do something that they deem 'populist' to gain the conservative vote again.

As in many industries, and this is no different, there are those who are exploited and always will be unfortunately. We have seen many examples of this with European boarders coming down in many industries.

I would like to add that they cannot stop a man paying for a girls 'time'. It is her 'time' that clients pay for in the world of independent escorts. What they choose to do in that time is their affair, between 2 consenting adults.

Also, I have never understood why it is considered OK for a man to buy dinner, clothes, drinks, give money etc. to a lady who he hopes/wishes to have sex with at the end of the night?

Sex is not often about love, even in the best of marriages. Should wives charge? Or husbands for that matter?

Independent working girls just offer an honest exchange and this way we all know where we stand.

The senseable, mature course of action would be to licence independent escorts and parlours. This way the girls have the law behind them, are protected and the tax man would also be happy

This is a joke. A government which is obsessed by corrupting our youth and indeed the population with its amoral and unethical ideas dares to send one of its Blair Babes to bleat about the oldest profession! Young girls can go off and have abortions without their parents' knowledge. Sexually transmitted disease is rampant and the government's response is to advocate innoculations before puberty for small girls. It is politically incorrect to condemn immoral behaviour, and our TV screens are filled with prancing "nancy boys" using obscene language. No doubt this last sentence is politically incorrect, but so be it. Maybe this government which can never be consistent, will next decide to support legal brothels and institute a NVQ qualification in Health & Safety for sex workers.

I read Adrienne if I remember to log on and as I proceed begin by thinking that I'm in agreement and then realise she is way above me intellectually. It is some kind of political shorthand which I half recognise from some period of the 1970's - but never understood then, since one needed an encyclopedic memory of the history of the subject at hand.

An elitists club of intellectual snobbery excluding the plebeian populace they superficially seem to speak on behalf of. What they speak, or write is a kind of vanity and conceit; since I doubt many know exactly what they have said. Yet they presume to communicate.

As to the subject at hand, may I cut to the chase. Harriet, her husband the exUnion official, much of the ex-trotskyist members now nLabour Party MP's, members of the half blind Brown Government have become tiresome, dull, predictable, and accident prone. If one agreed with them emotionally, or theoretically, it is laughable to imagine one might ban the 'World's Oldest Profession." Some twenty years ago, to my chagrin, (for the circumstances not the service,) I had occasion to visit the ladies of the night. Ok! it was a physical release but one must not confuse sex with 'love'; love cannot be bought. Though many who visit are really seeking the latter. This is socially sad - but hardly deserves a criminal record.

If HM Government seek to reduce sexploitation, crime
et al they need look to increasing the likelihood that the perpetators, 'one', will be caught. If one considers the last twelve months and the murders of young men all over the Country, this is an enormous indictment of the Home Office, The Judiciary, the new Dept of Justice and the Police; and for that matter those who know and do nothing.

What is this deluded black and white idea that people have that paying for sex encourages sex slavery. Are they really that naive?. There are many countries around the world (NOT just Holland) where prostitution is legal, and has been for years. I have to say at this point I am happily married and have never paid for sex myself so I am not biased in my argument, but see NO problem with prostitution as a concept. If it was made legal to pay for sex, then surely it could become an organised industry, with worker protection, workers contributing (a fortune) to the taxation system, people not being criminalised for wanting some fun. In addition to this, it would take prostitutes off the streets, mean that those doing it could be regulated and brought out of the underworld. What about those who crave sexual contact and simply cannot meet the right person?. Elderly people?, Someone who is perhaps heavily physically disabled?. Someone who simply has no social skills or doesn't want to take home some drunken letch from a club. Has anyone ever pondered over the possibility that maybe there would be a lot more cases of rape if there was not a way that certain individuals could obtain sex by paying for it?. How is prostitution any different from going to a club, buying a person you have just met drinks all night and perhaps buying them something to eat, and then having a one night stand at the end of it. The only difference is that drinks and food get exchanged instead of money.

I put it to everyone here that the only people who could possibly complain about prostitution are those who cannot see beyond their own nose.