What is worse? Prostitution or using a prostitute?

What is worse?

Having a mindset that thinks about prostitutes...

 

Inherently, it is just a financial transaction, and I consider those to the morally neutral. Its only been illegal for a hundred years, and was illegalized during the same temperance wave that got prohibition through. Much like drug enforcement, it seems to be enforced very much along race and class lines. For example, much of the literature from 1910 refers to it as "white slavery."

While there are no doubt brothels staffed with human trafficking victims, or desperate women making money with abusive partners, by legalizing prostitution, we could open up life lines for these women. Lifelines we take for granted, like calling the police on dangerous johns, or going to the hospital if they have an STD.

My point is neither is morally reprehensible.

 

Honestly speaking, I don't see prostitution as something that is wrong morally. Making it illegal doesn't really do anything except make the activity more dangerous (STD ridden, murders, rapes *if possible, idk*). There's no real benefit for it being illegal.

Getting back to the morality of it.. I don't see it as immoral, really. I wouldn't do it, bc I wouldn't pay for it. But if 2 adults wanted to partake but there's an exchange of goods/services, then so be it. it's not really a big deal, any different than a job.

The problem (if there is one) is the abusive pimp. If I was a prostitute I would be an individual contractor. Maybe set up something like a gym membership. $20 for the first one. Every time after up until the 6th time is $25. Then every time after that $30. 10th time + goes to $25. See, you draw them in with a cheap price, 10+ decrease it for their loyalty. No protection increases it $15. Tips ARE encouraged.

Hell, even set up a rewards system like Blazing Rewards at Buffalo Wild Wings. Make some real cash.

 

there both wrong
but its common that prostitutes were molested and abused

 

In the case of trafficking it's very immoral. If it's consensual then I don't view it as morally wrong. At that point it's more of a business transaction.

 

I see prostitution as an immoral practice built solely on lust and the objectifying of a person. I don’t see a huge difference between prostitution and porn, so both are just as bad imo.

 

From a Christian stand point either would be wrong for me. From a secular standpoint, I don't have a problem with either and I don't feel it should be outlawed.

 

Both. No one who understands their own worth desires to grow up to be used by those who likewise do not understand their own worth or the worth of others.

 

The prostitues are worse than their clients because they’re the ones having sex and performing other lewd acts on dozens of different people every single day. They not only put their health in danger, but their physical safety and well being. Engaging in such risky behavior definitely speaks to the character of the person doing that “job.” They obviously don’t respect themselves and are probably doing it just so they can fund their drug habit.

 

I think it depends on the business model of the prostitute on weither there is a real problem. Here's best to worse in descending order of riskiness

Escorts/Call-Girls: You dial up a phone number, and put $200 in an envelope on the counter, an attractive woman shows up at your door. She has a hired goon waiting in the car if you rough her up at all. Police don't even look twice at these women, and they rarely get charged with any crime. They also tend to be educated, high paid, and drug/STI free.

Brothel Girls: You walk up to a stripmall, see any "massage" place with a very Asian sounding name, and it is probably a front for prostitution. The good thing about these is that they are at least contained, so LE tends to leave them alone. Some cities have designated areas for these businesses to operate. These are where the trafficked women could end up because of the illegality of prostitution. Most women are still generally drug/STI free.

Streetwalker: These are the drug addled women that walk the streets for money, and are constantly harassed by police. They are detrimental to any area they operate in, and usually are handing all of their money to a pimp that laid some real good game, or got them addicted. These women also may not use protection 100% of the time so there is a higher risk of STI infection.

For the first 2 examples, I would say they are low impact/low risk activities, and are a simple business transaction. The streetwalkers/Johns that frequent them are the real problem.

 

I'm not sure if I agree with the idea that johns aren't shamed as much as prostitutes are. I can't really say I've seen that evidenced in the way people treat johns vs. prostitutes, but maybe we just have different circles.

 

That may be true in Australia, but in the US, a john is the common term police officers use for any man who was with a prostitute. It's not derogatory in any way. It's just what they're called.

 

i cant believe it that people are so truthful here.