What is wrong with having "red light districts" in America

I just don't get it. Man wants to pay and woman wants to make a living. What is wrong with that. Isn't it legal in Nevada?

originally posted by: musicismagic
I just don't get it. Man wants to pay and woman wants to make a living. What is wrong with that. Isn't it legal in Nevada?

Christians, is my one word answer

originally posted by: musicismagic
I just don't get it. Man wants to pay and woman wants to make a living. What is wrong with that. Isn't it legal in Nevada?

Because America is a nation of perverts that act like prudes. We love our violence, but freak out at a nipple. We're a nation of people who get mad at schools for teaching sex ed, but are too ashamed to teach our kids themselves. We're a nation that's perfectly fine having their kids watch MMA and/or WWE, but get offended when people kiss in public.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is we're just a bunch of stupid arseholes. XD

a reply to: musicismagic

Out in California, there is an industry where both men and women are paid to have sex. The industry is built around filming the acts and selling it to other people.

a reply to: musicismagic
You do realize there are also male prostitutes. Right?

On topic: There's nothing wrong with having "red light districts". The stigma against prostitution is twofold. From the secular view, it's about disease control. A whole system would have to be put in place like other places in the world where it's legal.
From the religious view, it is seen as "sinful". Christianity, and it's ideology, still has a stranglehold on this country. We are only in the early stages of breaking free of it. In time, you could very well see legalized prostitution in many states.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: musicismagic
I just don't get it. Man wants to pay and woman wants to make a living. What is wrong with that. Isn't it legal in Nevada?

Christians, is my one word answer

I usually agree with you Jimmy...

But don't give "Christians" the persecution ammo...




It's actually due to taxes. IMO.

originally posted by: Necrobile

originally posted by: musicismagic
I just don't get it. Man wants to pay and woman wants to make a living. What is wrong with that. Isn't it legal in Nevada?

Because America is a nation of perverts that act like prudes. We love our violence, but freak out at a nipple. We're a nation of people who get mad at schools for teaching sex ed, but are too ashamed to teach our kids themselves. We're a nation that's perfectly fine having their kids watch MMA and/or WWE, but get offended when people kiss in public.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is we're just a bunch of stupid arseholes. XD

That was a good little sermon. Though I would change stupid to ignorant in the last line.

a reply to: Klassified

No, I think stupid fits the bill better. Ignorant implies that people just don't know any better. In my 36 years alive, I noticed that most people do know better, but still choose the other route.

For example, we're a society that teaches everyone from an early age to read, something that only people with privilege were able to do in the times of old. But, even though the majority know how to read, most choose not to. If you've ever worked in retail, you know what I mean.

It was being discussed on the news in Canada about a week or so ago. The fellow that owns the Bunny Ranch franchise is trying to start business up here. It adds an element of safety for the girls and for that reason alone it makes a lot of sense.

The profession is not going away, so we should be making it safe.

It seems that Amsterdam has found a way to guarantee medical safety, profitability and regulate it. So why not?

For me, no. I've never paid for it in my life, so I'm not gonna start...but I liken it to legalizing any and all drugs. You wanna drug yourself to death? Fine. Just tax the he'll out them. Prostitution too.

MS
Christian

a reply to: Klassified
Or how about if he uses "stupid" and "ignorant".

Edinburgh tried having "tolerance zones". The city council would designate a residential street in an down-and-out area a "tolerance zone" where pimps, prostitutes and johns wouldn't be arrested for soliciting for sex (naturally without ever gaining the consent of residents or even asking their permission).

The prostitutes wanted somewhere "residential" so there would be people around all the time for their safety. Residents absolutely did not want prostitutes on their street especially since women like students and mothers were the ones being constantly harassed by motorists.

The end game was that house prices would fall like a stone, property developers would buy up the homes, these would be converted into luxury flats, sold off, and the increased population density of professional workers would lead to an never-ending stream of complaints to the council. Then it was back to square one to find another street...

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: musicismagic
I just don't get it. Man wants to pay and woman wants to make a living. What is wrong with that. Isn't it legal in Nevada?

Christians, is my one word answer

+1

it offends the Christians, and they run things around here.

a reply to: stormcell
Doing that in a residential zone is just asking for failure. That doesn't even make sense that they would have tried that, other than to say that it would never work.

Tolerance zones would have to be in business districts

Red is pretty, but you can see better with white lights.

The biggest reason that prostitution is illegal in most parts of the U.S. is the fact that it can be a form of unreported/untraceable income and uncle sam is not having that.

You see a woman's body or a mans for that matter is the one asset that you have from birth and it is no secret that sex sells. There is no way to inventory how much product (in this case your own body) you have made profit on. So in theory a successful sex worker could in fact become a millionaire without ever having to report the income and we all know the gubment wants it's cut.

They will say public safety and all that jazz, "we are stopping the spread of disease" well most but not all ladies in that industry are usually very clean and very safe, at least the smart ones anyway.

People shall f#ck and whore around all day long, as long as this is done by free will and because of enjoyment for both sides, and NOT because of money, income, (modern) slavery, materialism or existencial issues.

Unfortunately 99% of it is defined by exactly the latter ones.

Now you may understand why these things can be forbidden. Of course the real cause behind it is the financial system we live in, but that doesn't make these things "normal".

I see no reason why it can't be legalized, regulated and taxed just like any other business. Do I want it next door to my house? I don't want any business next door to my house. Put it near other businesses/ retail establishments, and I have zero problem with it.

originally posted by: lordcomac

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: musicismagic
I just don't get it. Man wants to pay and woman wants to make a living. What is wrong with that. Isn't it legal in Nevada?

Christians, is my one word answer

+1

it offends the Christians, and they run things around here.

If Christians 'run things' around here, what happened to the Blue Laws?

Because how are you going to prove therefore tax the income?

a reply to: kaylaluv