Ag with kids said:
AGC said:
Ag with kids said:
AGC said:
Ag with kids said:
Kvetch said:
Ag with kids said:
Kvetch said:
Ag with kids said:
Ol_Ag_02 said:
CanyonLakeAgbu said:
I should have deleted my bookmark from this thread a day ago. It has......devolved.
I've been banned for way less.
Yeah...
And that poster DID call my daughters hookers.
But, in the immortal words of Dalton...I chose to Be Nice.
Because they aren't.
Just calling out what you're supporting. Sorry the hypothetical makes me a meanie while y'all sit here and shill for the abuse and degradation of real women out of some false interpretation of liberty.
Maybe you should reevaluate your positions if the logical conclusions feel gross to you. Or are you just the NIMBY types that are fine with others daughters being victimized?
A real joke that I should catch a ban when y'all sit here and simp for pimps.
No. You called my daughters hookers.
It DOES let me know what kind of a person you are, so that's a plus.
I haven't changed my position on the subject though, so your insults and theocratic solutions haven't done anything other than that.
I think prostitution is bad. But, I don't think it should be illegal. I disagree with lots of things that I think the government shouldn't be involved in.
You're a big government person, though, so you don't get that...
Ah, yes. So big government for a polity to be able to regulate themselves in a manner that doesn't reduce women to sex objects. How evil and tyrannical.
Think of me what you want. My point stands that you're perfectly willing to allow someone's daughter to wind up as a hooker as long as you don't have to see it. You're the one that doesn't have the moral fortitude to stand up and say this is wrong and we shouldn't allow it for the good of the women themselves and society writ large. All under some misconceived, pie in the sky, libertarian notion that people have the right to degrade themselves in any manner possible. As if prostitution has no externalities beyond the sex act itself.
Pretty incredible given your situation. Spare me the indignation.
Whatever. You're a big government authoritarian and a theocrat along the lines of the ayatollahs - with slightly different rules adjusted to your book as opposed to their book.
Can you give us a longer list of the things that you want to control for us besides just having sex in a way that displeases you?
Lost in this hysterical response is the fact that Iranians sought refuge here in the states when the ayatollahs took over, where the laws were more similar to kvetch's ideas than your proposals. Perhaps your complaint of big government authoritarianism is a red herring and the real issue is your desire for complete self governance and autonomy at the individual level subject to no outside restraint?
Interesting how you try to make freedom sound like a bad thing.
But, then authoritarians don't like people being allowed to think for themselves when the authoritarians are perfectly willing to force you to think their way...
Maybe, just maybe, there's more than two extremes and outlawing prostitution isn't a bad thing that's only associated with those herp derp authoritarians you keep obsessing over. Not everyone to the right of you is literally hitler.
Spend some time understanding the reality of trafficking and why women wind up in it. If you have as many daughters as you claim have some pointed discussions with them and ask them how they would feel about spending 10 hours a day seeing dozens of Johns who pay for violence and kink for just a single week and if they'd truly feel empowered. We can talk high end escorts all we want but it's a lot like onlyfans - few women truly have the power you and others associate with this freedom, or the personality disorders to profit off of it.
I didn't say I supported trafficking. Don't conflate the two. Trafficking is bad.
I said I think prostitution should be legal. I did NOT say I think trafficking of humans should be legal. Notice how those are two different things?
Some people who are trafficked are prostitutes.
Some people who are prostitutes are trafficked.
If you can't understand the difference then it would be impossible to have an intelligent conversation about this subject.
Because I'm not discussing those people.
You don't know the legal definitions involved here at all. Or the infrastructure behind prostitution even in legalized countries. Take Spain for instance: organized crime talks women in Brazil, Central America, and Eastern Europe into coming over where it's legal. There's still trafficking! It's also not safe; lots of people don't want basic missionary stuff. Most Johns watch porn going to where they buy and they like to act it out. That means violence or the threat of it, including withholding payment if they don't get what they want (same way porn producers work). Protection from Joh's isn't free ever.
But let's take it a step further: what kind of women do you think wind up in this profession? Ones from families where the parents are still together? Who have loving fathers watching over them? And supportive communities? No, it's poverty driven because anyone that can afford to avoid it does because that life sucks. That's what's so disgusting about ideas like yours: it's exploitation. And the women in the life are using drugs, alcohol, and other methods to deal with the trauma of being used for sex day in and day out. There is no, 'well at leas they get paid': they spend it all on drugs to cope with the life.
The problem is that you don't know the people you're discussing. They're abstract concepts like a trolley problem.
That's why we can't have an intelligent discussion.
