Should Prostitution Be Legal?

According to Slate Magazine’s article, “It’s Time for Legal Prostitution,” written by Reihan Salam, the world’s oldest profession is not going anywhere. In particular, Salam writes, “for those who believe that sex work should be illegal, it’s more important to protect society from sex workers—on the grounds that they spread moral turpitude—or to protect sex workers from their clients—on the grounds that those clients are dangerous.” In other words, Salam claims, those who oppose prostitution should consider the more important aspect, the safety of sex workers, especially since the majority of clients are violent towards prostitutes. According to The Daily Beast’s article, “Why It’s Time to Legalize Prostitution,” written by Cathy Reisenwitz, evidence proves legalization would protect sex workers, reduce violence, and reduce sex trafficking. Reisenwitz argues, “As with the drug trade, much of the violence associated with sex work is exacerbated by its illegality. Violent people are more likely to prey on sex workers, confident that they won’t be reported to police. This leaves workers dependent on pimps and madams for protection, which often leads to more violence. And then there’s abuse from police.” Further, “Some estimate that police actually abuse American sex workers more often than clients do.” Reisenwitz mentions the World Health Organization, along with a recent report, “Violence against sex workers is associated with inconsistent condom use or lack of condom use, and with increased risk of STI and HIV infection. Violence also prevents sex workers from accessing HIV information and services.” This reveals that the WHO recommends that countries decriminalize sex work, rather than legalize it. In other terms, the WHO suggests “criminals” be at fault rather than the prostitutes, especially since because the prostitutes are the victims themselves.

According to Donna M. Hughes’s article, “Legalizing Prostitution Will Not Stop The Harm,” “Prostitution is consuming thousands of girls and women and reaping enormous profits for organized crime in post-communist countries. In addition, each year, several hundred thousand women are trafficked from Eastern European countries for prostitution in sex industry centers all over the world. The practices are extremely oppressive and incompatible with universal standards of human rights. The sex trade is a form of contemporary slavery and all indications predict its growth and expansion into the 21st century.” Hughes further argues, “Women’s compliance to multiple unwanted sexual acts results in trauma to the mind and body. Survivors of prostitution often report that each act of prostitution felt like a rape. In order to endure the multiple invasions of the body women use drugs and alcohol to numb the assaults to their dignity and bodily integrity. Eventually, the woman’s physical and emotional health is destroyed.” Specifically, Hughes argues, prostitution should remain illegal and be banned for good because it negatively affects women’s health physically, mentally, and emotionally, which is why they turn to drugs and alcohol often. According to the Huffington Post Canada’s article, “Why I’m Against Legalizing Prostitution,” written by Andrea Mrozek, “Our poisonous drink includes the reality that there is little stigma around sex of any and all kinds–whether purchased or not. Our culture today believes that saving sex for the safer confines of marriage is laughable–as ridiculous as it is quaint. Add to this the pernicious and pervasive presence of pornography, lurking literally one click away in your living room.” Further, Mrozek argues, “Not enterprising entrepreneurs, that’s for sure. Not whole and happy women. The women, who prostitute themselves, as all but the most ideological know, are more likely to have been abused, sexually and physically. They are more likely to be addicted to drugs and alcohol.” In particular, Mrozek reveals the fact about the modern world, in which men and women, today, view saving sex until marriage as a joke, and that premarital sex, prostitution, and pornography are all the “culprits” to blame for. Further, and as mentioned previously, the line of work destroys women’s health physically, emotionally, and mentally, and that they are not savvy entrepreneurs due to their low-self esteem and “poor health.”

The proponents argue and reveal that legalizing prostitution will protect sex workers, reduce violence, and reduce sex trafficking. More importantly, it’ll also protect sex workers from violent clients, rape, and any sort of sexual abuse, including sexual assault. In particular, Reihan Salam revealed, “for those who believe that sex work should be illegal, it’s more important to protect society from sex workers—on the grounds that they spread moral turpitude—or to protect sex workers from their clients—on the grounds that those clients are dangerous,” meaning the safety of sex workers is what matters most, that it is up to women if they want to pursue this line of work, and that there should be no room to judge. In other words, it is not fair for women to be judged. The other proponent, Cathy Reisenwitz, argues, “As with the drug trade, much of the violence associated with sex work is exacerbated by its illegality. Violent people are more likely to prey on sex workers, confident that they won’t be reported to police. This leaves workers dependent on pimps and madams for protection, which often leads to more violence. And then there’s abuse from police.” However, she mentions the WHO because the organization recommends decriminalization rather than legalization. The WHO reveals and suggests “criminals” be at fault rather than the prostitutes, especially since because the prostitutes are the victims themselves, which, in turn, conveys the fact that legalization will protect sex workers, reduce violence, and reduce sex trafficking.

The opponents argue and reveal the reasons why prostitution should remain illegal, and that is because it negatively affects women’s health physically, mentally, and emotionally, the women’s “depression” leads to excessive use of drugs and alcohol, low self-esteem, and face the negativity surrounding the social stigma behind prostitution. These reasons reveal Donna M. Hughes’s argument, “Women’s compliance to multiple unwanted sexual acts results in trauma to the mind and body. Survivors of prostitution often report that each act of prostitution felt like a rape. In order to endure the multiple invasions of the body women use drugs and alcohol to numb the assaults to their dignity and bodily integrity. Eventually, the woman’s physical and emotional health is destroyed.” The other opponent, Andrea Mrozek, argues and reveals the fact about the modern world, in which men and women, today, view saving sex until marriage as a joke, and that premarital sex, prostitution, and pornography are all the “culprits” to blame for. And, Mrozek seems to reveal how prostitution is a cause of cheating and adultery, especially since married men and men in relationships want to be “hitting that.” Mrozek argues a key point though, “Our poisonous drink includes the reality that there is little stigma around sex of any and all kinds–whether purchased or not. Our culture today believes that saving sex for the safer confines of marriage is laughable–as ridiculous as it is quaint. Add to this the pernicious and pervasive presence of pornography, lurking literally one click away in your living room.” Specifically, the key point is…sex is everywhere!

In conclusion, I agree with Side B. On the other hand, though, I agree with one part in Side A, and that is that prostitutes should not be judged or blamed, especially if they are the victims because the majority of clients are, or can be violent and abusive. However, the reason I agree more with Side B because prostitution does negatively affect women’s health mentally, physically, and emotionally, the women’s “depression” leads to excessive use of drugs and alcohol, low self-esteem, and face the negativity surrounding the social stigma behind prostitution. This reveals how highly unfair that is for women because they are glorified as submissive sex objects. It also is not fair if clients get away with it, meaning if they attempt or commit violence, assault, and rape. Society may protect individuals from sex workers, but it is not doing an exceptional or decent job at protecting sex workers from criminals or disrespectful clients. That is something that should be addressed, so that these women do not go through life this like, especially since the negativities associated with prostitution is not what they deserve, and they, especially, do not deserve to be treated in this manner.

 

 

 

BDSM…Normal, Unique, Sickening?

I would not prefer to do BDSM because, from my personal experience, I never really felt pleasure coming out of pain. However, to some, BDSM is considered a unique method of sexual expression, and, to some, it is considered sexual abuse. It may be considered sexual abuse if one of the parties does not favor it, and, therefore, views it as being violent. It may mean more than just being chains and whips, and maybe power, privilege, and gender equality. If two people want to perform BDSM together, the main guiding principles are meant to be safety, hurt but not cause harm, no self-destruction, have full consent, and never be under the influence of any form of substance. In conclusion, these principles reveal how BDSM tends to be misunderstood by society, especially since because society rarely realizes that two people may be comfortable with performing BDSM. Therefore, BDSM is a healthy form of sexual expression. Also, many would be suprised knowing which kind of people do it. In particular, according to the National Coalition of Sexual Freedom, “You do not have to be afraid of people who engage in SM. SM players are doctors, lawyers, teachers, construction workers, secretaries, and everything else you can imagine.” Since sadomasochism is consented between adults, it is not criminal behavior. Sadomasochism is not abuse if trust, honesty, and COMMUNICATION are exchanged between two consenting adults. Finally, Sadomasochism is not non-consensual. Why? Because one does not consent to be emotionally damaged, physically abused, or mentally abused.

Dyrek, P. (2011, November 10). Workshop uncovers healthy side of sexual expression, BDSM. Retrieved March 10, 2015, from http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/thebrownandwhiteblog/index.ssf/2011/11/bdsm_the_reality_behind_the_wh.html

BDSM Defined: An Exploration of Adult Sexuality and Lifestyles. (2004, January 1). Retrieved March 10, 2015, from http://www.teramis.com/kink/bdsm_defined.htm

 

“Male-Loving” Gene?

This article was an interesting read. Previously, I could not see how genes influence one’s sexual orientation, but I tended to think it could have been fascinating. For instance, I would question myself and think if someone claimed, “I guess I am homosexual because my uncle was.” In other words, if someone told me that, the expression on my face would have been quizzical. Also, from my experience, the majority of my gay friends do not have other relatives who are gay or lesbian. According to this article, hormones, birth order, and environment are said to play roles. However, I would agree with with American geneticist Dean Hamer claiming that sexual orientation could be partly genetic (in regards to the x chromosome coming from the mother’s side) than say it is a “lifestyle choice,” something I disagree with. For example, you would not hear someone say, “I choose to be a lesbian because women are awesome and men are jerks.” In conclusion, though, I do think the majority of individuals are born with their own sexual orientation. I believe there really is a “male-loving” gene rather than a “gay gene” coming from the mother’s side.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/06/04/the-science-of-sexuality-how-our-genes-make-us-gay-or-straight/

Graves, J. (2014). How our genes could make us gay or straight. Retrieved February 3, 2015, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/06/04/the-science-of-sexuality-how-our-genes-make-us-gay-or-straight/

Why choose a baby’s gender?

I do not think it is acceptable at all for a parent to choose a child’s gender. First of all, there is no “right” to choose a newborn’s gender. That is neither ethical nor fair. In other terms, this not only harms society, but may also harm the child and the rest of his or her family, including the rest of his or her life. This harms society because other parents may be influenced in wanting to do this, which is dangerous. Our society must be equal, meaning not “more male than female,” or “more female than male.” It makes no proper sense whatsoever. Parents should not even be parents if they are not able to be prepared in accepting, and parenting either a male or a female. According to the article, “Should parents be able to choose their baby’s gender?,” by UK’s Daily Mail, Human Genetics Alert’s director, Dr. David King, claims, “The creation of a new life is the most morally serious thing you can do. We must not let it become just another consumer choice,” which I definitely agree with. Why would parents want to pay so much money for such an outrageous “operation?” However, I, slightly, agree with a different, yet ethical, point of view. According to the CBS News article, “Choosing Your Baby’s Gender,” by Tatiana Morales, previously, genetic selection was an idea used so that parents could avoid passing on a genetic disease to their children. I agree with this idea due to its safety because if I were a parent, I sure as heck would not want to pass on a genetic disease to my child. However, according to the article, gender selection has been applied to help couples achieve a balance between boys and girls. I totally understand if couples desire to achieve that kind of “balance,” but, as mentioned previously, I do not think parents should be parents if they do not accept the fact that they will likely have male children, or likely have female children. If parents do not want to pass on genetic diseases, I think a wise choice would be to not have more children because, first, it saves a lot of money from the procedure and from having more children, and second, avoid confusing a child because he or she will likely suffer from gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder. I mean, what would it be like for parents if their kid came up to them and asked, “Why did you decide I had to be male when I was destined to be female,?” or “Why did you decide I had to be female when I was destined to be male?” I would feel guilty, as a parent, if my child asked me this because I know he or she would not be happy with the response because it’s never really always about transmitting a genetic disease. It is mostly about the balance, such as the fact that a mother wanted to be able to do feminine activities with her daughter or that a father wanted his son to carry on the name. Just accept it if your kid will be a male or a female. Accept their sexuality. Accept who they are.

Should parents be able to choose their baby’s gender? (2015, February 27). Retrieved February 27, 2015 from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-144107/Should-parents-able-choose-babys-gender.html

Morales, T. (2002, November 6). Choosing Your Baby’s Gender. Retrieved February 27, 2015, fro, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/choosing-your-babys-gender/

Hello world!

Welcome to your brand new blog at St. Edwards University Sites.

To get started, simply log in, edit or delete this post and check out all the other options available to you.

For assistance, visit our comprehensive support site, check out our Edublogs User Guide guide or stop by The Edublogs Forums to chat with other edubloggers.

You can also subscribe to our brilliant free publication, The Edublogger, which is jammed with helpful tips, ideas and more.