Poll about Legalized Prostitution

Post Reply New Topic

I think that's implicit in the word, "entitlement." An entitlement is something that you're owed by society, that people/the government/the world should automatically give you regardless of what you have or have not done to obtain it.

As I said prostitution is a sin, and exploitation of people who engage this, mainly women.

France has legalized prostitution, but now with the withdraws from this idea
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013 ... on-clients

Actually, the government's biggest entitlement program, Social Security, is given to people based upon what they have paid into the system. People who haven't paid into the system for at least ten years, and who are not married to someone who paid into the system, don't get anything out of it. People who have paid more into the system end up getting a larger pension out of the system. The government does not automatically give it to you "regardless of what you have or have not done to obtain it."

But, why do the Feminists insist on the word "entitlement" in particular? The government probably isn't going to start a program of distributing sex, except possibly for the disabled. At present, the government imagines (at least officially) that it has a monopoly on sex, which it taxes once through the issuance of a marriage license. Any coitus outside of marriage interferes with this revenue stream. The government may thus have an interest in discouraging coitus outside of marriage, as it hasn't been taxed.

To be more precise, and to avoid confusion, the Feminists should probably use the word "right" rather than "entitlement" in their slogan. "People have no right to sex" is a lot clearer than "people have no entitlement to sex." This gets away from the thought of government action to make certain that everyone is getting a satisfactory amount of sex. Which, cum to think of it, wouldn't be so bad in and of itself.

Last edited by ArrantPariah on 22 Dec 2013, 11:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Which means that the money from prostitution is going to criminals.

Aren't you in Poland?

http://www.krakowpost.com/article/4965

You seem to be missing out.

As long as there's a legal requirement to keep prostitutes STD-free and free of any ties to organized crime, I'm fine with it.

There is one situation where I think that even the Feminists will concede that sex does constitute an entitlement:

http://usmarriagelaws.com/search/united_states/



If a fellow pays for a marriage license, and pays for a wedding, he is then entitled to at least one round of sex. If the bride doesn't dish out, then, in some jurisdictions, the marriage doesn't count. Similarly, if the groom turns out to be impotent, then the bride has grounds for annulment.

However, for British gays:



Sex turns out not to be an entitlement for gays at all. For heterosexual gents who have paid for a marriage license and wedding: we're entitled to at least one round. That's an ENTITLEMENT!

Cum to think of it, that UK marriage law does seem discriminatory.

Following a heterosexual wedding, the groom in not only entitled, but legally and morally obliged to jizz into his bride's vagina. At least once.

For homosexuals, there is no such requirement nor entitlement. Out of fairness, the law probably ought to stipulate that each husband must jizz once into the other's rectum. And, each Lesbian has to do whatever she has to do to her wife.

Homosexuals ought to be entitled to the same entitlements and obligations (both legal and moral) as heterosexuals. Just being queer shouldn't get them off the hook for a decent shag after the wedding.

You didn't seem to take into account the second definition given by Wikipedia. Following that one, entitlement is a perfectly good word to use.

And about all the UK law thing you're talking about, remember that it is an old country and it is bound to have remnants of laws from ages past that are no longer relevant in today's age. In the end, they are words written in a paper unless someone tries to enforce them. Do you have any example of someone trying to enforce those laws?

I i;m from Poland but not from Krakow.

I still think that prostitution is bad and immoral.

Well, À chacun son goût

Note that this is the "casual" sense of the word. If the Feminists were to use the term "right" rather than "entitlement", then the term "right" would be used in its non-casual sense, and the meaning would be clearer. Note LKL's interpretation: "An entitlement is something that you're owed by society, that people/the government/the world should automatically give you regardless of what you have or have not done to obtain it." Her interpretation is more consistent with the non-casual sense of the word.

I believe that when I enter a store to make a purchase, then I am entitled to be treated courteously by the store's employees (in the casual sense of the word). I also believe that when a man marries a woman, then he is entitled to a good shag after the wedding ceremony (in both the casual and non-casual senses of the word).



This particular bill was introduced just this year (2013). And, Parliament is granting to gay couples a specific exemption to an entitlement that heterosexual couples enjoy.

Oftentimes people who wish to live in a different country will enter into a sham marriage in order to gain the legal right to reside there, or to move to the top of the immigration-priority list.

If I were to do this for a woman, then I would absolutely insist upon at least one good shag, on the grounds of it not only being my entitlement, but also a civic duty. Something akin to voting, or paying property taxes. Particularly if I resided in a jurisdiction where unconsummated marriages were not regarded as marriages. I certainly wouldn't want to be in a position where I had to lie during an interview with the immigration authorities. One good shag, and we'll be good.

Homosexual Englishmen do not have this leverage, as coitus after the wedding is neither an entitlement nor an obligation. When an immigration officer questions them about their sex life, the Englishman can say truthfully "I have never once boned him up the ass", and his husband would still get to stay in the country.

It is legal around here. There's a legal brothel within walking distance of my house (no, I have not been there).

Hey, employment options!



(Good to see that Brisbane is ahead of the curve in that aspect.)

I was actually trying to define the word in both senses, and not leave out the 'government' part because I know that, in the US at least, there can be a governmental connotation; however, I think that feminists mean it in the more social/interpersonal sense. At least, that's the part that I mean when I use the word.

As for when couples are/are not 'entitled' to sex, I think that when you're in an established relationship with someone (i.e., you get married for romantic rather than platonic reasons, or even if you just go to bed with someone with the understood goal of having consensual sex, then consent is implied unless otherwise stated. Consent can always be removed, so it's still not exactly an entitlement, but I don't think that most people go through the entire process of checking and rechecking with their partners every single time, as if they were strangers.

Wrt. prostitution, a slightly different tack: once money is exchanged, the service provider can still decline to perform, but he or she needs to return the cash if he or she decides not to fulfill his or her part of the agreement. One occasionally hears stories about one party or the other getting roughed up or even murdered over contract disagreements, and legalizing prostitution would protect people in the contractual sense as well.

It's a no brainer. Legalize. Regulation should be minimal to ensure that everything is consensual.

Hei, marriage is far more exploitative than prostitution. I know many beautiful women trapped in unhappy marriage and can't easily get divorced.

The marketing are deceptive. For example, no fault divorce, is actually coded as "irresponsible differences". The laws are made unclear so people do not know they can escape.