well prostitution may be the oldest profession in the world but it does not mean it is good for womem to sell their bodies for money. I can't believe that you think that it is right that we legalise prostitution because when we do that we say 'yes, it is fine for women to sell their bodies'. In the same way we cannot legalise heroin because it is a message saying to certain weak members of society that it is OK to shoot up.
Again you present a quasi liberal ideal that is a cover up for what you may really think and believe (you would no sooner prostitute yourself than a nun would) - I always put myself in the equation - would I like to sell my body for sex (and not in the glamorous Belle de Jour type of way) but in the real disgusting £10 in the back of a car on a dark street somewhere to feed my habit type of way - and the answer is NO way.
You are so shallow Catherine - is the cure to loneliness having prostitutes for sex? What about caring about people on a much deeper level and making sure people do not have to sink to that level in the first place in society by providing care and counselling services free of charge.
God, you write such tosh

They're selling their services, not their bodies.

Last time I checked sex-workers got to keep their bodies afterwards.

Anthony, if your neighbour, just like everyone, has to pay her bills, why doesn't she get a decent job just like the rest of us. my husband died last year and I am trying to raise two kids. I have more bills to pay than your neighbour will ever have. I clean other people's homes, not a very glamourous or sexy job, but at least it gives me the time to be with my kids. Sure it would be easier to become a "sex worker" (god, they don't know the meaning of the word work) and earn a day's cleaning giving a "Quickie", but no I would NEVER dream of it. So give us a break with your false sympathy and give it to the girls actually forced and brutalised into the trade instead. "Not a nice job" says your neighbour - her choice. If you become a prostitute out of free choice thereby earning more money than most women could ever dream of, then bear the consequences or just shut up.

Brigitta wrote: "you are probably some trendy liberal yuppee"

Sorry to spoil your lazy steroetype. I'm actually 62 years old and the product of what used to be called 'The respectable working class'.

I have seen a great deal of life at the bottom of the pile and I know that the heroin problems that we have today are the result of a change in the law regarding heroin. Under the old Dangerous Drugs Act anyone who became addicted to heroin could obtain, needles, syringes and pharmacologically pure heroin from a GP. This meant that there was no market for illegal very dangerous impure street drugs. The illegal labs producing the 'brown sugar' (that's where the song title came from) just didn't exist until the criminal law which regards addiction as a crime instead of a medical condition made them a paying proposition.

My 'working girl' neighbour was a quiet and pleasant person who pursued her job (which she found mildly repugnant) in order to earn a living. She sold a personal service (like a hair dresser) - a willing seller doing business with willing buyers. I fail to see that it is any business of the law to intervene in a consensual transaction between adults.

Where coercion or trafficking are concerned then what is needed is the enforcement of the existing law - not new laws which will achieve nothing.

Fiona - I'm sorry about your husband (really, that's not a debating point) and I admire you for doing what you do for your kids. My mum did plenty of cleaning to help keep me when I was little - I was dressed on a bob a week from Littlewwods club book - so I know a bit about being poor. I don't know how you know that your bills are greater than my former neighbour, Becky. One of her overheads was, of course, a child minder (another of our neighbours) to look after her little boy when she was at work. And if she was earning such good money how come she lived in a tower block flat on a sink estate?

Finally, just for the record, I have never used the services of a prostitute so you can all of you remove that lazy stereotype of men as well.

The state has to stand as an example even if the world chooses to live the way they do.

In some areas yes the State does have to set an example. But where people's lives are being damaged and destroyed then the State has the duty to be pragmatic in looking for a solution that will work.

The war on drugs is a complete and uteer failure - just look at how long we have been fighting it. The only people benefiting from treating addiction as a crime are the drug dealers.

Same for prostitution. If you want to protect vulnerable women, and stop human trafficking you do not do that by pushing them even further from the protection of the law. If you want to control something, legalise it with provisos that protect people. The truly moral stance is to protect people and you cannot do that by driving the unpleasentness of society under ground.

The Government's decision to cut funding to the Met's Anti Trafficking Unit is a damned disgrace and the ministers and civil servants should be ashamed.

In Scotland they have already criminalised the kerb crawlers. The result in Aberdeen is all the street prostitutes have moved from the safe tolerence zone which was in operation into the city center. They are now propositioning men as they leave clubs. It is estimated by a drug rehabilitation team that there is more prostitution in that city then there was a year ago.

In Edinburgh the number of assaults on street prostitutes has doubled.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7734480.stm

I take issue with fiona, yes there are some men who use trafficked and coerced women, but the big majority don't. Catherine Healy from the English Sex Workser Coperative says they get more kindness and synpathy from their clients then the likes of Harriet Harmen and Jacqui Smith.

I am amazed at all the old clichés and stereotypes are still being thrown around as though they are fact. I am a gay male sex worker and I work with/have know hundreds of agency/indie escort girls over the ten years I have worked. I am not/nor were they on drugs or from abused back grounds. I/ they do this work either full time or part time because it pays well has flexible hours and is fun. Sometimes it is not but hey welcome to life. Given a choice of stacking shelves or working in a dull office or spending an hour or two with for the most part charming gentlemen from all types of back ground I know which one I would choose.
As for street girls not all are on drugs but granted that most are feeding a habit then it is surly societies duty to offer them protection and support not to criminalise them. Also if you force street girls to work in dangerous situations then their beatings or even deaths are on the hands of the prohibitionists and this illiberal government.
With regard to brothels they vary in standard but then when they have to operate in a criminalised environment what does one expect. Decriminalise the laws like they have in New Zealand and allow the industry to develop like any other service industry. Arguments against this are from moral perspectives not human rights perspectives. Morality is and should always be a personal choice and the activities of consenting adults is no concern of this or any government.
Pushing the industry underground and into the hands of real criminals who thrive on exploitable markets is the immoral option and shame on those people who push for the government to crate a blackmailers/exploiters market. It is amazing the industry is as free from criminality as it is considering the way we have to operate. Re trafficking it probably represents less than 1% of the industry and yes should be dealt with but to do so will mean stronger immigration control and stricter monitoring of ethnic minorities where it would appear the majority of trafficking occurs. That is going to cause lots of problems re claims of racism. Also if the government was serious about trafficking and punishing those who use the products and services of trackers then expect raids and arrests at your local super markets tomorrow considering the amount of foods and other products produced by trafficked and abused persons especially children.

D F

The bile and vitriol directed at the journalist who wrote this piece,in some of the preceding comments is frankly shocking
It seems that the new taboo in both the UK and Ireland is to question the reasoning behind such legislation. In truth this proposal has very little to do with the welfare of the women and men in the sex trade and more to do with political aspirations. The very unholy alliance of the religious right pressure groups and some feminists are behind this. For example,you only have to look at he board of the Irish pressure group,http://www.ruhama.ie/page.php?intPageID=138 to realise it's a religious pressure group, dressed up as humanitarian, Safety, protection and decrimilisation is what is needed for these vurnable people.

Of course there are few sadists who get a charge from lording it over a beaten-down woman and a criminal element that is happy to supply that market. Driving prostitution deeper into the shadows -- just like the War on Drugs -- is a price support / monopoly program for criminal gangs.

Your more average male with more sex drive than social opportunities provide is just looking for a good time and enjoys himself best when the lady enjoys his company.

Any human being forced into providing sex for money or any other reason, is in a living hell and deserves our full support.
On the other hand, having lived in Germany for the last three years where prostitution is regulated and all sex workers, are contributing members of society through tax, it is career choice for some, long or short term, or even part time. It is simply a choice, that can or not be made. In Ireland and the UK, it seems we are determined to further marginalise these individuals, further contributing to the misery of all concerned. Prostitution will not end but evolve into something even less desired by society, to think otherwise is delusional.
I suspect one or two here, are from the ban and stone them brigade. Self appointed moral guardians who belive is free speech as long as it agrees with there point of view. An argument is lost once you resort to name calling.

oh ruth stop being such a goody goody - the is no bile or vitriol directed at the journalist people feel strongly about these things and need to express their opinions and have the right to critisise too - are you her mum by any chance?

yes Paul, as i have said before, if you think prostitution is so enriching, then imagine your mother or sister being shagged for money? Is that enriching enough for you? It is nasty to exploit your body and nasty to exploit another's body for your own pleasure - get sex the normal way, by building up a healthy relationship with someone. 'unholy alliance' is just another way of you expresing that you feel uncomfortable deep down by exploitation but you are still going to do it anyway and pretend you are 'just being a grown up' in fact you are a user (if you do it)

I would rather not work -- 'prostitute myself' -- to pay my bills and put a roof over my family's heads, but I feel I have little choice. Do I merit the sympathy gushing out toward women who *choose* the option of offering sex for money? Perhaps not.

Jacqui Smith claimed this morning on Radio 4 news that the cause of women being trafficked for sex is the demand from men to have sex with trafficked women. Yes, read that again: she didn't refer to demand from men for sex (with a consenting adult partner) in return for money, she actually said that men want sex with trafficked women, meaning (as I understood her) that men want to rape sex slaves! Lunacy.

Any woman genuinely coerced into having sex is being raped, and we already have laws against that which could and should be used in such a case. Any man or woman with a drug problem shouldn't have to sell sex to cope, there should be help for them.

This is not a difficult matter to resolve. Common sense seems quite sufficient. Any man or woman should be free to offer sex in return for money; no man or woman should be forced into it. There: how hard was that?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Brigitta, Oh I get it, your one of these people who gets to set the moral compass for all of us, decide what we can or cant do, with our lives.
Punish rather than protect, stigmatise and vilify is your mantra. Brigitta,you scream unresolved issues, all that moral indignation and bitterness will eat you up, if not already. I would prefer to live alongside a legally run brothel any day, than in the Disneyland you seem to occupy. Where further crimilisation rather than regulation, will make street prostitution go away and make it safer for sex workers, it would be laughable if it was not so serious. I am a full time nurse struggling to make ends meet, last time I checked, that was working class. No matter what I say you will shout it down, so I finish at this. Well done again CT.

Does this mean sex will be free, as seems a good idea?

Gives it more value!!

You know, most of these arguments arise because of the different attitudes towards sex in general.

Some here consider it sacred and worth protecting; some consider it to be a form of recreation; some consider it to be both, depending on who you are having sex with.

When this difference comes into play, there really is no debate. You cannot convince others one way or another, because your world views are affecting your judgment (and I don't mean this in a negative way.. it is what it is). All there can be at this point is discussion, and a sharing of ideas.. unless you want to change each others' views on sex.

You know, you Brits(let's exclude those confused yankees) lead the western world in puritanical attitudes, along with hypocrisy(scandal after scandal in the private lives of moralising prominent people) and incarceration rates. Do you know you have 4000 kids under 14 imprisoned under the infamous and repressive ASBOs? And yet all you can do is talk about punitive action against those not conforming with how you see the world. I think on the spot fines for all church attendees would be a good start to a new, reformed society. Thank goodness my ancestors escaped your class-addled, repressive society!

Luc - I'm surprised you wrote that. Considering the atrocity that is Guantanamo Bay, and the plague of creationists and bible-bashers that inhabit much of middle-America I thought you'd have more sense than to lecture Europeans about ASBO's and puritanical hypocrasy.

The irony is quite astounding.

oh for god's sake grow up Jazzy, no one thinks that all men are evil bastards and yes of course some women are not to be admired and are very much the guilty party when it comes to sex and exploiting men for money - but the answer is not 'vaginas for sale' for men who have problems - in the same way as there might be male prostitutes for sale as well. All in all, any form of exploitation is TERRIBLE. We need to make the world a better place and that goes through every thread of life in society. It is going to take a long time to clear up the mess of humanity - way past our lifetimes - but I believe we will get there eventually. So in the meantime, we can stop using vaginas for sale, we can stop exploiting people and yes, place like Guantanamo Bay are pure EVIL- that raises a very good point - you cannot clear society of one ill by replacing it with another. 9/11 was horrific but you can't punish innocenty people in a place like Guantanamo - there has even been a 14 year old boy imprisoned there. In the same sense, you cannot clean up the ills of personal relationships by having prostitutes and exploitation of men or women as an answer. Get to the ROOT of the problems and we shall be half way there and riding ourselves of the incredible lies we use to convince ourselves that our stupid little justifcations for using people are based on LIES and following the negative side instead of the positive side in ourselves.

it is so easy for men to get angry at women who give them borders Jazzy - no I'll hug my children thank you and i have never had to take 'meds; that is a very nasty comment. Is that all you can come up with as an argument - you are not very intelligent.
As for Luc, congratulations on the birth of your daughter, i am very happy for you and hope you can keep off the swinging for her sake - it is an unhealthy lifestyle and now you are a Dad try to live with self resepct and honour.

Research indicates that most women who are involved in the sex industry have been sexually abused. I don't know where that leaves me in this debate, but I do know that PTSD results from abuse, and PTSD limits a human being's capacity to make decisions which are in their own best interests. It means that most women involved in prostitution and the sex industry are just as vulnerable as women who are trafficked.

iskwujpo znqvgte mpnayroli gliqsr rnipts ltyzbcnj mtzjsg