Legalize Prostitution

Anti-prostitution laws are inspired primarily by fanatical Christian moralism. According to Christianity, having sex outside of marriage is a ‘sin’, and paying for this kind of sex is even worse! Paying for foul sex with foul coin; surely the parties that engage in such an activity deserve an eternity in hellfire! No decent community could possibly tolerate such sinfulness; hence the activity should be illegal, punishable by imprisonment in this life, hellfire in the next.

The anti-prostitution laws are thus an unwelcome attempt by nosy fanatics to violently and noisily intrude into the lives of other people. The other arguments in favor of anti-prostitution laws mainly consist of ex post facto rationalizations of these laws that are seemingly less religious and moralistic in tenor. Like most rationalizations though, they are as flimsy as reeds, and can easily be disposed of. We will do so in turn:

1. Prostitution is inherently exploitative.

Prostitution is neither more nor less inherently exploitative than any other form of wage labour. Both involve selling a specific service which requires the use of a specific body part to perform. Whether it is a ditch digger selling the service of digging ditches which requires the use of his hands, or a prostitute selling sexual services which requires the use of her sexual organs, the nature of the two phenomena are fairly similar. It is prudish Christian attitudes about the sexual act and, more recently, a kind of spurious mysticism surrounding the sexual act, which leads many people to neglect the essential similarity between prostitution and other forms of wage labour.  

The Marxists hold a bizarre, yet consistent, position on this question. They consider both prostitution and wage labour to be inherently exploitative. The libertarians hold the other consistent position on this question, which is that neither prostitution nor wage labour, as long as they are voluntary, are inherently exploitative. If you think that wage labour is at all a good thing, then the libertarian position makes the most sense for you, which means that prostitution is not inherently exploitative.

2. Many prostitutes are trafficked or otherwise forced into the ‘profession’.

Forced prostitution and human trafficking should of course remain illegal, I do not dispute that. But prostitution that is voluntary on both sides is not an impossible, nor even an unusual, occurrence. If prostitution were legalized and became an above ground business, rather than an illegal, shadowy one monopolized by shady operators as it is currently, it would be much easier to identify and prevent instances of forced prostitution and trafficking than it is currently.

Pointing out the similarity to other forms of wage labour is again fruitful here. Forced labour and trafficked labour exist; we call it slavery and the practice is rightly illegal. The way to combat slavery is not to outlaw all forms of labour for hire; it is to identify and stop the practice of slavery exclusively, something that is much easier to do when the labour for hire market is above ground and relatively transparent. The exact same thing applies to prostitution.

3. Prostitution leads to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).

As a general rule, people that engage in an activity professionally are able to perform that activity more safely than people that engage in an activity as an amateur. Prostitutes and brothel operators will probably be more aware of and cognisant of sex-related safety matters than amateurs. They will know better what preventative measures to take to avoid STD infection, and will know better how best to monitor sexual health.

As such, it is probable that having promiscuous sex with a bunch of amateurs would put you at greater risk of STD infection than having promiscuous sex with a bunch of professionals. Of course, having no sex at all or having non-promiscuous sex with only one partner would probably be safer than going to a prostitute, but this is not really a fair comparison.

4. Think of the children!

Anti-prostitution law advocates worry that if prostitution were legalized, children would see prostitutes in their neighbourhood and would see advertisements for prostitution. My response: so what? So children might learn (a little bit earlier than they currently do) that there are people who have sex with others for money, big deal! There’s nothing wrong with children learning things about the real world: they will eventually learn it anyway! Besides, it is only the religious notion that prostitution is inherently sacrilegious and shameful that makes people especially touchy about letting their children learn about this particular aspect of human life.

With these lame rationalizations out of the way, we can now discuss a number of ways in which a legalized prostitution industry could be especially beneficial:

1. Practice for young men (or women).         

Many young men, whether for social or natural reasons, are desperate to lose their virginity. They are also nervous about doing so though, for the understandable reason that they have had no practice engaging in the sexual act before. They desperately want to be able to ‘perform’ and not to ‘embarrass’ themselves on their first sexual encounter, for fear that if they do not, the woman they are courting will leave them in frustration and they will have to begin the long process anew. The problem is that, for men, this potent cocktail of desperation, nervousness, and inexperience will play havoc with their ability to ‘perform’ the sexual act effectively.

Here is where a safe, socially respectable prostitute could beneficially come in. This professional could kindly and patiently help the young man to lose the desperation of virginity, and to become more comfortable with and skilled in the sexual act. This would hopefully allow the young man to be less desperate and nervous, and more confident, when it came time to perform the sexual act with a woman he really cared about, an experience which would probably be a lot more enjoyable for both parties as a result.

This suggestion is nothing new; the practice has a very ancient pedigree, prominent in the time of the Ancient Romans, amongst other civilizations. It was only really the rise of the puritanical monotheistic religions that cast this reasonable practice into disrepute.

Please note that similar reasoning could well apply for young women and male prostitutes, but since I have never been a young woman, I will refrain from commenting extensively on the matter.   

2. Sexual outlet for people that are not conventionally-beautiful and for others who have a hard time finding a romantic partner.

Intimate/sexual companionship is, I suspect, for most people an important contributor to good mental well-being. Unfortunately, some people find it difficult to get this kind of companionship on a non-commercial basis, whether it is because they are not conventionally-beautiful or for any other reason. While probably not as satisfying as non-commercial companionship, many people will consider the occasional bout of commercial companionship to be better than nothing at all.

If prostitution were legal, above ground, and socially acceptable, these people would have a much appreciated, practical outlet for intimate/sexual companionship available. Only cruel Puritans would take pleasure in denying these people this.

 3. Break the Amateur Monopoly

Anti-prostitution laws and taboos create a strange kind of monopoly for sexual services: a monopoly by amateurs that excludes professionals. People that seek sexual companionship are only allowed to get it ‘for free’. The thing is though that sexual companionship is rarely actually given ‘for free’: it is often given only in exchange for being taken out on ‘nice dates’, or for pledges of undying love and commitment, or, sometimes, for a diamond ring and a marriage contract.

Now, don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with going out on nice dates, or pledging love and commitment, or getting married. I just don’t think that it is ideal when one of the main motivations for doing these things is the satisfaction of sexual desire. In this case, the price for this simple satisfaction is a monopoly ‘price’, one that couldn’t be asked as easily if the anti-prostitution laws and taboos didn’t create the Amateur Monopoly in the first place.

With the professional option available in an above ground and socially acceptable fashion, people wouldn’t agree to pay such high ‘prices’ to amateurs for the simple satisfaction of their sexual desires. Rather, they would be more likely to make relationship decisions based on less superficial factors, such as compatibility and deep emotional attachment.  

In conclusion, the main argument for anti-prostitution laws and taboos is a fanatical religious/moralist one, and thus need not be taken seriously. The seemingly ‘secular’ ex post facto rationalizations for these laws are flimsy and easily disposed of, while there are some definite advantages to legalizing the practice. For all these reasons, I would be in favour of the immediate and total repeal of all anti-prostitution laws.