I’ve started reading The Economist during my travels. Fairly regularly but not like I’m a subscriber or something. Imagine the rush when I discovered they were holding an open debate on legalizing prostitution!* It has long closed, but the comments are open reading for all. I hope they include this in an upcoming issue.
Gotta say that I’m still grinning over the public trouncing Melissa Farley got. Her moral-panic shit plays fairly well in the US but internationally — does not hold water. Thank you, rational people, for showing up.
Given that this is The Economist, I sort of figured the comments would be good. And I was right. I haven’t read all of them but two from the closing arguments struck my fancy (the first one is flippin’ brilliant).
The oldest profession know to mankind followed by sailors — fisherman (food and souls) and politicians. Of these only politicians should be required to register with law enforcement as to their purpose, integrity and honesty — I already know what a prostitute does.
Why should prostitution be considered “a demeaning activity?” It is only demeaning if you come from a religious perspective or you hold to some romanticized notion of sexuality. It is only demeaning if you care what other prudes think about you. Healthy self-respect comes from within, not from without.
*Those of us who were informed argued for decriminalization instead of legalization. This is simply how The Economist chose to phrase the question, in common vernacular.