Escort Services

[dairygirl4u2c]

the idea is... escourt services often, not sure if usually.... end up being for prostitution. the escort services know that their services are legal as long as paid sex is not discussed... and as long as sex just occurs doing a servicing without that talk,,, then no prostitution has occurred.

one could argue,,, that the effect of escourt services is sufficient to outlaw it. another might say that on principal, it's not paid sex and shouldn't be banned.
i actually see other alternatives, but i wanted to see what the poll results were with what is said.

[dairygirl4u2c]

that should say escourt services become "essentially prostiution" in the first sentences

[Madame Vengier]

I voted no. I don't think the gov should be regulating dating. It is a fact that not all escort services are for prostitution. Some of them are genuinely for partnership and companionship. Maybe it's an odd way to get a date but it's none of my business and sure not the government's business.

Edited August 7, 2008 by Madame Vengier

[CatherineM]

We had an escort murdered by a John here a couple of weeks ago. I don't know about other places, but they are prostitutes here. Prostitution should never be legal. I serve on the Alberta Committee Against Human Trafficking. If there is one thing that I learned, is that in places where prostitution is legal, trafficking goes through the roof. The only thing that seems to help is changing perceptions among the cops, and the public to where they view the Johns as the criminals, and the prostitutes as the victims. In countries where this has been implemented, all the problems associated with prostitution, drastically reduce.

[Deb]

We all know they are mainly fronts for prostitution. Objectifying human beings and paying for them is morally unacceptable. If they were really just for "companionship" men wouldn't be ordering the type of woman they want "companionship" with and all those hiring themselves out wouldn't look like look like, well, high end prostitutes.

[dUSt]

I thought Craig's List legalized prostitution. Heh, go figure.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='dUSt' post='1620822' date='Aug 7 2008, 08:15 PM']I thought Craig's List legalized prostitution. Heh, go figure.[/quote]

interesting, joke,, or truth?
i'm interested which it is,,, and the context of what you mean.

[mommas_boy]

Interesting story ... I got propositioned by a prostitute the other day ... At least I think she was a prostitute; she mentioned sex, but not money, so she could have easily just been seeking a partner (then again, I doubt that any prostitute will mention money at first for two reasons: (1) its bad for "sales" to mention cost up front, and (2) mentioning cost upfront is a good way to get caught by an undercover cop). She was in a car, too, which was odd. I was just sitting outside at the time.

Anyway, I was in total shock and didn't know quite what to do. I told her "no" of course. But then she asked me "why not?" So, I told her that I was Catholic.

If I had my head about me, I would have asked her more questions to try to figure out why she got into it, and then see if I could refer her to someone to help her get out. Ditto on what CatherineM said about the trafficking; in many cases, this is just another form of slavery.

Edited August 8, 2008 by mommas_boy

[Jesus_lol]

fed ex/greyhound delivery/mail should also be banned for its use in transporting small quantities of drugs for sale or personal use.

and less sarcastic now. "we all know..." doesnt really mean anything more than "as far as i know". escort services are often a viable and useful service, particularily with business dinners, etc. that is their primary purpose. sure they can be fronts, but so could many other things, no reason to ban something that isnt inherently evil.

[CatherineM]

The escort who was killed here recently met her "date" at 2am. I haven't been to a business dinner in a long time, but I don't recall ever having one at 2am, but then again, I have fallen on my head, so maybe I just have forgotten.

[dairygirl4u2c]

so it seems interesting to me. there's people who say ban them,,,, and there's people who say don't ban them. as if those are the only options,,, which appear to be the case given that's what i set it up as.

could it be that the other option is... no sex with an escourt? even if paid sex isn't talked about? it seems like that's a decent compromise, without banning, while getting the job done.

those who said don't ban it... isn't this a way to get rid of the effective prostitution?
those who said ban it... couldn't we salvage the escourt services that are legit?
shouldn't both groups now change their stance?

or at least say that they didn't give all the options they'd been thinking of? eg, it's possibly by saying "don't ban it" they were thinking of but not saying of other alternatives. but it appears they were willing to take the bath water with the baby,,, save legit escorts despite some bad ones.

[Winchester]

If you have to pay someone to go out with you, you have more serious things to worry about than breaking the law.

[Balthazor]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1621784' date='Aug 8 2008, 04:16 PM']If you have to pay someone to go out with you, you have more serious things to worry about than breaking the law.[/quote]
Yeah like venerial disease and an angry pimp....

[MissScripture]

[quote name='Balthazor' post='1623529' date='Aug 10 2008, 01:24 PM']Yeah like venerial disease and an angry pimp....[/quote]
No, no, they're now called "STIs" (sexually transmitted infections) so as not to worry those who have them.

[johnnydigit]

if this country feared God, i'd be a yes due to morality. sadly, it's too well defended by our laws of freedom..