Zoning
One, very convenient, thing that ALWAYS gets left out of the discussion when we are talking about legalized prostitution is zoning. See - there is not ONE country in this world (I imagine) that will allow prostitution to exist anywhere and everywhere (unless it's very private, high end type "escort"). In Amsterdam - prostitution is largely isolated in and around the red light district.
A lot of people say that zoning happens because if prostitution is isolated, it's easier to regulate but I smell bullshit. You know why zoning exists? Parents don't want brothels next to schools, parents don't want brothels next to hospitals, they don't want them in their neighborhoods. So what happens is that brothels are set up in the middle of nowhere (Got Bunny Ranch?) or they are isolated in the shittiest parts of cities (Got Amsterdam?).
Either way - this zoning creates some problems that I don't even have to research to understand. For one - as the article I linked to in one of my last entries mentions - is that it creates the same stigma that people claim legalization will get rid of (honestly though - that stigma ain't going anywhere, regaurdless, until we take down the patriarchy). Because the prostitutes are still treated as "other" as something that can't coexist side by side with other types of work.
What strikes me as odd about this claim - that it makes it easier to regulate is basically this: What OTHER job is zoned by this claim? Car dealerships? Malls? Condos? Construction? I mean, give me a f'n break. That claim is so disingenuous (my favorite word these days, hehe).
And ask yourself.... Did zoning in Amsterdam help "regulate" prostitution? Fuck no. The problem with regulating something like sex work is that it's hard to regulate, period (especially because illegal sex work usually coexists right next to legal sex work). An example that I think of is simply this: if a man pays a woman for sex - usually they are alone, right? How does the government step in and "regulate" that? How does the government step in and make sure that woman isn't raped? It's almost the most absurd concept I could even think about.
And I hate to say it - this feeds right back into what I was saying about zoning causing stigma. I have a hunch that if a prostitute is raped - no one will believe her still.
So all of this keeps leading me back to this thought: legal or not, regulated or not, NOTHING will be done until we take down patriarchy. It's as simple as that. It's the root of the abuse involved in this industry to begin with, and it's the root of the stigma. I mean - it's even the root of the stigma from other women. Because if a man's entitlement exists and he's cheating on his wife with a prostitute - some of her resentment and anger towards prostitution or sex work is going to stem from that.
So as long as men feel entitled to cheat on their wives/girlfriends etc with prostitutes whilst they pretend to be monogomous, that stigma will exist in the minds of women. And what does all of that root back to? Yeah, patriarchy.
I think I'm more radical than I previously thought! haha
A lot of people say that zoning happens because if prostitution is isolated, it's easier to regulate but I smell bullshit. You know why zoning exists? Parents don't want brothels next to schools, parents don't want brothels next to hospitals, they don't want them in their neighborhoods. So what happens is that brothels are set up in the middle of nowhere (Got Bunny Ranch?) or they are isolated in the shittiest parts of cities (Got Amsterdam?).
Either way - this zoning creates some problems that I don't even have to research to understand. For one - as the article I linked to in one of my last entries mentions - is that it creates the same stigma that people claim legalization will get rid of (honestly though - that stigma ain't going anywhere, regaurdless, until we take down the patriarchy). Because the prostitutes are still treated as "other" as something that can't coexist side by side with other types of work.
What strikes me as odd about this claim - that it makes it easier to regulate is basically this: What OTHER job is zoned by this claim? Car dealerships? Malls? Condos? Construction? I mean, give me a f'n break. That claim is so disingenuous (my favorite word these days, hehe).
And ask yourself.... Did zoning in Amsterdam help "regulate" prostitution? Fuck no. The problem with regulating something like sex work is that it's hard to regulate, period (especially because illegal sex work usually coexists right next to legal sex work). An example that I think of is simply this: if a man pays a woman for sex - usually they are alone, right? How does the government step in and "regulate" that? How does the government step in and make sure that woman isn't raped? It's almost the most absurd concept I could even think about.
And I hate to say it - this feeds right back into what I was saying about zoning causing stigma. I have a hunch that if a prostitute is raped - no one will believe her still.
So all of this keeps leading me back to this thought: legal or not, regulated or not, NOTHING will be done until we take down patriarchy. It's as simple as that. It's the root of the abuse involved in this industry to begin with, and it's the root of the stigma. I mean - it's even the root of the stigma from other women. Because if a man's entitlement exists and he's cheating on his wife with a prostitute - some of her resentment and anger towards prostitution or sex work is going to stem from that.
So as long as men feel entitled to cheat on their wives/girlfriends etc with prostitutes whilst they pretend to be monogomous, that stigma will exist in the minds of women. And what does all of that root back to? Yeah, patriarchy.
I think I'm more radical than I previously thought! haha